An easy way to put an editor to sleep
Plus: Pitches Get Stitches' inaugural edition!
When pitching media, many experts assume their knowledge base is too specific for a general reader to understand. So they either dumb down their message or make it as general as possible.
I understand this impulse. After all, they’re trying to reach an audience broader than their coworkers and others who intimately know their space.
Yet it’s a mistake. Only offering a general overview limits you from competing in what’s usually a crowded space: those who share your expertise and want to write about what they know.
This week, I’ll be doing my first pitch review for my Pitches Get Stitches series. In this opening essay, I wanted to highlight a theme that I saw in that pitch, and that I’ve seen in countless others.
The pitch—which I’ve presented in full below—does a sound job of describing an issue in the mining industry that needs attention. But because it’s essentially an overview of a subject others have already written about in-depth, I doubt it would pass most editors’ desks.
As a leader, you have a wealth of insight about your particular field. Everything you’ve seen, and the conclusions you’ve formed from your experiences, is unique. That is what qualifies you to write about it in an opinionated way.
Yet when it actually comes to writing out these insights, most leaders strip out their personality and depth.
What a disappointment for editors and readers hungry for something that deviates from the conventional wisdom they constantly see.
Start from the specific and build to a larger point from there. It’ll be more interesting—and you’ll have way more people eager to hear what you have to say.
Hi, I’m Jake Meth. I’m the founder of Opinioned, an op-ed consulting firm that helps thought leaders publish columns in top media. Previously, I built and edited Fortune’s opinion section, and I’ve worked in journalism and communications for 15 years.
This newsletter has three parts: opening thoughts related to op-eds/thought leadership, analysis of a reader-submitted pitch, and headlines of hypothetical opinion articles I’d love to read. You can read more about Heds here.
If you’re not already subscribed to Heds, you’ve made a huge mistake!
Pitches Get Stitches (The First!)
If you’ve read my last few newsletters, you’ve seen my call for op-ed pitches for me to evaluate in this newsletter. Well, I received my first pitch!
The central theme of my critique is analyzed in the essay above. Below, I’m providing the full text of the pitch and a few thoughts on what it did well and not so well.
The Pitch
Miners need to address more than carbon to keep the energy transition rolling
Ignoring water and communities could hamstring efforts to supply critical minerals for rebuilding our energy system
Miners are increasingly in the spotlight as society begins to understand the role that a dozen or so key metals (copper, nickel, lithium, and so on) have in enabling our energy transition and net-zero goals. As the spotlight shines more brightly on miners, they're being asked to clean up their own operations (alongside their efforts to power a cleaner energy system by supplying the metals that power solar, wind, and batteries). A big part of cleaning up their act is setting KPIs for ESG targets, whether those targets are attached to voluntary sustainability plans, shareholder demands, or debt vehicles where the interest rate is tied to ESG KPIs ("sustainability linked loans").
Carbon is king when it comes to ESG for most of us who sit behind a desk and worry about the present and future pains associated with climate change. But, in mining, how you treat water and localized pollutants, how you treat communities and share prosperity with them--that's what can create a positive impact on lives right now. Alternatively, if you screw those things up, it's what sparks community protests that could shut a mine down.
So, including those less common KPIs (water quality and efficiency, economic development, and so forth) in your ESG targets is critical in mining. In itself, it is the responsible way for miners to act. From a strategic perspective, if miners don't get this right, they risk a series of effective and detrimental protest actions--slowing the energy transition, one shuttered mine at a time.
The Stitches
Topic
I was initially intrigued by this pitch, because I didn’t know anything about what’s being done to measure sustainability beyond carbon emissions in the mining space.
My initial instinct when this happens is to find out what I don’t know. So I searched and found quite a few articles written on the topic. Most of the in-depth writing was done by consulting firms like McKinsey and Bain. But there were a few Reuters reports and stories in mining trade media.
Because the client is seeking to publish in trade media, this is a red flag. As an editor, I’d be hesitant to run a piece like this because it doesn’t look into any particular element of the mining-ESG measurement issue; as I explain in the essay above, it’s more of a high-level overview. It doesn’t really stand out from what I read in the other articles I found.
Headline
The headline format is strong. It conveys their point clearly and succinctly.
That said, I don’t think the “energy transition” part of it matches their argument. The pitch states that measuring sustainability should also include considering the impact on polluting water and negatively affecting the lives of those who live nearby. Those two concepts are not related to the energy transition, which is about moving away from the use of carbon and toward renewable sources of energy.
Don’t try to accomplish too much in the headline. Simply arguing that miners need to move beyond carbon in their ESG considerations is enough.
Vague language
The subhed mentions “ignoring … communities.” I know this is just the subhed, but I still don’t like vague words like “communities” when describing a problem. What is mining doing to communities, and which communities are being affected? Even if many communities are involved, it would be better to just mention one in the subhed (and the specific problem affecting it) than to generalize.
Also, saying miners are “increasingly in the spotlight” raises an eyebrow. According to who? If you’re going to make a trend statement like this, especially at the start of your pitch, you need to back it up.
My recommendation
Make a more specific, in-depth argument within this broad topic. Rely on your expertise to bring us there. Maybe you argue that mining companies are not equipped to meet most ESG goals because of their broken leadership structures. Or talk about how carbon reduction is a red herring for progress, because it’s the most unimportant aspect of sustainability in mining. I have no idea if either of those two things are true; I’m just giving you a model for how I’d form your argument.
Questions you could ask yourself when brainstorming: What’s the worst thing happening related to ESG and mining? Do many people know about this? Do I have a strong opinion on it?
Heds
If you’re inspired to write an op-ed based on one of the headlines you read below, please reach out so we can work on it together.
Before continuing, please see my note on how to read the below headlines. Ideal writers are in italics.
The focus on Sam Bankman-Fried’s sad parents is a media failure
Countless lives were ruined in the FTX collapse. Who cares how upset his parents are? (media critic; crypto critic)
‘Generative AI’ is a meaningless term
Overuse has led to abuse. How to spot the pretenders. (AI builder)
Put a gag on gag orders
A short history of their use as it pertains to Trump’s fraud trial. Can they be wielded as political weapons? (law historian)
Does China’s military really need U.S. chips?
A dive into how China’s military uses technology. (Chinese military expert)
The most secure job around? Working for yourself
Risk-averse people should better understand the risks of having all their pay come from one source. (entrepreneur; economist)
Why do serious news sites run raunchy and misleading ads?
If they’re really committed to telling the truth, they shouldn’t be a platform for this kind of content. (media researcher)
Will recently-passed aid to Israel have any impact the Gaza war?
An inside look at how government military aid works. (former government agency leader; government researcher)
Enough corporate climate pledges!
It’s easy for a company to say they’ll be carbon neutral by X year. But by that point, who in their leadership will be left to be held accountable? (exec of company fighting climate change; climate change advocacy group head)
Amazon is finally doing drone deliveries. Should you be afraid?
An analysis of the risks to public safety. (logistics company exec; public safety expert)
Venture investors are becoming dupes
Few put any real effort into understanding what they’re funding. It’s fueled a massive startup bubble. (venture investor)