Tuesday, September 7, 2010

Declining Pay for Freelance Writers


Travel Writer at Pyramids





Getting It Write



With per-word rates shrinking and salaries sinking, our freelancer rethinks how she measures success.

By Kristen Kemp – September 22, 2004




In the fiscal year 2000, I made $77,000. I didn't pimp myself out (in the literal sense), and I didn't get in on Martha Stewart's IPO. I just freelanced. I wrote more magazine articles than I can remember. I had a contract for a series of four kids' novels. I was paid $800 for two days of speaking at a public elementary school. Those days, fees were hot, and anyone with a semi-important job title was looking to hire a hack. As a result, my scrappy lifestyle went upscale. I visited the Bliss Spa twice (and no one had given me a gift certificate!). I traded my cheap chain restaurants for the ones they show on the Food Network. I bought a Bichon Frise and upgraded to Ketel One. I spent a lot of time writing and hustling, sure. But what I remember most is how much time I spent playing.



Now it's September 2004, and I'm balancing my checkbook. I have $500 dollars left. The money is trickling in at the drip-drip pace of an IV tube. I have no book contracts, and invitations to speak are nonpaying. This year's calendar definitely doesn't include appointments at Bliss. But it's not just the money that's scarce—it's my time. I work harder and more diligently and more skillfully than I did in 2000. I spin my wheels pitching and turning in copy and taking on kooky tasks (I write advertorial letters that go out to stores' credit card holders). The buzz phrase for those of us with middle-class jobs right now is work more for less. Secretly, I still hope for a raise.



But it ain't gonna happen.



Let me set the record straight: I'm not complaining. Last year, I earned upwards of $40,000. For a freelance writer, that's OK. It's not $75,000, but it's not $20,000 either (which is a sum I've been familiar with in the past—that's the no cable, no Blockbuster, no fun range.) Last year, I carried a debt on my credit card, and I ate at Teriyaki Boy, but at least I could afford a few plane tickets. Life isn't luxurious, but it certainly isn't bad. I mean, how can I complain? I stretch the budget to add DVR to my cable, and I can spring for the better health insurance—the one that includes appointments with my shrink.



The bone that does beg to be picked is the one with the workload. Magazines and newspapers are under budget constraints, same as everyone. For this, I could blame the economy, the Republicans, or the pizza delivery boy. It doesn't matter who's at fault; things are still the same: I turn in story after story, complete edit after edit, and crank out ideas and revises. But I'm not getting raises for work that I'm told is well done; I'm getting salary cuts. One editor at a major magazine—a cool woman I've worked with for years—felt badly when she recently told me: "I want you to know that we aren't paying $2 a word anymore. We have to pay $1 to $1.50. Is it OK for me to still put your name in the hat for this story?" Of course it's OK. I'm happy to work for her, and I don't blame her for my mid-40s salary. After all, a smaller freelance budget at her magazine means she'll be spending longer hours at her office doing the writing she used to pay me to do.



I wonder what good it does for all of us middle- to upper-middle class folks to sit around feeling sorry for each other. Some writers—even the good ones—aren't getting much more than $.50 a word. But still, I gripe to my freelance friends—scrappy troopers scattered across the country from Park Slope to Hollywood—and they're having the same experience as me. "I'm still getting $2 a word, but I'm getting screwed on the word count," one says. "If they assign me a story for 1,500 words, then they'll ask for 2,000, end up running 1,800, and I won't get paid for the extra."



She's right. Four years ago, 1,000- and 2,000-word assignments at $2 per word were the standard at major publications. Now I get 800 to 1,000 word counts at $1.50 per word or less. That's not an economic slump; that's a new standard. Two other writers admit that they're taking smaller assignments for less money. They're afraid if they don't, they'll price themselves out and lose work. Another freelancer explains the current situation best: "There are so many newbie freelancers and freshly unemployeds who are willing to work for so little and do so much that seasoned freelance writers are competing with glorified interns for the steady, if not most satisfying, jobs."



You said it, sister.



I started in the magazine business in 1996, and I made $1 per word straight out of Indiana University Journalism School. (This is the rate writers have been paid since the 1960s.) One of the freelancers quoted above—five years more accomplished than me—advised me to start demanding more money in 1998. I did, and I wound up with a fat yearly income. Now, we're both taking whatever we can get. We aren't demanding. We are yes-women.



But even though our salaries have sunk and our playtimes are less playful, things are OK. She ended up taking a fulltime job and uses her freelance work as an income supplement. I'm starting to teach more writing classes so money will be steady and predictable, though hardly what I'd call abundant. Other freelance friends have taught dance classes, gone to grad school to get medical degrees, or taken corporate PR jobs. Most of us have some form of income supplement, and that's how we stay in the freelance game.



I've just accepted that the workload is going to be heavier. Who cares? I still love my job. I've downgraded to Stoli, but at least I can drink it at two o'clock in the afternoon (even though I don't). I can flip on the TV while I sit on my couch and work with the dog's nose propped next to my keyboard. I may not have the playtime—or the extra cash to make playtime more fun—but I still have the best job for me. I can't imagine life without freelancing, and I can't imagine that I'll ever stop complaining about it. I've mentally signed up for the duration, which means I'll write till the skin wears off my fingers. Who knows? One day—maybe in 2014—I'll see that raise.



Anything can happen, right?



Kristen Kemp is a freelance writer living in New York City. You can read her other "Getting It Write" columns in the archives.



Falling Pay for Freelance Writers



Monday, September 6, 2010

The Lousy Pay For Freelance Writers


Moorish Man Posted by Hello



Writers Weekly on Lousy Pay for Freelance Writers from Other Freelance Writers



September 08, 2004

To Pay or Not to Pay...Fellow Writers By A Struggling Freelance Writer




With keen interest I read a letter written to Angela Hoy from a fledgling newsletter editor unable to pay column writers. Angela nicely but firmly advised the editor to think twice about that no-pay policy. She warned the novice that the seasoned and veteran writers would flame viciously and ruin the editor's reputation.



Not so. Writers write for free all the time and no one seems to care. Writers even write for other writers without the respect of a paycheck. What I've learned as a writer who likes to write articles about writing, is that writers are some of the worse paymasters in the world. And for some reason that depresses me. But the irony continues to thrive.



Writers complain about the insult of little or no pay for their talent, but when the shoe is on the other foot and they evolve into editors and ezine/website owners, the concept of paying a writer becomes foreign if not totally forgotten. As they sell their own wares, they take from their own. At the risk of sounding harsh, is this not a bit cannibalistic?



With a deep breath and heavy heart, I did some research into the pay rates of online writing magazines to see if my gut was right. When I mentioned to Angela what I found, she asked if I'd be willing to divulge the findings. The review of a few well-known writing sites revealed the following information, which lists title, website, word length, and current pay rate to its contributing writers.



EZine Websites That Pay Freelance Writers



The list is ranked based on payment per word.



Writers Weekly.com $50 for ~600 words (8.3 cents/word); $30 for success stories of ~300 words (10 cents/word)



FundsforWriters $30 for 500-700 words (4-6 cents/word)



Writing World $40-$75 for 800-1500 words (5 cents/word)



KT Publishing $50 for ~1000 words (5 cents/word)



Write From Home $25 for 500-1500 words (1.6 - 5 cents/word)



Every Writer $20-40 for 500-2500 words (1.6 - 4 cents/word)



The New Writer £20 ($36) for 1000 words (3.6 cents/word)



Writing for Dollars $15-25 for 500-1000 words (2.5 – 3 cents/word)



Worldwide Freelance $20 for ~1000 words (2 cents/word)



Writing, Etc. $10 for 500-1000 words (1-2 cents/word)



National Association of Women Writers $10-20 for 600-1500 words (1.3-1.6 cents/word)



Writers Life $10 for 800-1500 words ($0.007 – $0.013 cent/word)



Fiction Factor $5 for 800-1200 words ($0.0042 - 0.0063 cents/word)



Absolute Write $5 for 800-2000 words ($0.0025 - 0.0063 cents/word)





EZine Websites That Don't Pay Their Freelance Writers



These are confirmed paying ezines. So many others continue to say "we are a non-paying magazine, but as we grow we hope to be able to pay our writers." At the same time, many of these ezines sell books, display affiliates, and offer courses demonstrating they do earn an income from which they could pay writers. Some examples of these sites are:



Writer Online: Pays zero to $50 for 100-5000 words (0-2 cents/word). We're putting this in the non-paying category because they only pay for "selected content." But, they don't tell you what that selected content is in their guidelines.



Writers Write: "The IWJ does not offer monetary payment at this time."



Fiction Addiction: "Fiction Addiction.NET is not currently a paying market."



Writer Gazette: No pay.



Working Writer: They want writers to pay for a subscription...but they don't writers.



Apollo's Lyre: "Apollo's Lyre is a non-paying market at the moment."



Writer's Crossing: "I can't pay you."



Author Mania: No pay.



Newsletters and ezines for writers are not unique in offering little or no pay for contributors. Ezine editors in all trades pay less for bytes than ink on paper. But in these days where writers fight to have paper editors compensate them separately for electronic rights, why do we as writers slight each other and dodge paying our own kind for those same rights?



We unite to fight the big editor but fail to emulate what we strive for – respect for our words in any format. Many non-paying editors say they can't afford to pay writers, yet ads appear on many non-paying sites. In response to an editor seeking writers for no pay, WritersWeekly.com's Angela Hoy said, "If you can't pay writers, perhaps you should find another line of business. It never ceases to amaze me how many people start these little newsletters and websites with no money to pay their initial bills. You can't start a business without money and expect it to survive, nor expect to offer a high-quality publication. It's like asking people to support your pipe-dream, which is incredibly selfish and unfair to new writers who don't know any better."



Why don't editors write their own material until they have the resources to pay columnists or use free, canned articles given away for press and book sales? A few do, but most do not.



Two reasons.



First, the editors must use their time to earn a living, usually writing, and don't have enough extra time to write free articles. Second, the canned articles show up in multiple places making them old news, defeating the effort to be fresh and different from the competition. So once again, while many editors are trying to make money, they deny it to their cohorts.



No, I do not believe malicious intent is represented here. Most of these editors genuinely originated their publications to aid their friends in the craft. I believe it's a cycle and a rut. It's hard to take on a new business expense when free seems to work just as well. And writers submit their work for free for various reasons such as collecting clips, free advertising (versus purchasing ad space), and the instant gratification of a byline (quite a temptation indeed).



And if the offer presents itself, an editor is going to use it. A good article for free is like finding a dollar on the street. Who can pass it up?The point I would like to make is that editors should do the right thing by their peers. Considered more experienced and knowledgeable, editors should step up to the plate and offer payment to writers, even if only a token amount. By paying a writer, the editor raises the bar of the writing environment. As the editor's success climbs, so should the compensation to the writers that helped him or her step up that ladder.



When times are lean, editors should write their own material. When times are fruitful, editors should reward writers appropriately.Allow a writer to at least earn money toward a website, DSL connection, or printer ink by paying for a piece. Selling several of those in a month might make a novice but talented writer feel prouder and more motivated to continue.



Writing for free makes the business only a hobby. To take it seriously, money needs to change hands. There is something about getting what you pay for that makes the whole profession, including these publications, more credible in the eyes of the editors, the writers, and the readers who are the customers for our words.



Copyright © 1997 - 2004 WritersWeekly.com. All rights reserved.



Guidebook Contract Offer


Concorde Final Flight Posted by Hello



Tom Brosnahan

Guidebook Contract Offer




I received a message from "Mexico Mike" Nelson, an author specializing on Mexico, asking my opinion of a book deal he had been offered. His questions and the responses might be helpful to other authors.



Tom, perhaps you'd be willing to help me with a good "problem". I've been offered a chance to do a book on Mexico (a travel guide) by [a travel guide series]. They have guides to Hawaii, Australia and that part of the world, but nothing on Mexico. I'd be starting from scratch. Length is to be 300-500 pages. They offered me a royalty 10% for the first 7,500, 12% next 7,500 etc. with an advance of $10,000 over 4 payments. $2,500 upon signing contract, $2,500 when half manuscript is finished etc. Royalties are based on "actual monies received", so that's the wholesale price less returns as I read it.



I think it is a low offer. Frankly, I figured that something of that magnitude would be worth about $60,000, considering the expenses involved. On the other hand, I have done most of the traveling and will do the rest this year. What I don't have is a lot of the details like taxi prices, bus schedules etc.



One friend said I should do the book as a vehicle to get my name known. I don't know if guidebooks are the way to do that or not. You certainly have quite a name in the field. Another said that writing articles would be more lucrative and a better vehicle.



Is their offer ok? Any observations you can give me will be most gratefully appreciated. My idea before this offer was to write small books and self-publish, but I need an investment of about $6,000 to get the cost per book down to where it is reasonable.



Thanks, "Mexico" Mike.



----------------------



Mike,



1. A $10,000 advance is average, but I would hold out for at least 40% of it (better, 50%) before you start the work. You may need the capital. It is common for publishers to pay out the rest as the work progresses, particularly with a first-time author.



2. The royalty rates offered to you are average (10% with an escalator to 12%) for percentage of net. However, your contract should determine very precisely what constitutes "net," and how the books will be sold. If the publisher decides after a year to sell off the guides at cost, you get nothing, whereas if your contract had stipulated cover price you would have to be paid full royalty. "Net" is a slippery term. "Cover price" is an indisputable amount of money. And all royalties are based on sales less returns.



It's instructive to know the publisher's returns policy, and how long they will be permitted. Also, will the publisher withhold a "reserve against returns?" For how long, and when will the reserves be released to you? Find out.



3. I can't tell if this is a low offer or not. In a sense, only time will tell. It depends upon how good a book you write, the market, the way the publisher promotes the book, whether or not there are any bad headlines which dissuade travelers from going to Mexico, etc. On the face of it, these terms sound normal, but one bad clause in the contract can change that. Publishers do all sorts of things these days, some of them quite unethical.



4. Writing a book makes you an instant expert, particularly if the book is in a respected series. It promotes your reputation far faster and farther than a series of newspaper or magazine articles. The very big magazines pay better (I've earned $2 per six-character word), but they only give the work out to writers they know and trust--writers who have already made names for themselves by, say, writing a guidebook!



5. Bottom line: If you like detail, like writing, like Mexico, trust the publisher, get a good contract, and plan to do the revisions to the guide, it can be a pretty good deal. The first edition won't make you much money (if any); succeeding editions may make decent money (but see No 3 above) because you don't have to do all of the writing again, and you'll know where a lot of the info is.



6. Self-publishing can be quite lucrative. Richard Bloomgarten made a good living on his simple self-published books to Mexico because he very smartly set up his own distribution network. But that's another subject entirely.



Hope this helps.



Tom



Guidebook Contract Offer

Sunday, September 5, 2010

Travel Writers Sites Ranked by Google


Close Call for Cruise Ship Posted by Hello



Written Road Blog - http://www.writtenroad.com

Travel writer and editor Jen Leo share how to break into travel writing via market leads, how to market yourself and editor lists.



Travelwriters.com - http://www.travelwriters.com/

The mission of this site is to be an up to date source of market information, tips on improving your writing, and a guide to the best resources for travel writers on the net.



Travelwriter Marketletter - http://www.travelwriterml.com/

Monthly newsletter for those in the competitive field of travel writing.



Freelance Travel Writing - http://www.FreelanceTravelWriter.com

Learn how to create compelling travel writing features. Free newsletter with tips and travel markets.



Media Kitty - http://www.mediakitty.com

Online information exchange uniting top working journalists and PR professionals in travel and tourism worldwide.



Australian Society of Travel Writers - http://www.astw.org.au

Information and member details of the Australian Society of Travel Writers



Travel Info Exchange - http://www.infoexchange.com/Guidebooks/Guidebooks.html

All about travel information: how to get it, judge its quality, price it, write it, picture it, design it, update it, and communicate it to travelers. How to write a travel guide, resources and an email discussion.



Travel Media Association of Canada - http://www.travelmedia.ca/

A professional, membership-based, non-profit organization of travel writers, broadcasters and industry personnel.



Travel Writing Tips - http://www.travelwritingtips.com

Freelance travel writer Flo Conner provides step-by-step tips and articles to turn your 'Treks into Checks'.



Offbeatrips - http://www.offbeatrips.com

Online freelance travel writing course providing tuition in key aspects of freelance travel journalism, encompassing writing, photography, sponsorship and marketing. Australia.



Travel Writing for Fun and Profit - http://www.writerswrite.com/journal/aug98/philcox.htm

Travel Writing for Fun and Profit, an article by Phil Philcox.



Philip Greenspun's Travel Writing Career - http://photo.net/webtravel/history.html

"How I got started as a Travel Writer", article by Philip Greenspun.



Adventure Travel Writer - http://www.AdventureTravelWriter.com

Editorial advice and how to break into travel writing. Learn about the travel writer's lifestyle.



In Search of Elusive Metaphors - http://www.samexplo.org/mardon.htm

The Art of Travel Writing. Article by Mark Mardon.



Travelwriters UK - http://www.travelwriters.co.uk

A resource for professional travel writers and travel editors.



Travellady Magazine - http://www.travellady.com/articles/article-travelwriting.html

"Everything you Ever Wanted to Know about Travel Writing" article by Madelyn Miller.



00AandEsTravelWriter - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/00AandEsTravelWriter/

How to make a living as a travel writer. Writing discussions and tips. Finding markets that pay. Small email list.



Wanderlust Writers - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wanderlustwriters

A group for travelers who like to write about their journeys. Post links to your writings about travel.



Travel Writers Sites Ranked by Google



Saturday, September 4, 2010

Lonely Planet Veteran on Travel Guidebook Writing


San Diego on Fire Posted by Hello



Home Truths From Abroad



BBC2's Foot In The Door series gives eager recruits the chance to get started in their dream job. On Thursday the assignment is travel guidebook writing. Mark Honan, a Lonely Planet veteran with 10 years' experience on four continents, gives the inside story on his job - no time to see friends, no time to laze around on the beach. And people say it's a life of glamour...



Mark Honan

Observer

Sunday June 18, 2000




So you want to be a travel guidebook writer? Most people do. 'You lucky so-and-so,' I've been told countless times. 'Fancy being paid to be on holiday. What a great job.'



Think of the benefits, these travellers tell me. Eating in fancy restaurants. Bedding down in the top hotels. Spending arduous ('ha-ha') days researching the best beaches for sunbathing and swimming. Being treated like royalty because everybody wants a favourable mention in my guidebook.



That's the theory. The reality is there are plenty of hassles too.



Far from being treated like royalty, guidebook writers are an anonymous bunch. Most of us don't declare who we are when we check out places: we want to find out what sort of a deal an ordinary traveller would be offered. In hotels, we invent an excuse to see a selection of rooms. 'I'll be returning in a few weeks with my parents, uncle, long-lost half-cousin and their disabled cat.' That sort of thing.



If we do have to reveal ourselves, the red carpet is rarely rolled out. In Europe proprietors are often suspicious. 'What sort of book? I don't want to pay to be in a book,' they say aggressively. Even when they learn they don't have to pay - in fact, they can't pay - their attitude doesn't soften.



In Germany once, a hotel receptionist refused to let me view any of his empty rooms. 'Show your editor that picture instead,' he said dismissively, throwing me a brochure. In Switzerland, a proprietor was too lazy to tell me the full range of room prices. 'Fine,' I shot back, 'in that case I'm taking you out of the book.' My reward was to be chased down the stairs and out on to the street by a furious, swearing hotel owner.



In Asia, where Lonely Planet is recognised as the market leader, people do tend to fawn over you a little more, provided they manage to discover who you are. (Somehow, in India, everyone seemed to know I was writing for Lonely Planet, despite my denials.) But the odd free beer is usually as far as it gets. Accepting freebies is frowned upon, as we must be scrupulously objective in our write-ups. Accepting payments or discounts in return for positive coverage would mean the immediate termination of any research contract with Lonely Planet.



Guidebook writers have only moderate status within a large publisher. We can rarely keep copyright of our own words. It's the publisher's name that sells the books - the author's name is often relegated to an inside page, or perhaps even omitted altogether (not so in Lonely Planet books: we even get a blurb and a photograph). Rumours circulate that publishers consider authors a necessary evil - specifically 'Lower than a snake's arse,' according to some choice recent gossip.



In the early days of guidebook publishing there was more opportunity for diversity and creativity, especially with a cutting-edge publisher. Nowadays, the market is much bigger and more competitive. Travel books are a standardised 'product'. Each book within an imprint must have the same look, approach and useability. Authors have to adhere to a rigid 'house style'. It's the McDonaldisation of travel destinations. As a writer you can't help but feel disenfranchised.



This has increased the status of editors. They will ruthlessly police our words, dispensing swift justice to anything that fails to conform. Imperious decrees will be issued, containing copious demands for clarifications or background information. Authors must respond to these swiftly, no matter what other commitments they have. Once I arrived in the Solomon Islands, but had to wrench my mind back to Switzerland to deal with a thick wedge of editorial queries and proofs.



Don't count on making your fortune writing guidebooks. Newcomers want to do this job so much that they will do it for virtually nothing, at least at the beginning.



They will endure countless hardships to eke out their meagre budget and track down the information they need. They'll visit plush hotels, test the sweetest-sprung divans, then end up sleeping on hardboard bunks in cardboard shacks. They'll study poetic menus in gourmet restaurants, linger longingly to ask a few patrons how they enjoyed their multi-course feasts, then dine in the meanest roadside slop-shops. They'll check prices for first-class rail and club-class jets, then breathe deep on the clouds of smoke seeping from broken exhausts in battered buses. They'll do it because they enjoy it. Rather, they'll enjoy the first three days of their three-month trip, because it's new and fresh. After that it becomes a grind. We've all been through this rite of passage.



These new writers have quickly found that the so-called glamour has disappeared. They'll console themselves with the thought that once they've got this first book under their belt, they will have their foot in the door. Then they can start making some real money for their next book.



What they soon realise, as they're attempting to negotiate their new project, is that the next batch of wannabe writers is clamouring to write that same book for next to no money, their own 'isn't this cool' rose-tinted glasses as yet unshattered. Thus the one-contract veteran will have to settle for slimmer fees. Another bugbear is the deadlines which are as tight as an ageing swinger's belt. The reason for this is that publishers need to get books on the shelves before they are out of date. I would love to spend four months researching three chapters of India, even at the cost of earning less money per day. One day chilling out on the beach, the next day researching, and so on.



No chance. If it can be researched in two months, I will be given two months minus one week. I will have to work almost every waking hour, seven days a week: researching throughout the day, writing up or organising my notes at night. Travel becomes a joyless logistical exercise, conducted at a relentless pace. I will have to steam into town, check out everything in the guide and line up a few new entries. As soon as this is done I must ship out to the next place, casting wistful glances at the relaxed, time-rich travellers pondering where to have a leisurely beer. I will have nightmares about having my research notes being stolen. My dreams will be invaded by endless investigations of imaginary hotels, restaurants and train stations.



I will return home exhausted, with a backpack bulging with brochures, timetables and price schedules. I will have to forget I have friends I haven't seen for ages. Instead I will retreat to my office until the writing-up is complete. During that time I will fail to recognise the concept of a weekend or office hours. As the deadline approaches my stress levels mount. Every hour I am awake and not working, I will be trying to suppress the nagging thought: 'I could be working right now.'



At last the job will be finished - if I'm lucky, within deadline. I can afford a cou ple of days off now (unpaid, of course), before I start worrying about where my next contract is coming from. Before long I'm back on the road again, wrenching apart the strands that hold my life together in England.



Which heralds the next problem for the career guidebook writer. Taking two- or three-month research trips abroad is great in your carefree early twenties. As you get older and collect more commitments, this gets harder to organise. I am married now and our first child, a daughter, was born last month. Sadly, I know that important stages in her development will happen while I am somewhere else. The career of a guidebook writer tends to be a short one. Within Lonely Planet it is said that writers usually suffer 'burn-out' within five years.



All of this begs the question: if this dream job is so terrible, why am I still doing it?



Because, naturally, it does have its good points too. It's nice that people think I've got a cool job, even if I don't always think it's so cool myself. The research can be exhausting, but there's a genuine satisfaction in finding a place that stands out, and then describing it accurately and evocatively. It's good to be working out there in the real world, instead of being locked up in an office. Then there's the thrill you get when you see your guidebook in print for the first time. And I still love to travel, even if it's for the sake of work rather than for the sake of travel itself.



Perhaps this last point is the key message for wannabe guidebook writers and everybody else. We're out there on the road to do a job, and we can never be deflected from that. Writers who go out there and treat it like being on holiday will end up with just that - an overlong holiday. Plus a blown deadline, withheld fees and no chance of being offered another research contract. Ever.



Lonely Planet Veteran on Travel Guidebook Writing



Friday, September 3, 2010

NWU Report on Pay Rates for Freelance Journalists


Longest Hair in the World Posted by Hello



Report on Pay Rates for Freelance Journalists



Last year, the National Writers Union Delegates Assembly appointed a committee to study pay rates for freelance journalists in order to determine a minimum recommended rate.



Our research was motivated by a strong sense among our members that freelance rates don't provide freelancers with even a moderate income. We believed that rates have not kept up with staff salaries in recent years. We had also heard widespread claims that freelance rates had not gone up since the 1960s. So we set out to see if there was any basis in fact for these beliefs.



In addition to researching what freelancers need to charge per word to make a living, we aimed to put the information into context: Have freelance pay rates increased, stagnated, or decreased since the 1960s? What do staff writers make? What do other college-educated professionals make? How much can publishers afford to pay writers?



We discovered that the situation is even worse than we had thought. In real dollars, freelance rates have declined by more than 50 percent since the 1960s. And while rates have gone down, publishers are getting more for their money.



This report deals only with rates, not rights, but it must be noted in passing that publishers are asking for and getting more secondary rights for the same dollar that once bought only one-time rights. Writers who used to compensate for the poor pay rates at newspapers by reselling articles to multiple markets can no longer do so.



How much do full-time journalists need to charge to make a moderate living?

Freelance writers spend a tremendous amount of time looking for work (researching and pitching articles) and revising. While some articles can be done in a week and others may take three months, for most full-time freelance writers, selling and writing 3,000 or 4,000 words a month is about the best that they can expect to do -- two feature articles or the equivalent in smaller pieces. (This is more than most magazine staff writers write -- which is about 2,500 words a month.)



At this level of output, a rate of a dollar a word means a gross income of $36,000 to $48,000 a year, out of which has to be taken expenses, insurance, and other benefits. This is the equivalent of earning a salary, with benefits, of about $30,000 to $40,000 a year. So for a college graduate working as a full-time freelance writer to bring in even a moderate income that includes benefits, requires at least $1 a word.



The median income of full-time, college-educated workers in the US is around $50,000, plus benefits. So to earn as much as the average college graduate would require somewhat more, between $1.25 and $1.60 a word.



How much did magazines pay in the past?

In real dollars, magazines used to pay far more than they do today. Freelancers' rates have been declining since the mid 1960's in real terms--for more than 35 years. For example, Writer's Market, which reports what magazines themselves say they pay, shows that writers' rates at the top magazines have declined by two-thirds to four-fifths since 1966, far more than the approximately 20% loss in real hourly wages that the average American worker suffered during the same period. Writers' real rates were falling even in the late '60s and early '70s when most workers' wages were rising.



As an example of the generation-long losses, in 1966 Cosmopolitan reported offering $0.60 a word, while in 1998 they reported offering $1 a word. In the meantime, the buying power of the dollar fell by a factor of five. So Cosmopolitan's real rates fell by a factor of three. Good Housekeeping reported offering $1 a word in 1966 and the same $1 a word in 1998- — a full 80% decline in real pay.



Another way of looking at these figures is to translate them into 2001 dollars. In terms of these dollars, Good Housekeeping was paying $5 a word in 1966.



To fully compare these figures with rates actually paid today, one must take into account that that the magazines' reports to Writer's Market underreport rates by as much as a factor of two in general, as demonstrated by the NWU's own ongoing survey of what writers are actually paid by the same magazines. Such underreporting of rates occurred in 1966 as well, so actual rates for Good Housekeeping, in 2001 dollars, may well have been higher than $5 a word.



How much do magazines pay their staff writers?

The average wage for staff positions ranges from $35,270 for news reporters to $45,500 for staff writers, plus benefits, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Based on our examination of largely staff-written monthly magazines, the average staff writer's output is between 20,000 to 30,000 words per year. This means that per-word rates average around $1.60 a word, not including the value of benefits. If benefits are included, this works out to close to $2 a word. (To be conservative, we used the Bureau of Labor Statistics' figure for staff writers. At the actual magazines we surveyed, most staff writers are paid at least twice that, which would mean per-word rates come out to about $4 a word.)



How much can publications afford to pay?

We also compared publication income with words of text published to get an estimate of income per word and to determine what fraction of total revenue is paid to writers. For example, for Discover magazine, 500 pages of ads a year at $50,000 per full-page ad gives $25 million a year in gross revenue. (This underestimates their income, because half-page ads cost two-thirds as much as full-page ads). Since the magazine has one million subscriptions at $25 per year, it has another $25 million a year. (This ignores newsstand sales, which make the total even larger.) Divide by 500 pages of text a year at 800 words per text page and Discover's income is more than $125 per word. Discover pays its writers $1 a word. So they pay their writers less than 1% of their gross income. If they paid them 15% of gross income, the way book publishers manage to and still turn handsome profits, they would be paying at least $19 a word.



The numbers are remarkably similar for Forbes, which also charges $50,000 a page for full-page color ads and also earns roughly the same income from ads as from subscriptions.



In general, advertising and subscription revenues are proportional on a per-word basis to circulation--the more readers, the more income per word. We estimate that publications can afford to pay 15% to 30% of their total revenue to their writers. This means that publications, except for those with fewer than 25,000 readers, can afford to pay $1 a word. This is confirmed by the fact that some magazines listed in the NWU Guide to Rates and Practices as having ad rates under $5,000 a page (the lowest category) did in fact pay as much as $1 a word four years ago, although rates have fallen since then. It also means that writers are being paid no more than 1% to 2% of total income, basically a tenth of what the book publishing industry pays.



For the largest magazines, the gap is even worse. Magazines like Good Housekeeping and Women's Day with ad rates of $200,000 a page and more and as many as eight million readers are earning something like $500 a word. Yet they pay freelancers $1 to $2 a word, less than 0.5% of revenues. If they paid the writers 15% of revenue, freelancers would be getting $75 a word at these publications.



What about newspapers? The New York Times takes in about $40,000 per ad page or about $2 million per issue, about comparable to Discover, Forbes, and Good Housekeeping. The Times metro edition hits about a million readers. With $1 million or more in subscriptions per issue, not counting newsstand sales, and 30 pages of text in a daily edition, this works out to at least $38 a word. So at 15% of income, the Times could afford at least $6 a word, not the 30 cents to a dollar it normally pays freelancers.



Thus a minimum rate of $1 a word is no hardship for publications and will be a first step to recovering the ground writers have lost over the past thirty five years.



NWU Report on Pay Rates for Freelance Journalists



Thursday, September 2, 2010

Lonely Planet and Globalization


Burma Postcard Posted by Hello



All the Lonely People

Globalization helped grow Lonely Planet Publications.

Now globalization helps it ship local jobs overseas.

BY KARA PLATONI

Workers must hit the road.




For years, the Oakland-based staff of Lonely Planet Publications cranked out much-beloved guides that help travelers figure out how ferry service works in Alaska or where to buy soccer tickets in Costa Rica. And for years, things were good. Buoyed by the rising tide of global commerce, international boundaries blurred, worldwide travel boomed, and people hankered to get farther and farther off the beaten path. Lonely Planet grew by making the planet a bit less lonely.



By growing more than twenty percent a year for a decade, the privately held company was becoming the world's largest independent travel publisher, with more than 650 titles in print. At its peak, Lonely Planet employed about 550 people worldwide, a quarter of whom were the designers, cartographers, editors, and new media staff based in Oakland.



As the company grew, so did its ambitions. Once fondly regarded as a producer of backpackers' bibles, Lonely Planet began aiming for a wider audience. The company spun off a host of products including videos, language tapes, road atlases, coffee-table books, and digital travel guides. It made plans to produce television broadcasts under the moniker "LPTV." It also ventured into multimedia, launching a Web site, an Internet bulletin board, and a phone-card service. Along the way, it developed a reputation for being the nice guy of travel publishing, a company that donated some of its profits to charity and urged trekkers to be respectful of the environment and culture of the places they visited.



But now the global business tide that once lifted Lonely Planet's fortunes is washing back out. Last month, for the first time in the company's nearly thirty-year history, Lonely Planet announced that it would lay off fifteen percent of its global workforce and move all book production back to its original base in Australia, where the Australian dollar is worth about half its US counterpart. The vast majority of those cuts will come from the Oakland office -- about seventy people -- and be staggered from March through July.



Despite early news coverage that blamed Lonely Planet's layoffs on the post-9/11 travel slump, company executives have made it clear that slowing revenues, the need to pay off bank loans, and pressure for the company to develop its first-ever long-term financial plan made changes necessary well before September.



Some laid-off Oakland workers put it more bluntly, blaming the money crunch on bad management, too-rapid expansion, and the company's willingness to throw money at unproven projects. How ironic, they say, that by moving jobs across the border, Lonely Planet has joined the global trend of companies chasing the bottom line. How ironic that a company that made its fortune on its reputation for being progressive and iconoclastic is now behaving more like the corporations to which it was supposedly an alternative. How ironic that, in a community where so many are outraged by the movement of shoe factories and auto assembly lines over the border in search of cheap unskilled labor, Lonely Planet would take the lead in exporting something new -- white-collar jobs.



In 1973, newlyweds Tony and Maureen Wheeler set out from London to Australia by way of Asia. Upon their arrival, they were so besieged with questions about their trip that they sat down at their kitchen table and banged out a hand-assembled guide entitled Across Asia on the Cheap. It was so successful that they followed it up with another one. And so began Lonely Planet.



The company's first overseas office opened in Oakland in 1984; in the early '90s, smaller offices in London and Paris followed. Despite the company's rapid growth, the way was not always smooth. During the latter half of the '90s, Oakland staffers say the company had a cash-flow crisis roughly every other year. Until last year, these crises were generally handled by temporary belt-tightening measures, but did not lead to major changes in the company's business plan.



In fact, employees say Lonely Planet was famously unencumbered by long-term plans, market research, or even uniformity among its four offices. In particular, the Oakland and Melbourne offices were seldom on the same page. Cartographers didn't use the same map-drawing technology, billing wasn't consolidated until a few years ago, and disparate costs of living and exchange rates made the financial situations of these offices and their employees very different.



To finance its expanding product line, in the late '90s Lonely Planet took out increasingly large bank loans. With the larger loans came more stringent bank demands for accountability and profitability. The soft travel economy certainly didn't help either. US sales were down twenty percent in the last half of 2001, according to a March e-mail sent to staffers by Eric Kettunen, the company's general manager of US operations. According to notes from a January managers' meeting, Chief Executive Officer Steve Hibbard said that the company was "severely behind" its business forecast, causing it to run afoul of some banking covenants.



Last October, to save $1 million (Australian), executives asked employees to voluntarily work shorter days or weeks for reduced pay, or take extended leaves at fifteen percent of their pay. Oakland staffers say the offer was accepted with enthusiasm. "A lot of people were stoked to go travel, being that it's a travel company and most people are young and don't have responsibilities like mortgages or kids, so they're able to get up and go for a month or two," says production staffer Nancy McNeil, who agreed to speak only if identified by a pseudonym, like all the production staff and cartographers quoted in this story. "But I believe they expected to have their jobs when they came back, and many of them won't."



Local staffers said they were led to believe that the voluntary leaves had staved off the need for layoffs. In November, CEO Hibbard wrote that the staff's enthusiastic embrace of the plan had impressed its bank and auditors. Shortly thereafter, Wheeler responded via e-mail to questions about whether the program had worked. "You bet it has," he crowed, adding that the company had beat its savings goal. And following the publication of a San Francisco Chronicle column quoting Kettunen as saying that downsizing might be necessary if the travel industry didn't soon perk up, Kettunen wrote the staff that the company would be "in a solid financial position" -- even if sales stayed flat until the end of the financial year in June 2002. Publicity Manager Cindy Cohen says the company expected the leave program to resolve its cash crunch.



Sales didn't stay flat; they climbed by eight percent in the first two months of 2002, according to a letter from Global Publisher Simon Westcott to the company's freelance contributors. But management's assurances turned out to be over-optimistic. Senior managers were meeting behind closed doors, and rumors put the rank and file on edge. "The month to three weeks before the layoff were probably the worst weeks I've ever experienced in a job-place," says McNeil. Finally on March 19 the news arrived: management had adopted a three-year restructuring plan that would cut jobs and centralize book production in Melbourne. "It's sad to lose people, but I think it was also really well-intentioned and thought out and planned," Cohen says. "It's one of those paradoxes in life: it's tough and it's the right thing."



Although the travel slump hurt the company, staffers argue that Lonely Planet was primarily a victim of its own ambition. "They basically just boomed and busted and they're kind of pawning it off on the downturn in the economy, but it started before that," says laid-off production staffer Julie Anderson. "As they got bigger and bigger they extended themselves more and more, and this time they just did it too far."



Lonely Planet lost money by straying too far from its bread-and-butter travel guides, employees say. The company launched nine distinct new series in 1999 -- among them Out to Eat, Watching Wildlife, Healthy Travel, and a series of cycling guides. Having already documented the entire world, Lonely Planet had to write about new activities instead of new places if it wanted to keep expanding. It sank money into new media, redesigning its Web site and launching a phone-card service called Ekno.



The company also realized that in an online world hungry for content, it already had a wealth of maps, reviews, and photographs. In 2000, in collaboration with Palm, it launched CitySync, which allowed users to download Lonely Planet content onto their handheld. "If people stopped traveling with books and started to travel with Palm Pilots or whatever, they wanted to be the first ones out there," says laid-off cartographer Chris Jones. Lonely Planet planned to gain additional revenue by licensing its content to Web sites and travel portals.



At the same time, Lonely Planet started funneling its content into databases, one each for maps, text, and photographs. To take advantage of the photo database, the company introduced a new agency, Lonely Planet Images (LPI), which would act as a middleman. Instead of selling photos directly to guidebooks, photographers now had to license them through the photo agency, which retained the original film for at least five years and also took a cut of slightly over fifty percent off the sales. In return, Lonely Planet would market the photos to other publications.



But to date, the image bank's main client remains its parent company, and, combined with a drop in payment rates, some photographers now collect only twenty percent of what they would have made before the agency's creation. "There's nothing wrong with the idea itself, but they haven't made the progress they expected to," says one such photographer. "There are a lot of photographers who are saying, 'I'm getting a lot of thirty-dollar sales, but it was my understanding that those were going to be just a fraction of the action."



Although Wheeler, Kettunen, and Hibbard did not respond to interview requests, internal e-mails make it clear that many of these projects were money-losers. "We cannot continue for the next three years as we have for the past three," Hibbard wrote the staff in February. "The impressive sales growth that we enjoyed for so many years provided a very forgiving environment. There are a number of ways in which we used this period of growth to expand our capabilities and improve our products, but we also became too relaxed about margins, costs, and investment planning during that growth period."



Shortly after the layoffs, founder Tony Wheeler sent the staff an e-mail explaining that the company currently owes about $30 million (Australian) in bank loans. Wheeler singled out a few culprits. "We have looked cold and hard at some of the titles we've produced, and some of the expenditures we've made (on New Media, on databasing, on LPI) and decided that what we've got at the end of the day is not worth the amount of money we spent for it."



Other products also seem to have lost money; one of the first coffee-table books, Chasing Rickshaws, is out of print, and the Out to Eat and cycling guides are on indefinite hiatus. Notes from the January managers' meeting indicate that the New Media unit is $1 million (Australian) behind its forecasted budget. Wheeler maintains that the losses were not due to bad management. "If you don't take risks, even if they sometimes backfire, you don't get anywhere," he wrote the staff. "I don't regret anything we've done, any project we've taken on."



What next for Lonely Planet? The Oakland office will retain a small publishing team of about seventeen people, but will serve primarily as an outpost for sales and marketing. Lonely Planet has hired outplacement counselors, and its severance package has been universally described as generous. "We're not in danger of closing any time, not the Oakland office nor Lonely Planet in general," Cohen says. "There's absolutely not a chance. January, February, and March sales are all back up where they were last year at this time, and given what has happened in the travel industry in the last six months, if we can match last year I think we're doing good."



But the company will be slashing its payroll expenses by moving south. According to its staff, the average wage in the Oakland office was $35,000 annually, which translates to about $65,000 (Australian). In Australia, where the cost of living is much lower, the average staff wage is about $35,000 (Australian), or $18,800 in US money. Printing costs won't be affected by the move; that's already done in Hong Kong.



Some staffers are heartbroken that even a "progressive" business would flee the East Bay for somewhere with lower costs of doing business. Laid-off staffer Anderson remembers confronting Wheeler about the company's pursuit of a favorable exchange rate, accusing him of joining the tide of corporations moving production jobs to countries with cheaper labor. She says he responded by saying "No one in the First World wants to make shoes."



"But I liked making books," Anderson says she replied. "And my job just left for exactly the same reasons."



Lonely Planet and Globalization