How to pitch a publication without pitching guidelines
Practical ways to pitch when a publication doesn’t tell you how.
Looking for non-writing freelance jobs?
The Freelance Network universe is expanding with a brand new newsletter: The Freelance Jobs Network.
This newsletter shares paid freelance and remote roles across every niche beyond writing, including PR, marketing, project management, design, creative, video, photography, tech and development.
If you’re looking for other freelance opportunities (or you know someone who is), you should check out the FJN. It’s entirely free to read right now!
Missed any new writing opportunities?
Many opportunities from Monday & Tuesday’s updates are still active, and you can access them all right now with a 7-day free trial to the Freelance Writing Network.
Act fast, because these opportunities go quickly!
How to pitch a publication without pitch guidelines
When I share links to publications looking for or open to pitches, not every single one has helpful guidelines. As a freelancer, I obviously hate this. But it can’t always be helped, and you need to know what to do without a guide for pitching.
Some publications will spell out exactly how to pitch, a few even write out guidelines longer than War & Peace (which they then expect you to read before ignoring the pitch you sent them).
But many don’t share any details at all, especially some of the bigger names who know they’ll receive hundreds of pitches regardless.
When there’s no ‘write for us’ page, you’ll need to dig for the right contact and work out what an editor expects.
Let’s walk through it.
Start with the masthead
The masthead is your quickest route to finding the right decision-makers. Most outlets list editors by section: news, features, culture, business.
Match your idea to the closest section and note the editor’s name. If nothing lines up perfectly, make a shortlist of possibilities. You can always narrow it down later.
If you’re fortunate, the masthead will include email addresses, and one of the biggest difficulties—finding where to send your pitch—is solved for you.
Work out who edits what
Publications often reveal more than they realise.
I like to search for “letter from the editor” columns, bylined announcements, or section intros (though I don’t see so many of these anymore). These show who has authority over different areas. You can then cross-check that with what you saw on the masthead.
If the culture section always opens with a note from the deputy editor, that’s a good sign they’re the one commissioning, and therefore the specific person you need to contact.
Track editors online
Once you’ve got a name, Google their name with ‘email address’ or the publication to see if a contact format turns up.
If not, try Twitter or LinkedIn, as editors will often list work emails in their bios.
Sometimes it takes a little persistence to find the right email.
Use generic inboxes carefully
If you can’t find a direct email, most outlets have pitches@ or editorial@ addresses. These are monitored, but heavily crowded.
When sending to a generic inbox, I’ll always put the intended editor’s name at the top of the email. Something like: ‘For the attention of [Editor’s Name].’
It increases the chance of a pitch being passed on to that specific person.
Let published work speak for the guidelines
When no formal guidelines exist, the published stories become your template. This is good practice anyway, but even more so here.
Make sure you read several recent pieces in the section you’re targeting. Look at:
Length: are they short explainers or long reads?
Style: plain and direct, or essay-like? Personal? Factual?
Sources: mostly interviews, analysis, or a mix?
Headlines: straightforward or playful? Brief or long?
Mirror that style in your pitch. An outlet running 800-word explainers doesn’t need a pitch for a sprawling, 3,000-word feature.
Why missing guidelines aren’t a problem
Pitch guidelines help, but they’re never the whole story. Editors ignore pitches every day that followed the rules to the letter.
What they can’t ignore is a relevant, timely idea sent to the right person, framed in the way their publication already uses.
A lack of guidelines does not have to be a barrier to entry. It just means you’ll need to look harder to break in.
This was super helpful—most writers waste so much time hunting for “write for us” pages that don’t even exist. The reminder that published work itself is the best guideline feels like a real game-changer.
It also seems clear that pitches sent to generic editorial@ inboxes often get overlooked, while reaching out to the right section editor directly can make all the difference.
A common question among freelancers is whether it’s better to send a pitch to multiple editors at once when the right email isn’t clear—or if that could actually hurt your chances. I imagine editors must get frustrated seeing the same pitch land in several inboxes, but on the other hand, if no one ever responds, maybe it’s better than the pitch being lost in limbo. Curious what others think.
And honestly, it feels like freelancers could save each other so much time by sharing systems or tips for tracking editor emails—almost like a simple community resource. Even something as basic as a shared spreadsheet or list could cut down on hours of digging and guessing. Has anyone here seen a system like that work in practice, or would it even be possible to build one together?