Christ and Pop Culture is currently looking for feature pitches for articles that will be published exclusively in our new Christ and Pop Culture Magazine (currently available on iOS devices).

We’re most interested in unique, thoughtful, and/or surprising pieces on subjects that the Christian church overlooks or under-thinks. Christ and Pop Culture features are meant to be timeless, deeply thoughtful, and fresh. They often require substantial research, extremely unique and informative personal experience, or interviewed sources to fill out the piece. Features undergo a substantial editing process and will often require several passes and revisions before publication. You will, however, be extremely proud of the end product.

We can currently pay $25 for features after publication.

If you have an idea for a CaPC feature, email a 1-2 paragraph explanation of what you’d like to write to, with the subject line “Feature Pitch.” Make sure you’ve looked over our previous features as an indication of what we’re looking for. Please also include links to three of your best previously written works so far.


    1. Ashley, we’d be happy to see any kind of clips you have, any way you can get them to us. We’ll take word files, pdfs, scanned images, whatever.

  1. So, you want “unique, thoughtful, and/or surprising pieces on subjects that the Christian church overlooks or under-thinks.” You want them to be “timeless, deeply thoughtful, and fresh.” You want writers to invest “substantial research” into the piece, including multiple interviews. And then the piece will undergo “a substantial editing process and will often require several passes and revisions before publication.”

    And then you’ll pay a whopping $25 — but ONLY if you decide it’s good enough to publish?

    Wow, where do I sign up?

    1. There’s nothing wrong with these guys holding high standards despite being a smaller, less wealthy online outlet.

      Don’t be rude.

    2. Hey, if you can figure out a way for us to make more money on the site so a writer like me can make more cash, feel free to offer some constructive support. I know our editors (who are great!) would love to kick out more cash to us. Otherwise, if you’re writing for the cash and your literary contributions are so sublime and weighty that you can command heftier paychecks per piece, remember that this isn’t a forced job.

      In the meantime, we’ll go ahead and let the editors demand quality from our contributors. I guess they have this crazy idea that publishing crud won’t do anything for our readers or their ability to pay their writers more.

    3. I don’t think interviews are required for all pieces anyway.

      To the editors, are you still accepting single pitches for the blog? I know the magazine is different.

  2. Also, to clarify, writers pitch the feature idea first, which the editors then either greenlight or suggest a different direction. It’s not like you go through the entire writing and editing process and then hope we like it.

    I spent hundreds of hours writing my academic article on constitutional originalism. It went through several rounds of edits before I could even submit it for publication, at which point there were good odds it would not be accepted (since I’m just a student). And even if all the major journals were clamoring for it, I would not see a dime as a result.

    The internet is not academia, of course, but some of the same nonmonetary benefits attain. Writing for an audience, working with thoughtful editors, and getting your work noticed by at least a small population are all their own rewards. We all have bills to pay, but only a lucky few get to do that by writing for the internet – a point I think Mr. Moring can appreciate as an experienced writer himself.

    1. Indeed. If I have anything accepted I’ll be tempted to say keep the money, I don’t want the tax hassle!

  3. I’m with Mark Moring. Where do I sign up?

    Seriously, why put in that kind of time and commitment to benefit the owner(s)/founder(s) of this not-oft read blogsite/publication? For my dime (or less), I’d think spending endless hours on a manuscript might be better spent at Christianity Today.

    1. Nick Olson does deserve a bigger audience, though. You’re right about that. Love that guy.

    2. Thanks Susan (and Alan!) for the very kind words, and I very much appreciate you reading my work here. I always enjoy your comments on my MAD MEN recaps.

      While I can understand why people might have good reasons for thinking writing for a relatively small site for little to no compensation is a waste in various ways, I want to offer my perspective of how writing for CaPC has “paid off.”

      When CaPC brought me in to their fold, I had no experience writing on a regular basis for a publication, but they saw the potential I showed in my educational work and gave me the opportunity to 1. Have a weekly column on film (though I was a totally inexperienced film critic relying on instincts and the desire to grow), 2. be part of an interactive editing process in which people were reading my work and responding to it constructively, and 3. be part of a writing community that is fairly diverse in opinion (and growing more so in positive ways) and in which we seek to hash out thoughtful responses that grow out of the tensions of nuance.

      As is made public in these calls for writers, CaPC is not yet able to pay its writers much, but that’s not at all resultant from editors stocking too much away in retirement funds. Actually, I know of editors for CaPC who forego any money owed them for writing to put it toward the staff writers, toward illustration, or toward building the site.

      But CaPC has offered me a baseline platform–one that I’ve been proud to identify with (we’re far from perfect, but I think we try to incorporate a responsive humility to that realization). And if you write well once you get a platform, it’s nearly inevitable that you will be noticed. When Mark Moring was gracious enough to offer me my first opportunity with Christianity Today, I like to think that the work I put in here at CaPC was instrumental in creating not only that opportunity, but various others (I think that last line may have been an unintentional humble brag–sorry).

      At CaPC, I was graciously given the space to grow as a writer. I might cringe if I read my first few posts here, but the difference between my first post and my latest is, in large part, a testament to the culture that CaPC has fostered.

      As a former editor here, I know for certain that the whole team wishes they could pay the writers more. But it’s a young site and the Internet is a wild west if you’re trying to make money on written content. But in the meantime–aside from the benefits I’ve mentioned above–we’ve done the work here because it’s truly a labor of love. When one is able and willing to use “free time” for this kind of work, it’s suggestive of an intrinsic value.

      Does that mean there aren’t days when we lament the lack of monetary resource? Of course not. CaPC’s is a measured idealism.

      I may go without significant pay for my written work for the rest of my life. And I may have a tiny audience for that duration. But I’ll continue writing because it’s of immeasurable worth to me to do so.

      Thanks again–and cheers.

    3. Nick, I admire and (believe it or not) I believe in what you say here. I value your opinion, and your work (I hope that’s obvious). In any way CaCP has helped you develop your skills and has been a rewarding vocation for you, I am glad.

      My answer was one of judgmental snark. Partly it involved personal feelings and attitudes, condensed on a self-serving comment by a founder. Partly it was based on my observation of how often the work a few of the writers for CaCP consistently fall far, far short of what “they” were demanding of applicants. I know it was interpreted in the way it deserved to be interpreted. I own it. It was intentionally ungracious, and in that way it was far different than your work, which, as I said, is kind. It may have been a sin. But it may have been a rebuke to someone I felt needed to hear a rebuke. Who decides this? In this case, after some prayer, I did.

      I am glad to say I am not usually trollish or snarky, though sometimes I get carried away and express myself in ways I should not. But in this I had my reasons, and I believe I made my point to the person to whom it was directed.

    4. ???

      It wasn’t directed at you. I don’t know you. I don’t even know if I’ve ever read a post of yours.

      if you truly know what I’m referring to, you have the whole story and you’re telling me that my comment had no effect, then I’m sincerely sorry for that person. But no matter. It’s behind me, and I’ve done what I felt I needed to do.

      I see you’re one of the founders. Blessings on your endeavor here. Despite my unkind comment, I wish no one here harm or failure. Anything that glorifies God (and I think a lot of CaPC blog posts do) is only good. I wish I did it more myself.

      This is one sinner moving on out of this thread.

Comments are now closed for this article.