Yesterday myself and a handful of other photographers ran head-on into this hypocrisy.
A discussion on a professional mailing-list was in progress about the shock and horror of how little freelancers get paid for their work. Writers mind you. Aside from the dwindling value attached to freelance submissions, the question arose over people trying to get a start in the game by submitting their work for free. Nada. Nix. Nothing. No Charge. Gratis. Complementary. I need to be clear about this, we are talking about absolutely no payment of any sort what so ever.
There was suitable outrage. There were editors, freelance editors and freelance writers chipping in to point out how awful such a scenario would be. It should never happen, it causes all manner of ills. One editor posted these words to hoist their flag firmly on the moral high ground of the debate...
"But I draw the line when (and it happens often) writers offer me stories for free. Usually they are just starting out and want to get a foot in the door. But I explain to them (actually shame them) that to give it away devalues their writing/work and puts the income of freelance writers in jeopardy."
That was emailed at 11:19am.
Soon after I emailed the same editor independent of the discussion about what to invoice for my photos that had accompanied a story they commissioned. At 2:29pm the reply came back...
"Sorry Ewen, if you misunderstood, we don’t pay for images. Cover pictures yes. If this isn’t acceptable let me know and I’ll access pictures from elsewhere. Cheers"
So let's be clear about this. Writers giving away their work for FREE is devaluing their writing and threatens the income of all writers. Photographers however can get stuffed. I had not offered my photos for free, but when asked for payment I'm told that my contribution can be replaced elsewhere. I assume for no charge?
This is about hypocrisy. There are plenty of editors who don't pay for photos, and I've had to swallow that. They run my story because they get my photos. I'm a better photographer than writer and I know my shortcomings. But those editors don't post one-paragraph manifestos denouncing the acceptance of unpaid writing. In fact they repeatedly tell me that it frustrates them that they can't pay for images, they are restricted by decisions higher up.
What gets me steamed is how at 11:19am I'm told that freelance writers should never be published without payment, and at 2:29pm I'm told freelance photography is fine to print for free. Nada. Nix. Nothing. No Charge. Gratis. Complementary. I need to be clear about this, we are talking about absolutely no payment of any sort what so ever.
Hypocrisy is like when a seed gets stuck in your teeth. It's so small you cant easily get a hold of it but it can drive you totally insane.
2 comments:
Whoa. That's unbearable. When I'm reading a travel story it'll be the location that'll suck me in first {if it's somewhere I'm planning to go} or, primarily, it'll be the images that will strike me.
I find it horrifying that there could be an editor who doesn't understand this. Sure, photo library shots are cheaper - because, generally, we've seen them all before. Or do they intend on using old shots from previously filed stories? You know, the second-tier stuff that didn't quite make the first cut.
Triumph of bland bugets over talent. That's tragic.
In this instance I have no idea where the alternate photos would come from. Typically they might be from tourism board image libraries.
That I don't mind in fact, because the photographer got paid to shoot the images for the library. Maybe this editor will use a 50 cent library and fill up the pages with second-rate images. I don't know.
But they were happy to take my photos without payment and print them, contrary to their stated umbrage regarding written contributions.
It's all rather ordinary to say the least. If something is of value, shouldn't it be paid for?
Post a Comment