[jkincaid]

(TC writer here) I'd say send an email, and if you don't get a response in 1-2 days send one more saying that if you don't hear back in the next 24 hours you'll probably try your luck elsewhere. Don't be threatening about it (the reporter doesn't owe you anything), just be transparent.

Setting a 'time limit' like this helps makes sure you don't end up on the reporter's mental backburner indefinitely. Of course, if the reporter is super swamped this may lead them to simply pass on the story. But usually if it's good, they'll try to find another writer who can take it.

[paraschopra]

Incidentally, I just did the same thing to you :)

Had emailed you yesterday, no luck. Sent a gentle reminder to you again a couple of hours back. Still no reply, but keeping my fingers crossed :)

PS: seriously, though, sometimes I wonder whether journalists get my emails or it simply ends up getting into the spam box. Sadly, there is no way to know for sure.

[lawnchair_larry]

How do I bait you?

[RealGeek]

I would rather expect to hear a no than waiting indefinitely.

Why can't journalists simply say no for a story? I understand they are flooded with emails, but a one word no would suffice.

[edanm]

I agree with the sentiment, but I don't think I'd react kindly to a one word "no". Imagine putting in time and effort into an email and just getting "no" in response.

[pud]

One of the best ways to cut down on inbound email, is to send less outbound email.