Editors! Grrr! Yes, I know that writers are always complaining about editors, and vice versa, but my experience below might be enlightening to others.
For many years my book reviews have been published off and on in a western Canadian magazine with progressive leanings. It pays practically nothing ($35 for 700 words) but I wrote for it partly as my way of furthering the cause, as well as for the thrill of seeing my name in print.
I've rewritten reviews a couple of times because the editor wanted a slightly different slant. That won't happen again because I won't be sending them anything more. The editor held onto a review for two months, then rejected it, and now it's out of date. Blithely, he suggested that I try a similar Canadian publication - as if they would want something no longer timely.
As for that similar publication, and the thought of writing for it in the future - a flip through its pages is discouraging. Too many of its articles are lengthy and turgid. Many of the authors, though well-qualified in their fields, lack flair. Male writers predominate, and theorize. To plough through it, a reader has to be really motivated, as I was - and what's the good of preaching to the converted? If the publishers are truly committed to progressive social change, they ought to pitch the magazine to today's busy younger reader.