For a couple of months I literally have not had one editorial image approved due to wrong caption and facts etc. Ive been uploading for 4 years so I know how to do this and what type of image can be accepted. Or maybe I dont now haha. Anyone else having lots of issues getting editorial content approved?

In a word no. Seems odd not aware of any changes. They can be very picky over format so I copy a previously accepted one and overtype the factual stuff.

In most cases you have to get pre-approved to even submit editorial stuff. We have to send PRESS allowance of the event which we intend to upload. They send back a reference number and we put that number in when sending clips to currators. Long and useless procedure...

For events videos? not most editorial stills in general in my experience

Ah interesting. I have contacted them about representing at events without much luck. I actually shoot for Getty Images at many events but Shutterstock could be a good option.

Images I am trying to get approved are nearly all cityscape/tracel imagery with perhaps a  umber plate or name on a boat etc. Im fairly lazy at removing all logos etc. In the past I have just submitted as editorial. But now no luck

I contacted them about events got no response so never really bothered with it.I get the kind of stuff you refer to accepted all the time. From you have said sounds like theres something they dont like about your captions....I suggest you take a close look at their instructions...as I said I think they can be very fussy...might have spotted a comma out of place ;-)

Editorial is a very small percentage of our portfolio (<5%) but I don't usually have problems with captions at SS. This week I got a rejection on the only editorial image I uploaded for the same reason as you and like you, it doesn't make sense based on my past experiences. So you're not alone. I'm planning on reviewing/updating it and then resubmitting.

I've submitted a couple batches of editorials this month and they were accepted 100%.  In the past I've had problems with some editorials when they were much more strict with lighting, focus, etc., than normal RF even though they are supposed to be easier since you can't control everything or reshoot.  But no rejections for captions in years - I just copy the format from previous ones.

No, it's because you didn't follow the correct format.  Look at the instructions for making correct editorial captions or at recent accepted images and you won't have any problems.

Actually if you check even SS reviewers don't bother following the rule/guidelines on editorial captions for example they will also accept:

The quaint gold mining town of Chiltern in the Victorian High Country in Australia. Chiltern Australia - April 3 2017

or

The quaint gold mining town of Chiltern in the Victorian High Country in Australia. Chiltern Australia - 4/3/2017

My default would be 'CHILTERN, AUSTRALIA- April 3: The quaint gold mining town of Chiltern in the Victorian High Country in Australia on April 3rd 2017'. Never ahd issues. The shutterbuzz editorial example is this.

CITY, STATE/COUNTRY � MONTH DAY: Factual description of the image content

on [date] in [location]. Qualifying newsworthy second sentence (if necessary).

I guess i can slightly rewrite again. Just never had issues previous and hence my original question

CHILTERN, AUSTRALIA - April 3: The quaint gold mining town of Chiltern in the Victorian High Country in Australia on April 3rd 2017.

That one is close but still not exactly the format they want - try "CHILTERN, AUSTRALIA - April 3 2017: The quaint gold mining town of Chiltern in the Victorian High Country in Australia."  and it should work.  I think the date repeated at the end might be what they want at iStock but is not required by SS.  I have some from Australia I need to submit so will include them in my next batch to make sure they go through, but I haven't had a rejection for caption format for several years.  If they get rejected with that format then it's the reviewer and I would just resubmit with no changes.