Artist Feature Submission Guidelines: Text, Credits, and Rights

A clean submission makes room for the story

Editors can help shape a strong idea, but they should not have to guess who produced a track, whether a photographer approved a picture, or which of several similarly named profiles belongs to the artist. A complete submission gives a feature a fair chance to be understood and checked. It also helps protect the people whose words, images, music, and labor are part of the story.

This guide is for Baltimore rappers, singers, producers, DJs, collectives, event organizers, and other scene participants proposing a text-based community feature. It is not a promise of publication, a booking form, or a request to surrender ownership. The aim is straightforward: give editors enough accurate information to assess the idea, verify its details, and ask focused follow-up questions.

Local context matters. If your proposal concerns a release, performance, or collaboration connected with Baltimore, say what that connection is. Name the relevant project, neighborhood, event, or venue when appropriate, and explain the relationship rather than relying on broad claims such as “a major force in the city.” A mention of a place like The Crown or Ottobar can be useful when it is genuinely relevant; it should not be added as decoration or presented as a performance credit unless that credit is accurate.

What to send: the practical checklist

Put the core information in one message or document. Clear filenames and plain-text details are easier to review than a chain of social posts, screenshots, and unexplained attachments. Before sending, check that each link opens and that the person receiving the submission can identify what it points to.

• Artist or collective name: Include the preferred spelling and capitalization. If a project uses a different name, identify it separately.
• Primary contact: Provide an email address that is checked regularly. Add a role, such as artist, manager, or collective contact, if that helps editors understand whom they are speaking with.
• Short bio: Aim for 100–150 words. Include concrete work and Baltimore connections that are relevant to the proposed feature.
• Feature proposal: In one or two paragraphs, explain the subject, why it matters now, and what material or access you can provide.
• Verified links: Share direct links to the particular release, event listing, portfolio, or official profile being discussed—not only a general link page.
• Credits: Name the writers, producers, performers, photographers, designers, and other contributors whose work appears in the proposed material.
• Permissions and restrictions: State what you have permission to submit, what rights remain with other contributors, and any limits editors should know before reviewing it.
• Timing: Include relevant release or event dates and note any genuine deadline. Do not describe a preferred publication date as a confirmed one.

A concise, well-labeled submission is usually more useful than a long promotional packet. If you have a press release, it can provide background, but it should not replace your own explanation of the proposed feature. Editors need to know what is distinctive about the story, not only how the project describes itself.

Write a bio with verifiable local detail

A 100–150-word bio is enough to introduce an artist without turning the submission into a résumé. Lead with the name used publicly and the work the reader should know. Add a few relevant facts: a release title, a production role, a collective affiliation, a documented performance, or a specific connection to the Baltimore scene. A short bio should orient the editor; it does not need to make a case for greatness.

Be exact about credits. “Produced by” is different from “recorded at,” and appearing on a bill is different from opening a show or headlining it. If you refer to a Baltimore venue, give the event name and date when you have them. If the date is uncertain, say so and provide a link or contact who can help confirm it. Do not list a venue simply because it is familiar to local readers.

Promotional language can obscure useful facts. Phrases such as “the next voice of the city” or “a genre-defying movement” may express enthusiasm, but they do not tell an editor what the artist has made. Replace them with specifics: the title of a project, the role you played, the year it came out, or the collaboration that anchors the proposed story. If a claim is an opinion, frame it as the artist’s own description rather than as an established fact.

Keep the bio consistent with the artist’s public materials. If a name, pronouns, credit, or project title has changed, indicate the current form and explain any older form that may appear in linked material. This small note can prevent a correctable mismatch from becoming a confusing published error.

Make the feature proposal specific

A proposal should answer three questions: What is the story? Why is this the right moment to tell it? What can the artist or collective contribute beyond a general biography? The strongest ideas often have a clear point of view—a particular release, creative partnership, community project, performance practice, or turning point—rather than an open-ended request to “feature my music.”

For example, a useful pitch might propose a text feature about how a Baltimore producer and vocalist built a collaborative release, identify the project by title, state when it was released, and link to the work. If the story involves a performance, the submission might name the event and venue and provide a public listing or another reliable way to verify the details. This is a model of structure, not a claim about a real release or performance.

Tell editors what you can provide: a written account, a track list with credits, permission to discuss a particular process, or contact details for other contributors. Do not promise another person’s participation unless that person has agreed. If the proposed angle involves a sensitive disagreement, personal history, or information not meant for publication, flag it before sending details. Editors can then decide what they can responsibly review.

One focused proposal is easier to evaluate than five unrelated ideas in the same message. If you have alternatives, rank them and briefly explain which is the priority. A clear pitch respects the editor’s time and helps the artist avoid preparing extensive material for an angle that may not fit.

Build a credit list, not a guessing game

Music and community features are rarely the work of one person alone. A credit list should identify everyone whose contribution is relevant to the material being proposed. Depending on the project, that may include lyricists, composers, producers, featured performers, recording or mix engineers, photographers, videographers, cover designers, and writers. Include the role beside each name, rather than sending a list that leaves the relationship unclear.

Use the spelling and public credit each contributor prefers. If a person uses a stage name, include it as credited and, where useful for verification, distinguish it from a legal name without disclosing private information. Do not publish someone’s legal name, phone number, or private email simply because it appears in a file’s metadata. Share contact details only when appropriate and with permission.

For a recording, distinguish between creative and technical roles. A beatmaker may be credited as producer; an engineer may have recorded, mixed, or mastered the track; a featured performer may have contributed vocals or writing. If the exact role is disputed or unclear, do not guess. Mark the credit as unconfirmed and tell the editor what is needed to verify it.

For photographs or artwork, credit the creator and identify the specific item. “Photo by [name]” is not enough if a submission contains several images and it is unclear which person made which one. A simple numbered list or filename-to-credit key can help. For example: “Image 1, file cover-art-final.jpg: cover design by [credited creator]; permission status: pending.” A placeholder in an internal submission is better than inventing a credit, but the item should not be treated as cleared for publication until the status is resolved.

Be especially careful with group work. A collective’s public name does not automatically identify every person who contributed to a particular track, event, or image. Ask collaborators how they want to be credited and confirm that the person submitting has the authority to speak for the group on the specific materials included.

Explain permissions in plain language

Submitting material does not automatically mean that every right has been cleared. An artist may own a recording but not a photograph used with it; a writer may control an article while a publisher has separate rights in its layout; a track may contain a contribution from several people. Editors need a truthful account of what the submitter can authorize and what still requires approval.

For every proposed excerpt, photograph, lyric, artwork, or other creative material, identify its creator and state whether you have permission to submit it for editorial consideration. If an editor wants to publish it, ask what specific use is proposed and confirm that the relevant permission covers that use. Do not assume that a link to a public social media post means the post’s images or text are free to reproduce.

Quoted text requires care, too. If you submit words written by another person—such as a collaborator’s statement, an event description, or an excerpt from an article—identify the source and confirm that the person has agreed to its use, or provide enough information for the editor to assess the quotation independently. Never present another person’s writing as your own. If a quote is only background and is not intended for publication, label it clearly before sharing it.

Lyrics, liner notes, and long passages are not automatically available for reuse because they concern your own song or project. If you want an excerpt included, say who wrote it, whether it is co-written, and what permission has been granted. Editors may choose not to reproduce certain material even when permission is offered. A feature can often discuss a song without reproducing its lyrics.

When permission is pending, say so directly. “I believe the photographer is fine with it” is not confirmation. A better status note is: “The photographer has not yet approved publication; I can request permission and provide a written confirmation before the image is considered.” Clear status prevents a review copy from being mistaken for cleared material.

This guide is editorial information, not legal advice. If there is a rights dispute, a contract restriction, or uncertainty about who controls a work, do not make a legal guarantee on someone else’s behalf. Explain the issue accurately and seek qualified guidance where needed.

Links, files, and facts editors can check

Send direct, working links to the exact material relevant to your pitch. If you share a streaming link, name the release and track in the message. If you share a social profile, specify the post or project that matters. A link tree can be useful as a supplement, but it should not force an editor to search through a long list to find the work under discussion.

For event details, provide the public event listing or the organizer’s confirmed information. Include the full date, venue name, and event title when known. If a listing has changed, mention the change rather than forwarding an outdated flyer as if it were current. Venue calendars and event details can shift; the organizer or venue is the right source for final confirmation.

For attached text, use a readable document or paste the copy into the message. Label drafts clearly, such as “artist-bio-draft” or “feature-proposal-2026-10.” Avoid a folder full of files named “final,” “final2,” and “really-final.” If an attachment includes images or audio for review, identify the creator and permissions status in the accompanying note. Do not send sensitive personal documents or private material that is not needed to assess the feature.

Editors may check spellings, dates, credits, and event information against public sources or with the people involved. Include a source when a fact may be difficult to verify, and distinguish a confirmed fact from your recollection. A sentence such as “I believe this took place in spring 2024; the organizer may be able to confirm the date” is more useful than an unsupported exact date.

Share boundaries and correction needs early

Artists can identify information that should be verified before publication, including a disputed credit, a sensitive personal detail, or a project date that has not been announced. Place these notes in a separate “editor notes” section so they are not confused with copy intended for publication. Be specific about the concern and, where possible, suggest a reliable person or public source who can confirm it.

Do not send confidential material without explaining its status. A private message, unreleased recording, contract, or personal story may contain information that is not suitable for publication. If you share something only to provide context, label it before sending and state whether it may be quoted, paraphrased, or used only for verification. Editors need to agree to any special handling; a label alone cannot create an agreement after the fact.

If you notice an error after submitting, send a concise correction with the original detail, the corrected detail, and the source or person who can confirm it. Prompt, precise corrections are more useful than replacing a file without explanation. If a correction concerns a contributor’s credit or permission, flag it as such rather than treating it as a routine spelling change.

A worked example of a complete submission

The following fictional template shows the level of detail that helps an editor assess a pitch. The names and project are placeholders, not real Baltimore artists or events.

This format does not need to sound formal or promotional. It simply puts the information where an editor can find it. If a section does not apply, write “not applicable” or leave it out; do not fill gaps with assumptions.

Before you press send

• Can an editor identify the artist, the proposed story, and the primary contact in under a minute?
• Is the bio between 100 and 150 words, and does it use concrete, accurate details?
• Are names, roles, project titles, dates, and venue references checked?
• Does every link open and lead to the item described?
• Have all contributors been credited by role, with uncertain credits clearly marked?
• Have you stated who created each submitted text, image, or excerpt and whether publication permission is confirmed?
• Have collaborators agreed to be named or contacted where necessary?
• Have you separated public information from private or sensitive context?

If one answer is no, the submission may still be worth sending, but disclose the gap. An editor can work with a pending credit or an unconfirmed date when the uncertainty is visible. A missing fact presented as certainty is much harder to correct.