{"id":2648,"date":"2013-03-09T19:33:35","date_gmt":"2013-03-09T23:33:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/beatrice.com\/wordpress\/?p=2648"},"modified":"2016-07-23T23:09:19","modified_gmt":"2016-07-24T03:09:19","slug":"the-writers-who-arent-getting-paid","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/beatrice.com\/wordpress\/2013\/03\/09\/the-writers-who-arent-getting-paid\/","title":{"rendered":"The Writers Who Aren&#8217;t Getting Paid"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The argument over people writing for online media outlets without compensation has been going on for a long time, but it recently became more pronounced thanks to <a href=\"http:\/\/natethayer.wordpress.com\/2013\/03\/04\/a-day-in-the-life-of-a-freelance-journalist-2013\/\" target=\"_blank\">a highly publicized email exchange<\/a> between freelance journalist Nate Thayer and an editor at the <i>Atlantic<\/i> website. TL;DR: She asked if he&#8217;d be willing to edit down a piece he published elsewhere so she could run it as an <i>Atlantic<\/i> blog post&#8212;noting, &#8220;We unfortunately can\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t pay you for it, but we do reach 13 million readers a month&#8221;&#8212;and he strongly objected to that offer; to paraphrase his subsequent comment to an interviewer, exposure doesn&#8217;t pay the bills.<\/p>\n<p>Over the next few days, it&#8217;s felt like everybody&#8217;s had a response to this incident. Another digital editor at <i>The Atlantic<\/i>, Alexis Madrigal, sympathizes with Thayer&#8212;having been a struggling freelance writer himself&#8212;but argues that, right now, the best business model online media&#8217;s been able to come up with is <a href=\"http:\/\/www.theatlantic.com\/national\/archive\/13\/03\/lucrative-workforfree-oppurtunity\/273846\/\" target=\"_blank\">one that puts writers at serious disadvantage<\/a>. &#8220;In most cases, even great reported stories will fizzle, not spark,&#8221; Madrigal writes, speaking specifically of the traffic those stories generate and the extent to which they sell ads. &#8220;They will bring in 1,000 or 3,000 or 5,000 or 10,000 visitors. You&#8217;d need thousands of these to make a big site go.&#8221; And who can afford to pay for, and publish, thousands of those stories?<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Even a small blog, with one person at the helm, is going to need, say, 100-150 posts a month,&#8221; he continues. I think this is debatable, but it&#8217;s definitely a model that&#8217;s out there for a certain type of news\/issue-oriented blog, so let&#8217;s go with it. Next, I&#8217;m going to toss some numbers out here, rather than the specific numbers he uses: Let&#8217;s say a 250-word blog post is worth $40-50, and go up to $100-150 for a longer (500-600 words) piece, of which you&#8217;ll run one a day, and we&#8217;ll assume 20 publishing days to a typical month. If you relied strictly on freelancers, this could put your monthly editorial budget anywhere between $5200 and $9500&#8212;although since you&#8217;d be likely to set aside at least one-third of the blogs to be produced in-house, let&#8217;s say $3500 to $6300 a month. Can you guarantee your advertisers $6300 worth of visibility each month? And keep in mind: I&#8217;m just talking about pieces that are no longer than a typical magazine sidebar or, at most, a one-page article&#8212;we haven&#8217;t even come close to the longform journalism of which Thayer&#8217;s article would have been an example.<\/p>\n<p>Madrigal explains the shortcomings with this model well, and as the conversation gets around to &#8220;well, what if we didn&#8217;t pay some of the writers?&#8221; he offers some justifications, including exposure&#8212;later in the week, in a separate <i>Atlantic<\/i> post, Ta-Nehisi Coates admitted upfront <a href=\"http:\/\/www.theatlantic.com\/national\/archive\/13\/03\/lucrative-workforfree-oppurtunity\/273846\/\" target=\"_blank\">he&#8217;d accepted exposure in lieu of cash<\/a> for his earliest appearances at that blog, and he was upfront about why it worked for him: &#8220;I could not convince editors that what I was curious about was worth writing about. Every day I would watch ideas die in my head&#8230; What the internet offered was the chance to let all of those ideas compete in the arena, and live and die on the merits. And [<i>The Atlantic<\/i>] was offering a bigger arena.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<p>As I was sitting here thinking about how to frame my take on this, I realized that within the last week I&#8217;d actually written two short essays, each in the neighborhood of 500 words, and given them to the publishers of a book I&#8217;d edited (<a href=\"http:\/\/trulovestories.com\/books\/bedroom-roulette\/\" target=\"_blank\"><i>Bedroom Roulette<\/i><\/a>) to be published on other websites in order to promote the book&#8217;s release. So, yeah, here I am, smack dab in the &#8220;will write for expsoure&#8221; camp&#8212;although neither of the sites for which I wrote was ad-supported, a point that comes into play in just a bit.<\/p>\n<p>I&#8217;ve actually worried about this a lot from the perspective of somebody who publishes unpaid contributions from &#8220;guest authors&#8221; in <i>Beatrice<\/i> on a regular basis and does earn some revenue (though nowhere near a self-sustaining amount) from advertising. As someone who does not envision himself writing for corporate media for free&#8212;and I&#8217;m thinking specifically of sites like <i>The Huffington Post<\/i> that have gotten rich off of content the majority of which they didn&#8217;t have to pay for&#8212;I&#8217;ve grappled with the legitimacy of turning around and asking people if they&#8217;d be willing to write up to 700 words for <i>Beatrice<\/i> for free. (One of the reasons I&#8217;ve pinned hope on monetizing <i>Beatrice<\/i> in recent years, in fact, has been the desire to bring in enough to return to those contributors and offer a retroactive fee, or to apply that fee to a donation to a literary non-profit, and then to pay contributors moving forward. Already, though, again going by a $100 rule of thumb, that tab would run over $25,000, which can make me feel like I&#8217;m just daydreaming.)<\/p>\n<p>I spoke to my friend John Scalzi about this last week, because he&#8217;s someone who has very forcefully argued <a href=\"http:\/\/whatever.scalzi.com\/2012\/12\/09\/a-note-to-you-should-you-be-thinking-of-asking-me-to-write-for-you-for-free\/\" target=\"_blank\">against writing without getting paid<\/a> while running a series of unpaid &#8220;guest posts&#8221; called &#8220;<a href=\"http:\/\/whatever.scalzi.com\/category\/big-idea\/\" target=\"_blank\">The Big Idea<\/a>&#8221; at his blog, <i>Whatever<\/i>, and I wanted to get his thinking on the issue. He noted that <i>Whatever<\/i> isn&#8217;t a commercial blog, and not running any third-party ads at all, which mitigates the concern that he&#8217;s raking it in off Big Idea writers without getting paid&#8212;and he also observes that such essays, appearing around the time the contributor&#8217;s latest books are being released, have become &#8220;a natural part of the publicity cycle, in which authors make themselves available to promote their books and that work is seen as having a direct benefit in terms of sales and awareness of that specific book.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>(In his <i>Atlantic<\/i> post, Coates noted that when you see a group of authors\/experts\/scholars engaged in a &#8220;roundtable discussion&#8221; online, it&#8217;s quite likely that they aren&#8217;t getting paid for their participation, either&#8212;just as they aren&#8217;t typically paid to appear on television news programs to be interviewed. This can also be &#8220;a natural part of the publicity cycle,&#8221; although it&#8217;s not always about promoting a specific release.)<\/p>\n<p>Scalzi makes two other points I think are significant in this context: &#8220;Rather than seek out people to write for the site, I let people know slots are available if they want them,&#8221; he told me. &#8220;Which is to say they make an affirmative decision that it&#8217;s worth their time and energy rather than me trying to convince them.&#8221; If nobody&#8217;s coming forward to write Big Idea pieces, he doesn&#8217;t actively solicit contributors&#8212;he just lets the series go into quiet hiatus until writers start checking in again.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, he observed, &#8220;I also think people generally believe that I am letting them borrow my audience to talk about their book, rather than using them writing about their book to build my audience.&#8221; He didn&#8217;t start posting &#8220;Big Idea&#8221; pieces until well after <i>Whatever<\/i> had become a prominent blog with a strong core audience. &#8220;This seems like it could be a trivial distinction, but I don&#8217;t think it is when all is said and done,&#8221; he said, and I think that&#8217;s absolutely right&#8212;and I also believe that one of the reasons Scalzi and I have both been successful at building audiences (though he much more than I) is that, in addition to our own strongly formed perspectives, we&#8217;ve been willing to share other perspectives that capture our attention with readers, not in a bid to boost traffic, but just because we find them interesting and we hope someone else might, too.<\/p>\n<p>But a writer with a personal blog letting other writers &#8220;borrow my audience&#8221; is a very different thing than a corporate media website letting other writers &#8220;borrow their audience&#8221; and then collecting revenue off what those writers contribute. And, of course, I can&#8217;t strictly speaking call <i>Beatrice<\/i> a personal blog. So, as I say, I continue to grapple with these questions as the editor and publisher of <i>Beatrice<\/i>, and in the meantime I&#8217;m grateful for every writer who does choose to share something here with readers.<\/p>\n<p>As a writer, though, I don&#8217;t know what the &#8220;answer&#8221; is to the bigger question at stake&#8212;I know that I&#8217;m making an effort to focus on professional situations that adequately reward me for the skills and experience I bring to the table, and I encourage any other writer to do the same. But the choices I&#8217;m making along the way may be different than the ones you make, and the &#8220;reward&#8221; isn&#8217;t <i>always<\/i> about money&#8230; although, at some point, if writing is going to be more than just a hobby, it has to be.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The argument over people writing for online media outlets without compensation has been going on for a long time, but it recently became more pronounced thanks to a highly publicized email exchange between freelance journalist Nate Thayer and an editor at the Atlantic website. TL;DR: She asked if he&#8217;d be willing to edit down a [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[18],"tags":[549,50,551,550],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/beatrice.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2648"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/beatrice.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/beatrice.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/beatrice.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/beatrice.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2648"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"http:\/\/beatrice.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2648\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3923,"href":"http:\/\/beatrice.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2648\/revisions\/3923"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/beatrice.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2648"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/beatrice.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2648"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/beatrice.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2648"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}