I enjoyed this thread on Stuff Editors Say by @WarOnTheRocks editor @EvansRyan202: https://twitter.com/EvansRyan202/status/1311302676018335745

Here's what I tell folks pitching opinion pieces to @DefenseOne:

"What we're generally looking for in contributions to Defense One are oped-type pieces of 800 to 1,000 lively words that make a fresh argument about some element of national security and drive toward one or more recommendations for U.S. defense and military leaders...

“...Like any good argument, the piece should anticipate and address potential counterarguments. And since it's easy to talk about a better world, but more useful to describe how to get there..."

“...the piece should identify the obstacles that lie in the way, and describe how they might be overcome."

Like @EvansRyan202 said, the piece should have a lead that grabs the reader and heads right into its thesis. It should not be an excerpt from the National Security Strategy/a reference to the CNO’s planning guidance/a quote from Clausewitz.

Unlike Ryan, I’ll permit one or two acronyms — if they’re spelled out on first use.

Use links, not footnotes. And don’t be stingy with them. Use them to support your assertions, head off counterarguments, and allow readers to dive more deeply.

And finally, I’m @defenseone's lead commentary editor, but please send your pitch to [email protected], which will help ensure that it doesn't get lost in the to-do list that the world can add to…I mean, my inbox.