Cocktails & New Media Dreams
Disclosure - I do some photo work for Guest of a Guest when it suits me in some manner superior to mere “placement”.
Me, too - and I write for HuffPo when it suits me. Paying work you do when it suits the payer. That’s a big difference.
Regarding Sheila’s piece, I did want to point out that the situation with the Hamptons girls is more nuanced than “unpaid” work:
Ms. Griffith, with other Hamptons interns, works for food and gas, living rent-free in a three-story home with two acres of beachfront property and a pool, owned by a friend of Ms. Hruska’s.
I have to say, that sounds like a pretty good deal. I’m going to leave this particularly crappy economy out of it, but event before things started imploding, there was a reason people took low-paying entry-level jobs: To enter. These girls have access, bylines, a Hamptons house that wouldn’t look out of place on Royal Pains and, apparently, a designtated driver. Now, I can remember turning over purses for change a few times during my writing career, but that’s not something that they’ll have to worry about, because food is covered. So I can certainly see why it would be appealing.
The thing is, there’s labor on the one side, but it has to produce something of value for the other. And the more it costs, the higher that value has to be. That’s why Rachelle will take my photos, when nothing better is available. Her site isn’t a photo site, it’s a social/events site. When photos become more important to her, she may be ready/able to pay everone (they do pay some photogs), but by that time my little snapshots will be far outclassed by the other talent that will be available once money comes into it. That’s how it works. Pay is proportional to quality - but in the case of sites like HuffPo and G of a G, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts due to concept, packaging and market positioning. It’s why TMZ is a traffic juggernaut based on grainy snapshots and wobbly footage of Britney in sweatpants outside Starbucks.
It’s important to understand that distinction - there are a lot of moving parts at play along the continuum. If you’re a pub with money, you can pay only the really good people; if you’re really good, you can hold out for paying gigs. Somewhere in the middle of that is doing stuff for free because of platform and exposure, or because you really want it published, or you believe in it, or it’s just fun to write, or you want to be part of something. The Awl falls into that category; they don’t pay their contributors yet.
Anyhow, like most things it’s a little more complicated than “writers should be paid.” It’s more like, “writers make choices based on a number of factors.”
