Writing Epitaphs for the Mdj Obituaries Section
The process of getting an epitaph into the Mdj obituaries isn't as straightforward as typing something up and sending it in. Most people don't realize there's a specific workflow, character limits, and editorial standards that separate a accepted submission from one that comes back with edits or gets cut entirely. I've been dealing with this space for years, and the gaps between what families expect and what the editors actually run are consistently where problems show up. The epitaph itself is the short block of text that runs alongside the obituary notice. It's usually 40 to 80 words depending on the package you pay for. TheMdj has a standing policy that the epitaph cannot duplicate content already in the main obituary body. That means if you wrote about their career in the obit, you don't repeat it in the epitaph. The epitaph is meant to capture essence, not resume details. I once had a submission get rejected because the family included the exact same closing line in both the obituary and the epitaph. The editor flagged it as redundant copy and sent it back. What ended up working was rewriting the epitaph as a standalone biographical snapshot instead. It took twenty minutes and saved the submission from another round of revisions.
Here is how the workflow actually looks from the person submitting side: Draft the epitaph first before writing the full obituary. The epitaph determines the tone and angle you carry into the longer piece. If you write the obit first, you will naturally repeat yourself in the epitaph, and that is the most common error I see. Keep the epitaph under 65 words for the standard package. Going longer means extra charges per word, and some editors start trimming aggressively past the 75-word mark anyway. Use active voice wherever possible. Passive constructions eat word count without adding meaning. "She was known for her generosity" takes nine words. "She was generous" takes three and carries the same information. Word efficiency matters when you are working against a hard ceiling.
Avoid date stacking. Including birth date, death date, and ceremony date inside the epitaph is a waste of space. Those belong in the structured obituary facts section, not the narrative text. I have seen epitaphs lose entire paragraphs to date listings that should have been moved elsewhere. For the submission itself, the Mdj accepts epitaph drafts through their obituary desk email or via their online form. You get an automated confirmation within a few minutes. Human review typically happens within one business day. Turnaround is slower on weekends and holiday periods, so plan around that. If you need same-day placement, you are paying the expedited fee and still hoping the editor gets to it before the print deadline, which is usually 3 PM local time on weekdays. The people doing the actual editorial work on these epitaphs are underrecognized. They read through dozens of submissions a day, many of them emotionally charged and poorly structured. They are the ones deciding what gets published cleanly and what comes back with markup. They are also the ones who catch the factual errors that slip through — wrong dates, misspelled names, living relatives listed as deceased. I learned this the hard way when a submitted epitaph had a typo in the deceased's middle name and the editor caught it before print. That single check prevented a public embarrassment that would have been impossible to correct after publication.
Get the Full Details
One thing that catches people off guard: the Mdj does not allow religious or denominational language in the epitaph unless it is a general phrase like "in loving memory" or "at peace." Specific church affiliations, Bible verses, or doctrinal references get flagged and usually removed during editing. This is not a moral stance by the editorial team. It is a consistency policy across their obituary content. If you want faith-based language, you put it in the main obituary body where there is more flexibility. Another pitfall is the photo attachment. The epitaph submission must include a high-resolution headshot or approved photograph. Blurry phone pictures get rejected. The minimum resolution requirement is 300 DPI at the print size specified in your package. If you are unsure whether your photo meets the standard, run it through a quick image checker or ask the desk to confirm before final submission. One rejected photo cost a family an extra day of wait time they did not have. If you are working with tight word counts and struggling to make the epitaph feel complete, try the three-sentence framework. First sentence establishes who the person was. Second sentence captures what they valued or did. Third sentence offers the closing sentiment. This structure fits comfortably within 50 to 60 words and covers the essential ground without padding.
The main downside to the current system is that there is no preview tool. You submit your draft and wait for editorial feedback. You cannot see how it will look in the actual layout before it goes to print. Some newspapers offer a proofing stage where families can review the final typeset version. The Mdj does not currently have this. If layout accuracy matters to you, request a text-only proof from the editor before the page is locked. For families who want a faster or more flexible alternative, some use memorial websites or private PDF memorials alongside the newspaper submission. These can hold longer-form content, multiple photos, and extended tributes without the constraints of print space. The newspaper epitaph still serves its purpose for local recognition and permanence, but the digital layer handles what the printed version cannot. The practical takeaway is that preparation saves time. Have your epitaph drafted to length before you start the submission process. Verify the photo quality upfront. Keep religious or specific details for the obituary body. And treat the editor as a collaborator rather than an obstacle — the markdowns they send back are usually minor adjustments that improve the final result rather than arbitrary rejections.
