Remember when the news was about what happened, not how to feel about it? 1440's Daily Digest is bringing that back. Every morning, they sift through 100+ sources to deliver a concise, unbiased briefing — no pundits, no paywalls, no politics. Just the facts, all in five minutes. For free.

Read the newsletter trusted by 4.5 million fact-seekers.

Welp, it happened again. Editors at publications like Dwell, Business Insider, Vox, The Strategist, and Rolling Stone Africa were duped by an AI-created freelancer, once again.  The podcast Question Everything from KCRW documented how one editor in Toronto went to extremes to talk to the human behind the fake reporter. 

Nicholas Hune-Brown, at The Local, did a really great piece on his deep dive into who this person was and why they decided to dupe so many outlets. He even got her on the phone to try to learn more about what her motivations were and why she would try to run such a damaging scam. It’s a great piece and well worth a read. 

A couple of weeks ago, while I was on a fantastic girls' weekend getaway with a friend and fellow successful freelance journalist, we were talking about our pitches. These days, it's getting more and more difficult to even get a response from editors, let alone a story commission. When I told her about the podcast episode, she had a single pointed question: Why did this fake journalist get responses and interest in their pitches, when I don’t?

While this incident happened last year, her question underlined a few things that I think are really valuable to journalists like us, who are working hard to make a living wage and do good work.

The scam that Goldiee ran was, at its core, a pitch-craft operation. She did not succeed because she was a good writer. She succeeded because she understood what editors are looking for and systematically faked each signal using AI. Every deception she used points to something real that legitimate human freelancers can use to succeed with their pitches. Here are my six takeaways:

Hune-Brown acknowledges in his piece that the pitch likely appealed to him because a large language model was remixing his own prompt, asking for stories where "health and money collide.” It flattered him by sending back what he wanted to hear, which is something that AI models are actually trained to do: Please you. A human freelancer can leverage this by actually reading the editor's call, the publication's recent issues, and the specific section they are targeting, then writing a pitch that uses the outlet's own language to describe why the story belongs there. 

Hune-Brown explicitly identified the AI pitch formula: "This story matters because of X, it is timely because of Y, it fits your readership because of Z." That formula worked initially because it is genuinely useful. A pitch that answers all three questions, in your own voice and with real specifics, will do far better than one that is vague about any of them. Why does the story matter to real people, right now, in this specific publication? Answer that clearly, and you’ll have a much stronger pitch. 

The pre-reported interviews in Goldiee's pitch were faked, but the instinct behind them was sound. Editors respond to evidence that a story already exists, not just as an idea but as a reportable reality. One confirmed source who has agreed to speak on the record, named in the pitch, does more work than three paragraphs describing what the story could be. If you have made a call, say so. If a document exists, say so. Concrete evidence of legwork signals that the story is real and that you are the person to report it, because you’re already doing the work. Name your sources in the pitch. It makes your idea stronger. 

Hune-Brown's investigation collapsed Goldiee's credibility almost immediately: searches of her name alongside the outlets she claimed to have turned up no results.  When a colleague contacted one of her named sources, that source said she had never heard of Goldiee. Truthfully, I feel like this should absolutely go without saying, given basic ethics but…Make sure your clips are actually live, a professional website that is up to date, and a Muck Rack or Contently profile that reflects real published work. 

Hune-Brown said that a closer read of the pitch revealed rote phrasing that had all the hallmarks of AI-generated writing, and that Victoria's stilted follow-up email made clear what should have been obvious from the start.  Editors are reading for voice now in a way they were not three years ago. A pitch that sounds like a person, with a specific angle, a specific scene, and a specific reason you are the right person to report it, stands out from the volume of templated language landing in inboxes. 

Hune-Brown described a moment of bone-deep despair as he looked at his remaining pitches in his inbox and saw nothing but the synthetic sheen of artificial intelligence. He wrote that there were probably some promising young writers buried in there somewhere, but that he could not bear to dig through it to find them. That is the environment right now.  Editors are exhausted and skeptical, but they still need real writers. A pitch that arrives with a real voice, a real source, and a real angle need not be perfect. It just has to be unmistakably human.

If you want the exact formula I use every time I pitch, you can find it in my ebook. The pitch pattern I use and detail in the ebook lands more than 80% of the pitches I send, and it’s a solid investment if you’re looking to make a real living wage as a freelance journalist.

This week is extremely robust, with lots of opportunities for freelance work and content calendar pitches. If you’re curious about how best to pitch for content calendars refer to last week’s newsletter.

Freelance Opps include: 

Full Time Work includes a surprising number of editorial roles at a wide variety of companies, including 

I’ve also found some particularly bad Dishonorable Mentions to avoid, as well as some fun Passion Projects.

As always, everything on this list is remote or hybrid and pays at least six figures annually.

Want access to all these jobs, and more?

View this newsletter for just $3 or get a monthly membership for $5 per month. If you’re already a paid subscriber, you can sign in to view this week’s list of jobs.