We can make it pay
Debate on ways to end exploitation of journalists stirred by Newsosaur blog
06 Feb 2010
Media Workers Guild
 Rebecca Rosen Lum |
Editor's note: Alan Mutter's Reflections of A Newsosaur blog unleashed quite a response -- the biggest he's had -- when he called for an end to the exploitation of journalists the other day. Guild reps joined in the flood of comments. See Mutter's blog for a follow-up discussion and even more comments. Here is a post from the Freelance Unit blog by Unit Chair Rebecca Rosen Lum, and a comment posted on Mutter's site by Local Representative Carl T. Hall.
Rebecca Rosen Lum, Chair, Freelance Unit of the California Media Workers Guild:
“Citizen journalism”: The phrase has a certain democratic, Mr.-Smith-Goes-to-Washington ring to it.
But publishers’ beeline away from skilled journalists toward everymen who will work for free or cheap is part of a larger trend that serves ultimately to torpedo democracy. For without a robust, untethered and principled news media, the idea of democracy is just that – an idea. An exercise in theory.
It should come as no surprise that enterprising, rigorous journalism — the kind that nourishes a democracy — is costly. It’s costly because it is time-consuming and labor-intensive, and requires skill, both depth and breadth of knowledge, resourcefulness, vetting. That’s before we even get to writing with elegance and impact.
Seldom a day goes by that a posting does not appear on Craigslist seeking skilled writers so bursting with “passion” for the topic at hand that they are willing to devote hours of investigative reporting for the thrill of “exposure.” Ironically, many of these employers represent do-good nonprofit organizations, such as “JustMeans,” which offers roughly two cents a word for the thrice-weekly, quality postings it demands.
Resist, cried news media analyst Alan Mutter.
Mutter (“Reflections of a Newsosaur”) lit a match to a combustible topic this week when he pilloried publishers, including online content providers, for failing to pay journalists an honest buck for an honest day’s work – and challenged journalists to reject substandard pay. Read his full column here.
“It’s time for journalists to stop participating in their own exploitation by working for a pittance – or, worse, giving away their valuable services for free,” Mutter wrote.
Publishers are also seeking more secondary rights for the same buck that once secured one-time rights, a critical change for freelance journalists, who maximized their earnings by reselling stories in multiple markets. Magazine fees have been on a downward slide for decades (One of the nation’s top-paying publications, Good Housekeeping, paid $1 a word for 40 years). Trails.com pays $15 for articles about the outdoors; livestrong.com $30 for 500-word pieces on health, writes the L.A. Times’ James Rainey in his recent piece “Freelance Writing’s Unfortunate New Model.”
“The crumbling pay scales have not only hollowed out household budgets but accompanied a pervasive shift in journalism toward shorter stories, frothier subjects and an increasing emphasis on fast, rather than thorough,” Rainey writes.
Of course, students and recent grads have long produced stories to get clips and exposure. Nothing new about that. But add to that population the number of out-of-work, experienced professionals and tanking advertising dollars, and you’ve got a set-up for exploitation.
Mutter writes that part of the problem is that we don’t value ourselves as professionals. As a reality check, we can try on the idea that it makes good sense in this tanking economy to promote legions of “citizen urban planners” or “citizen surgeons.”
Are we joining that range of low-paid workers Barbara Ehrenreich chronicled in her groundbreaking book “Nickel and Dimed,” doomed to toil at umpteen low-paying jobs to make ends meet? Is being paid per click the journalist equivalent of the sweatshop in which seamstresses are paid by the piece?
Not always, cautions San Francisco tech writer Bill Snyder, who has done well with at least one pay-per-click website.
“The only way to know whether this is essentially legitimate, or potentially exploitative, is to have some experience with the company,” Snyder said. “Without it, who knows? Which is why it makes a great deal of sense to track freelance employers and share the intelligence” with others.
At Guild Freelancers, that’s the plan.
One of our primary goals is to develop a “Fair Freelance” certification for employers who value our work. The sites that pay two cents a word — if that — will find themselves listed on our Wall of Shame — and the recipients of an Amnesty International-style, polite-but-frank letter barrage.
And thanks to Mutter, who thoughtfully provided a spreadsheet template for with his rant, we can calculate our worth.
“Journalists need to stand together – and stand tall – to reassert the stature of their profession,” Mutter writes. “The reason is simple: If they don’t put a value on what they do, then no one else will, either.”
###
Carl T. Hall, Local Representative, California Media Workers Guild:
Despite the air of hopelessness wafting around some of the comments to the Newsosaur’s blog post, this is one of the most heartening discussions I've seen in some time about our craft.
I'm a Guild representative in SF trying to help some of our members get a freelance unit going. We want to concentrate on solutions. The problem stems from a loss of market power for journalists. You all know the reasons -- low to zero barrier to entry, drop of asset values, clumsy pricing mechanism, rampant theft of product, technology shifts, bad decisions etc etc.
I believe some of these problems will be self-correcting. For instance, the idea that journalism has become a "hobby" may be tested the first time a publisher gets whacked with a lawsuit because a hobbyist distorted critical facts just for fun.
Merely shining a spotlight, the way Alan did, on the sordid reality of today's journalism market also may help. Even a few top talents who insist on decent terms can make a difference. People really don't enjoy being exploited.
Clearly, that's not enough. Creative effort also are needed to set a higher standard. That's why my own union, the California Media Workers Guild, has been trying for the past year to help get the Bay Area News Project get going. We have no formal role now, but we hope to gain bargaining rights for the staff. We want to help this experiment succeed. For me, that means helping it develop into a quality nonprofit that will never tolerate cheap exploitation and low standards. Perhaps this will force others to raise their standards in the bargain. I recognize that some kinds of journalism may be a public good that will have to be subsidized, kind of like the opera or pollution control. So be it.
Existing high-quality commercial publishers -- and yes there are some -- may find a way to hang on. I hope they benefit from the competition and contributions of the new nonprofit sector springing up. For sure, a lot of creative management will be needed -- that's something we've not seen much in these dark times for newspapers. But some managements have toughened up, and smartened up, and are facing their challenges. We journalists, organized or not, must work collaboratively with these managements every chance we get. We have to skip some outdated ideology and find new strategies. We need to help our industry adapt to new technology and find new markets.
It's absurd, by the way, to be condemning innovative journalism schools like UC Berkeley and Columbia, which are needed now more than ever, to shape the transition and maybe help us all figure things out. It’s even sillier to be fearful of students. We need to welcome students and all the newcomers to journalism. We want to organize them, too. One thing journalism always needs is fresh talent. For one thing, they aren’t big on kowtowing, and would like to be paid, too.
We are discussing all kinds of tactics and strategies. Some will fail, but maybe some won’t. The point is to try to work it out, and never give up. Actors, barbers, baseball players – all kinds of trades have fought against rank expoloitaton and lived to tell. So can we.
If I sound like a chump, sorry, but I’m no kid. I have the scars you might expect on a newspaper guy who’s also a union guy. Talk about obsolete! But I've never understood why people think you don't have to fight for what you deserve. Maybe some people think they have no RIGHT to fight. Sometimes it’s hard to swim against the torrent of hopelessness, anti-union biliousness and tea party nonsense. It can be fun, though. And we can make it pay.
###