spectacular rate drop

[PJ White]

I sometimes feel sorry for myself about the loss of print-based
earnings, and the meagre scrapings from online.

Then I read this. A few years ago a guy working for the Atlantic was
offered $125,000 to write six articles a year for the magazine. They
just offered him zero payment for 1,200 online words.

http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/03/05/the-problem-with-online-freelance-journalism/

From $21,000 a piece to nothing is such an awesome fall in rate it
almost cheers me up.

Anyone got anything to compare?

PJ

[Ryanscribe]

That is an intriguing piece, thanks for that. Although ironically it notes that he 'pinched' some material from a 2006 article which he didn't credit ;)

Lots of lessons there ... get a job basically and work hard re-aggregating content.

> --
> --
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to FleetStreet...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/FleetStreet
> --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FleetStreet" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to fleetstreet...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>

[PJ White]

On 06/03/2013 10:56, Ryanscribe wrote:
> That is an intriguing piece, thanks for that. Although ironically it notes that he 'pinched' some material from a 2006 article which he didn't credit ;)
>
> Lots of lessons there ... get a job basically and work hard re-aggregating content.

Yeah, get a job. And if others follow Yahoo's ban on working from home,
that would mean get a job and go into the office. Makes me shudder just
thinking of it.

PJ

[Manek Dubash]

Job? What's one of those?

I did get offered a commission by an editor a little while back (names omitted to spare blushes etc) who offered a rate 20% less than the rate he used to offer - which itself had not changed in 20 years. It was take it or leave it. I took it (sigh).

Not quite hero to zero but a sign that I need to go find something else to do...

Manek
--

[PJ White]

On 06/03/2013 11:23, Manek Dubash wrote:

Job? What's one of those?

I did get offered a commission by an editor a little while back (names omitted to spare blushes etc) who offered a rate 20% less than the rate he used to offer - which itself had not changed in 20 years. It was take it or leave it. I took it (sigh).

Not quite hero to zero but a sign that I need to go find something else to do...

Manek

I think my feature writing word rate dropped from £300 per thousand words to £220. That's over 25 per cent fall. But that's irrelevant given that the frequency went from one and a half a week to about one a year. In a good year.

As you say, time to do somethng else.

PJ

[Manek Dubash]

Your experience mirrors mine, to the word rate, precisely,

Manek
--

--
--
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to FleetStreet...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/FleetStreet
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FleetStreet" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to fleetstreet...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--

Editorial & Communication Services

Manek Dubash, Managing Director

M: +447788 923557

Site: www.manekdubash.com
Blog: Big Tin

Manek Dubash Associates. Registered in England & Wales. Company Number: 4731413.

[Michael Newlands]

I've gone from writing for five or six publications a few years back at rates ranging from £250 to £350 per thou to just one highly specialist publication today at £300. They almost all stopped using freelancers and went fully in-house — the last one just a few months back. I'm still making just enough to keep my head above water, but am now going to also start working on a profit-share basis with a builder friend to drive people to his new niche market services. Got to be creative and think outside the box to survive these days.

Mike N

[Simone Castello]

I have realised that only the "oldies" moan about the rates, so there must be an eager supply of youngsters happy to work for peanuts.

Fingers crossed I will be starting a full-time job in marketing soon. Ironically I applied for a writer job at a local paper but due to restructuring the vacancies (for two writers) disappeared. At least they let me know that they weren't recruiting any more.

Last time I wrote editorial copy was early last year and the pay was quite low. I have survived doing niche editing work and writing digital marketing copy, although rates have come down there too. A copywriter was ranting online that he was asked to work for £100 a day (rates should be 180-350 depending on seniority but you are lucky to get £200-£250).

Simone Castello

Copywriting & SEO

http://www.simonecastello.co.uk/

Digital marketing series for SMEs

http://howtoseouk.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/new-digital-marketing-series-from-yours.html

[PJ White]

On 06/03/2013 18:24, Simone Castello wrote:

I have realised that only the "oldies" moan about the rates, so there must be an eager supply of youngsters happy to work for peanuts.

I'm sure you're right. Except about happy. See the necessity of, perhaps?

I cheer myself up knowing that all that surplus value is just digging the grave of capitalism. But maybe it's only the oldies who think that, too.

All the best for the job.

PJ

[Bryan Betts]

Yeah, interesting piece - as is Atlantic senior editor Alexis Madrigal's
lengthy response which talks about the frustrations on his side of the
fence:

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/03/a-day-in-the-life-of-a-digital-editor-2013/273763/

The other aspect of this is writing for free - sorry, I mean "for
exposure". There was a discussion the other day elsewhere, in which one
guy said that not once in all his freelance years has doing a freebie
ever generated anything other than more requests for freebies. Another
said "There's a name for people who write for free - but it's not
'journalist' or 'writer', it's 'blogger'."

And I thought, well, that's not quite true, is it? There are people who
get paid work as a result of writing for free, the important difference
is that the paid work is not in writing. It's consultants who publicise
themselves via their blogs, it's academics who write for specialist
journals, and its marketing managers who write puff pieces for trade
mags - although if some of us are lucky (for varying values of 'lucky'),
we get paid to ghost those.

I suspect there is a general truth here: do stuff for free by all means,
but not your main income-generating job (with the possible exception of
charitable and pro bono work, I guess).

Bryan

[PJ White]

On 07/03/2013 09:45, Bryan Betts wrote:
> Yeah, interesting piece - as is Atlantic senior editor Alexis
> Madrigal's lengthy response which talks about the frustrations on his
> side of the fence:
>
> http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/03/a-day-in-the-life-of-a-digital-editor-2013/273763/
>
>

Wow, thanks for that. Comments are good too. A lot to ponder.

Quick thoughts on your general truth: "do stuff for free by all means,

but not your main income-generating job (with the possible exception of
charitable and pro bono work, I guess). "

I'm not so definitive about this. For one thing, the exposure from doing
stuff for free isn't only from the published piece. Which I agree is
unlikely to lead to earners. There's exposure (which equals potential
earning opportunities) in the phoning round, going to conferences, and
talking to people. Paid gigs can come from anywhere, and you increase
your chances the more active you are.

Second, I just don't see why it is that way. If/when editorial budgets
pick up, will those sad souls who blogged away for free miss out? Or be
first in the queue? I suspect that depends on the relationship and it's
hard to generalise. But if an advertising supplement, say, (see how
desperate things are?) came along, I like to think editors would
remember those who'd provided free copy. Am I naive?

PJ

[Ben Tudor]

Paul Carr seems to have nailed it this morning, actually:

http://pandodaily.com/2013/03/06/the-future-of-journalism-its-time-to-pick-a-side/

"For one thing: let’s lay to rest the notion that payment equals pro.
A professional writer is a professional writer no matter whether he’s
being paid or not. Likewise, you can throw money at an amateur and
he’ll always be an amateur. The reason professional journalists need
to be paid is not because money somehow magically makes them better at
their job, but because real journalism is their job. The fact that
some pros maintain their own blogs, or occasionally write stuff for
free is utterly irrelevant to the argument."

When I commissioned people, I was always conscious that I was paying
their bills, and if I could push a bit of extra work their way, I
would. Here's the thought process of adding a freelancer to a mag's
roster:

* Hmm. Here's an interesting bit of writing.
* Small commission - maybe 500 words
* Commission comes back in on time, on word count. It reads well.
Writer suggests a few feature ideas
* Further commissions follow

They might be an established journalist, new grad or random dude off
the street who wrote something in off-spec, or a blogger. The key
things were always:

1) Writes well
2) Understands topic and readership
3) Gets it in on time
4) Makes my life easy as a result of 1, 2 and 3

But then, my tactic was always to get a small circle of freelancers on
roster for features who I knew I could trust, and give them as much
paid work as they could handle and I could find for them, either for
the mag I was working on, or any other title I knew needed good
writers. Commissioning out of this circle was always a matter of
either needing someone with specialist knowledge or skills, or picking
a promising-looking writer and giving them a chance.

Hope that helps. One thing I didn't do was pick people who'd write for
free or for peanuts. Maybe something's changed.
Ben

[Charles Arthur]

Disclaimer - I know and like Paul.

I think he's nailed it, indeed. His advantage at NSFW is that he's got venture backing, so can aim for that mass that will repay this. He's determined, and he's failed enough times before that he knows what not to do. (US business saying: you only get smart after you've failed three times. He failed at least twice.)

Though alternatively there's the Magazine app - makes money. Apps are a good encapsulation for content. But notice the thing here - has to be quality. Has to be what people can't get elsewhere. That takes imaginative editors and writers. The 90/10 rule still applies.

best
Charles

--

my blog: http://www.charlesarthur.com/blog/
on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/charlesarthur
writing a book: http://therivalsbook.wordpress.com

[PJ White]

On 07/03/2013 11:58, Charles Arthur wrote:
> Disclaimer - I know and like Paul.
>

Could you mention to him that women are people too? And journalists.

PJ

[Charles Arthur]

he has women writers on the NSFW staff. He's a very good friend of Sarah Lacy, who last time I looked was a woman.

Or is this something about the language in his piece? I may have missed that.

[PJ White]

On 07/03/2013 12:05, Charles Arthur wrote:
> he has women writers on the NSFW staff. He's a very good friend of Sarah Lacy, who last time I looked was a woman.
>
> Or is this something about the language in his piece? I may have missed that.
>

"For one thing: let�s lay to rest the notion that payment equals pro. A
professional writer is a professional writer no matter whether he�s
being paid or not. Likewise, you can throw money at an amateur and he�ll
always be an amateur. "

[Kim Thomas]

Several years ago Paul was a member here. Perhaps he still is?
---------------------------------------------------------
http:// www.kimthomas.co.uk
01707 332574

On 7 Mar 2013, at 12:06, PJ White wrote:

> On 07/03/2013 12:05, Charles Arthur wrote:
>> he has women writers on the NSFW staff. He's a very good friend of
>> Sarah Lacy, who last time I looked was a woman.
>>
>> Or is this something about the language in his piece? I may have
>> missed that.
>>

> "For one thing: let’s lay to rest the notion that payment equals

> pro. A professional writer is a professional writer no matter

> whether he’s being paid or not. Likewise, you can throw money at an
> amateur and he’ll always be an amateur. "

[Chris Wheal]

Of course people should write for free. People should do lots for free. I do. I wish more people volunteered as there are loads of things that need doing and need volunteers to do them. 

But here's some ground rules on writing for free:

If Dell, HP and Apple have given computers for free and Adobe provided the software for free.

If BT has provided telephone lines for free along with high-speed broadband.

If the web-host is providing a huge bandwidth, super fast server for free.

If the senior executives are working for free.

Of course, if the organisation is a commercial publishing company that pays for computers, software, telephone and internet, web hosting and has senior executives on telephone number salaries, then it understands the need to pay for things.

Chris Wheal
t: +44 20 8694 9412
m: +44 7831 268261

[PJ White]

On 07/03/2013 12:20, Chris Wheal wrote:
> Of course people should write for free. People should do lots for
> free. I do. I wish more people volunteered as there are loads of
> things that need doing and need volunteers to do them.
>
> But here's some ground rules on writing for free:
>

And here's some ground rules for businesses on whether to pay for services:

If you can manage without paying, don't pay.

If people object, make comparisons with other unconnected services and
tell you you need to pay for things you don't, just shrug.

PJ

[Chris Wheal]

It's Fairtrade Fortnight. There are consumers who will pay more for goods where the producers have been paid above market rates. 

There is an outcry if we discover a firm is employing child labour. There is an outcry of consumer discover companies have workers earning  a dollar a day.

How come there is no outcry when companies don;t pay at all for the labour of their suppliers?

Chris Wheal
t: +44 20 8694 9412
m: +44 7831 268261

[PJ White]

Because there's no law against it, as there is against child labour. Don't think the analogy with fairtrade works. It's just a way of branding different products for different markets.

And there is an outcry when it is actual labour - I'm thinking of the backlash against abuse of work experience/interns.

PJ

[bob]

This post describes experiences mirrored in my 'trade' : music.   We all do freebies, but you have to be firm sometimes.  A wednesday night might earn expenses only, typically £50-80 for a 3-4 piece band.  But you have to take your own PA equipment.  Still not too bad if you live locally.  But increasingly we find offers to 'support' main-title bands for - as one of you already mentioned - 'exposure.  Our rule is, Friday and Saturday night gigs, particularly those the punters must pay to see, must be paid.

 

Another parallel is, we find ourselves occasionally sidelined in favour of young, sometimes very young indeed, arrivistes who genuinely do play happily for exposure.  And many of them are every bit as good as we are.  Little buggers. 

 

Their equivalent in your business is probably the free stuff in the Guardian and elsewhere, under such headings as 'Experience' ; 'What I'm Really Thinking' ; 'Blind Date', etc.   The give-away is at the end of such pieces:  'Do you have an experience to share?  Send.....'etc.'  

 

Trouble is, like teenage bands, some of these people really can write.   'Thinking' is particularly well-written.  Little buggers.

[heather]

>
>Their equivalent in your business is probably the free stuff in the
>Guardian and elsewhere, under such headings as 'Experience' ; 'What
>I'm Really Thinking' ; 'Blind Date', etc. The give-away is at the
>end of such pieces: 'Do you have an experience to share?
>Send.....'etc.'
>
>Trouble is, like teenage bands, some of these people really can
>write. 'Thinking' is particularly well-written.

That, and all the other stuff, is *subbed*, though Bob!

It does not fall onto the page without considerable editing, cutting,
shaping....making it consistent in style, and as you say,
well-written.

There is also editorial input in deciding what experiences/case
studies and so on to use. It's not the equivalent of a band turning
up to play for buttons/nothing at all.

Most first-person stuff in all print media is 'as told to', though I
have done first-person stuff and it was all my own work.....but I am
a professional writer and I would be mortified if I had to do an 'as
told to' about myself. I have done 100s of 'as told tos' for all
sections of print media over the years.

Heather Welford





--
http://www.heatherwelford.co.uk

[heather]

I am hoping to move house soon and am clearing
out a load of stuff.....among them files
containing old invoices from the 1980s and 1990s.

There is one from the Independent of 1989, for £450, for a piece of 600 words.

Another from 1997 for a few articles for a
website - 4 x 500 words. £1985. The website
went out of business very quickly....probably
paying its writers too much.

There are several others in this vein, before I
just bundled the whole lot together for the
binmen.

[Simone Castello]

You should have scanned them and put them on Twitter to shame...
 
In which other skilled businesses are rates going down??? Oh... wait, anybody can write now, right?

Simone Castello

Copywriting & SEO

http://www.simonecastello.co.uk/

Digital marketing series for SMEs

http://howtoseouk.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/new-digital-marketing-series-from-yours.html

 

> Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 11:03:26 +0000
> To: fleet...@googlegroups.com
> From: heat...@blueyonder.co.uk
> Subject: [FleetStreet] Re: spectacular rate drop