LSE Blogs Submission Guidelines: Publishing with EUROPP and Beyond

Key Takeaways

• LSE Blogs is a family of separate blogs, each with its own editor, audience, and word limit. No single form covers the whole network.
• EUROPP stopped publishing new posts in 2021. Its archive stays online and is still cited, but new European politics commentary needs a different home.
• Editors want argument-led posts of roughly 800 to 1,200 words for an informed non-specialist, with hyperlinks instead of footnotes.
• A short pitch saves time, and posts tied to a news event need one to two weeks of warning.
• Picking the right title inside the network matters more than polishing the draft.

1. Introduction

Search for "lse blogs europp submission" and you land on pages that assume you already have an editor's email address. Guidelines differ from blog to blog, word limits sit in different places, and the title most people associate with the network, EUROPP, has been quiet for several years. Meanwhile, a policy-facing post on LSE Blogs can reach readers who will never open the journal version of the same work.

This article explains how the LSE Blogs network is organised, what its editors ask for, how the pitch and editing process runs, and how the network compares with other outlets that publish policy commentary. It is written for researchers, PhD students, policy analysts, and practitioners who have something to say and need to know where to send it. Word counts and timelines vary between titles, so the numbers here work as planning assumptions rather than fixed rules.

2. How the LSE Blogs network is organised, and where EUROPP fits

Treat LSE Blogs as a group of independent editorial teams sharing one publishing platform. Each blog has a remit, an editor, and a reader in mind, and each answers pitches on its own terms.

The platform at blogs.lse.ac.uk hosts more than a dozen titles run by departments, research centres, and standalone editorial teams. Some are open to anyone with relevant expertise. Others publish mainly their own staff, students, and invited contributors. The About or "submit a post" page on each blog carries the current rules, and those pages get updated without much notice.

EUROPP ran from 2012 and built a large archive of short analytical posts on EU politics, elections, the eurozone, migration policy, and Brexit. New material stopped appearing in 2021. The archive is still online, still indexed by search engines, and still cited on reading lists, which is why the name keeps surfacing in submission searches. Pitching EUROPP now will not produce a publication, and the network has not replaced it with a single European politics title.

For European politics work today, the practical routes differ by angle. A finding with a UK dimension goes to British Politics and Policy. Comparative European research goes to outlets outside the LSE network, such as the ECPR's The Loop or a Brussels-based research institute. A full paper goes to a peer-reviewed journal, with a short summary posted later on a blog that will take it.

Consider a lecturer with a paper on European Parliament committee voting. If the finding speaks to UK parliamentary practice, British Politics and Policy is a reasonable first pitch. If it speaks to EU institutional design, the piece needs an outlet with a European readership.

3. What LSE Blogs editors ask for

The core brief across the network is consistent: a short, argument-led post for a reader who is intelligent, interested, and outside your subfield. Format details vary in wording from blog to blog, and the underlying expectations do not.

Length and shape. Most titles work with 800 to 1,200 words, and a few accept up to 1,500. Paragraphs run two to four sentences. Subheadings break the text every 250 words or so. Anything that reads like a paper abstract gets cut in the first edit.

Headline. Descriptive beats clever. A colon is common, as in "Fiscal rules and the politics of enforcement: what the new Commission proposal changes". Keep it under about 90 characters so it does not truncate in search results.

Opening. State the finding inside the first 100 words. The reader should know what the post argues before deciding whether to keep reading. Background follows the claim.

Evidence. Hyperlink to the source: the journal article, the dataset, the official report. No footnotes, no endnotes, no reference list. If a number matters, put it in the sentence and link the source beside it.

Voice. First person works for opinion. Hedging does not.

Author bio. One or two sentences, current affiliation, and a link to the underlying research. Editors often ask for a social media handle as well.

Images. Supply a landscape image at least 1,200 pixels wide, with a caption and a credit line naming the creator and the licence. Images pulled from search results without permission get rejected, and so do generic stock pictures of the European Parliament building.

Licensing and disclaimer. Posts on the network typically carry a Creative Commons licence and a line stating that the views belong to the author and not to the LSE. Check what that means for your funder, your employer, and any embargo on the research.

Exclusivity. Most titles want original material that has not appeared elsewhere, including on a personal blog or a university news page. If a version has already run somewhere, say so in the pitch and let the editor decide.

Posts get turned down for predictable reasons: a paper summary with no argument; a topic that needs three paragraphs of background before it makes sense; a piece that repeats what the blog published a month ago; commentary on an event that has already passed.

4. From pitch to publication

Pitch before you draft, unless an editor invited the piece. Editors commission to a word count and a slot in the schedule, and they would rather redirect an argument before you spend a week on 1,500 words.

A pitch that works is short and structured.

What happens next, in a typical sequence. The editor replies with a yes, a no, or a request to reshape the angle. An accepted pitch comes with a word count and a deadline. You file the draft. The editor cuts and reorders, then sends it back for fact-checking, sometimes with a new headline. Publication usually follows within one to three weeks of the accepted draft. Posts tied to a news event can move in a day or two, and only if the draft is ready when the news lands.

Two things to avoid. Do not send the same pitch to several LSE blogs at once; the editors know each other. Do not file 2,000 words against a 1,200-word limit and expect the editor to cut it for you.

Take the case of a PhD researcher who wants one policy-facing publication before going on the job market. Reading five recent posts on the target blog and matching their structure takes an afternoon. The pitch can go out that week, the draft the next, and publication can land inside a month.

5. Where LSE Blogs sits among policy outlets

The choice of outlet comes down to three things: who edits you, who reads you, and what the piece counts for in your own institution's assessment.

Three variables decide most cases. Reach favours The Conversation and LSE Blogs. Speed favours The Loop and independent publishing. Credibility with a specific policy audience favours think tanks and specialist outlets.

Two practical notes. Blog posts rarely count as formal research outputs in UK assessment exercises, so check your institution's rules before treating a post as a substitute for a journal article. For European politics specifically, the gap left by EUROPP is real: a comparative piece on EU fiscal rules has no obvious LSE home, while a piece on how those rules affect UK fiscal policy fits British Politics and Policy with little adjustment.

6. FAQ

Q1. Can I still submit to EUROPP?

No. New posts stopped appearing in 2021 and the site functions as an archive. Check the LSE Blogs index for active titles, and for European politics look at the ECPR's The Loop or a Brussels-based outlet.

Q2. Do I need an LSE affiliation to publish on LSE Blogs?

Not for most titles. British Politics and Policy, the Impact Blog, Business Review, and USAPP all publish external authors. A few departmental blogs publish mainly their own staff and students, and their About pages state which model they follow.

Q3. How long should a post be?

Between 800 and 1,200 words for most titles, with a ceiling of 1,500 on some. Confirm on the individual blog's guidelines page, since limits change without a network-wide announcement.

Q4. Should I send a pitch or a finished draft?

A pitch, unless an editor asked for the full piece. A short pitch costs twenty minutes and can save a week of writing in the wrong direction.

7. Conclusion

The submission process behind LSE Blogs is more ordinary than the search results suggest. Pick one title, read what it has published recently, pitch a single argument with evidence attached, and file at the word count you agreed. EUROPP's closure changed which blog a European politics piece should target. It did not change the mechanics of pitching.

Match the outlet to the work. UK policy analysis belongs at British Politics and Policy, research impact and higher education at the Impact Blog, business and management at Business Review, and US politics at USAPP. Comparative European research needs a different home, and technology policy has no dedicated LSE title, which leaves specialist outlets and general-interest platforms.

Allow a few days to two weeks for a reply to a pitch. The pitches that get a yes state a finding in the headline and support it with three pieces of evidence.