Have an article that you would like to pitch Dark Market Economist?
We think that’s great and we would love to hear from you.
With that said, we like to see pitches that meet certain standards of quality—but most importantly, we’re looking for a certain kind of spirit in the pitches that we publish.
Major news outlets can create hard news, here-is-something-you-have-never-before-seen-or-heard, pieces better than we can. We aren’t looking to make competition with them on those kinds of stories.
Instead, we’re looking for writers, data scientists, and multimedia creators that want to use their craft to craft context for the latest current events.
We are looking for stories the focus on issues in one of three key subjects, each of which corresponds to a vertical of the site, they are:
We ask that pitches take an angle that caters to one of these three approaches, not that all coverage be restricted to matters of one of these three subjects.
All material—articles, essays, commentary—should be at least 500 words in length and 1500 at most. We feel this is a generous word count, if you can make a persuasive argument otherwise, shoot for the moon, but expect pushback to mount as your word count does.
We value multimedia or data reporting. We will gladly help create written copy to accompany work like this.
How does ransomware affect someone living in a suburb in the midwest?
How will blockchain technology change banking for anyone, not just those invested in the bleeding edge of tech?
What are the implications of the latest prize winning social scientists, policy makers, or artists?
Our audience is dissatisfied with content, it craves context—and we want all the pitches accepted here to give them that.
Betwixt and Between
If you find that you have an idea that doesn’t fit the guidelines above, but have the fervent belief that its what we’re missing, then by all means, send it in.
We can’t promise that it will be addressed as quickly as other pitches, but our site looks for good material in whatever form that it comes to us, and if our format excludes something that could make us better, we are the one’s that are mistaken and we will adjust our guidelines so that they account for the best work brought to our attention.