you can’t pay your rent with “the unique platform and reach our site provides”

A very nice editor at Huffington Post contacted me yesterday, and asked me if I would be willing to grant permission for the site to republish my post about the seven things I did to reboot my life.

Huffington Post has a lot of views, and reaches a pretty big audience, and that post is something I’d love to share with more people, so I told the editor that I was intrigued, and asked what they pay contributors.

Well, it turns out that, “Unfortunately, we’re unable to financially compensate our bloggers at this time. Most bloggers find value in the unique platform and reach our site provides, but we completely understand if that makes blogging with us impossible.”

I translated this on Twitter thusly:

This set me off on a tiny bit of a rant:  

I’m very lucky to not need exposure or “reach” or anything like that, at least not right now and not this way. I’m also very lucky to be able to walk away from things like this because I believe it’s the right thing to do. If I’d offered this to Huffington Post for nothing, because I hoped they’d publish it, that would be an entirely different thing, because it was my choice.

I don’t know what the going rate is for something like this. At six cents a word, which is SFWAs lowest professional rate for short fiction (not a perfect comparison, but at least something to reference that’s similar), it would be $210. That’s not nothing, but it’s not house payment money. Maybe I should have just taken their fabulous offer of exposure?

I don’t think so, because it’s the principle of the thing. Huffington Post is valued at well over fifty million dollars, and the company can absolutely afford to pay contributors. The fact that it doesn’t, and can get away with it, is distressing to me.

The exchange I had with this editor wasn’t unpleasant, and I know that she’s doing what her bosses tell her to do. I don’t blame her for the company policy. If I’d brought this to Huffington Post and asked the site to publish it, it would be an entirely different situation, I think, (I already posted it on my Medium account, anyway), but this is one of those “the line must be drawn here” things for me. I don’t know if I made the right call, but I do feel good about standing on principle, and having an opportunity to rant a little bit about why I did.

Discover more from WIL WHEATON dot NET

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

947 thoughts on “you can’t pay your rent with “the unique platform and reach our site provides””

  1. Exposure is fine, as long as you just exchange your work for around $3,000 dollars worth of advertising space on the Huffington Post, in lieu of payment for your blog article. Hey, this costs them nothing, right? Exposure doesn’t pay the rent, but if you can sell your exchanged advertising space on Huffington Post just might. Quid pro quo.

  2. Well done for that! I am glad you acted according to what you believed in, and wish there were more who really perceived their value without wanting to be a ‘Huffington Post Author’ alongside ‘Bestselling author’, which is how quite a few entrepreneurs introduce/market themselves, and I cringe at the sight of that. Surely everyone cannot be a best selling author without either lying or tweaking the numbers through some sort of manipulation?

    1. On Amazon they have a list of bestsellers by category. My guess is that a lot of these people had eBooks that were bestsellers in their category the day they were published.

  4. As a designer and artist, I LOVE this post. The get away with not paying due to many are just looking for the backlink SEO juice a link from them can create, but they should actually pay.

  5. Right on Will! A similar bogus argument is made to justify unpaid internships. It never ceases to amaze me that companies expect new graduates, especially in the arts, to work “for the experience” on the hope of eventually earning a place, or worse so they can simply list the job on a resume. How are those artists to pay for the schooling they just completed, let alone afford the basic necessities for 3 to 24 months while they provide actual value to a company as unpaid interns!?

    2. Yes, very astute. Why is indentured servitude fashionable again? Also: you know how people used to advise youngsters “there’s no free lunch in life,” “If you want something of value you have to work for it,” “Don’t expect to get something for nothing,” & etc? I just find it very striking how these days, it seems like the ones who really are expecting to get something for nothing are huge corporations. HuffPo, and other online media outlets. Huge multinationals bringing in crowds of unpaid interns. Uber, paying their drivers barely more than they have to spend in order to drive an Uber. It is not a positive trend for the economy as a whole.

    3. …or to pay graduate students in mental health Nothing for their hours of clinical trainee or intern work at agencies where students who are learning the ropes are working with those who are MOST in need and are typically the ones who need someone with the MOST experience

    2. Totally agree! I would love to see that article get written and published – be nice to blow the lid off the scam of ‘Exposure’ content all the sites/blogs are looking to exploit. Really upsets me because it cycles down to people not wanting to hire writers for other professional jobs thinking they can get it for free. Well, you get what you pay for!

  7. Thank you for putting this out there!!! Absolutely artists of all kinds should be paid for what they create!!! When you start giving away art for next to nothing or free you devalue not only yourself, but other artists in the community! Please keep that in mind the next time someone wants you to do anything for “exposure” or pay you $100 for their wedding photos….

  8. You’re too polite to say it, Wil, so allow me to suggest that this editor was not a nice person at all. They may have been civil, affable, conciliatory, apologetic, but they were asking you to give something for absolutely nothing. And that’s what that person does for their labor. Just because it’s their job to coerce, shame, wheedle, and connive content from those who are more vulnerable than you does not excuse that. That company, and many others, have a dirty and shameful model that should not be supported in any way.

    The worst people are the ones who turn their likeability and spend their social currency to take or abuse others. There are lots of people in our first world society who take, deny, or con with a smile.

    I appreciate your raising this issue, and I appreciate your coming down on the right side.

  9. I especially think it was poor taste since they approached you for it. I struggle with finding places to write for that will pay me. The few I have found I cherish.

  12. As a new (2 years) blogger, I vacillate between spreading my content (for free) to get readership and holding back and sucking it up. Where do we stand? The reality is that my blog and the internet give me the opportunity for readers, but broad exposure has only come with partnering with the big boys. Damned if I do, Damned if I don’t.

    1. When you are a new writer/artist/whatever, sometimes you do have to suck it up for exposure and readership and be prepared to be a starving artist until you can show blogs and editors that you have a track record, a good reputation and you are worth it. Breaking into a market takes time and humility. Like any other vocation, you’re just not going to make house money right off the bat. That said, Wil Wheaton is not a new face on the block; he’s been around and should demand his worth. Know your worth, but don’t expect everyone else to right away, and don’t give up.

  13. As a fellow writer and creator of various media, I agree and am tired of hearing they can’t afford to pay us for content they hope will help them make money. Did they forget how commerce works?

    1. No, Justin…they hope that YOU forget how commerce works! Huffington Post has YET to make a consistent profit, and they have had their share of ‘writer uprisings’ over the past few years. The ‘illusion’ is that ‘all is well’ in the blogasphere. The reality? To thine OWN self be true. Remember: once upon a time, ‘self-publishing’ was ‘the’ way to go. Unfortunately, there was the small print…IF you had the cash to do it.

  15. Wil thanks for this! I’m a programmer, and while I was going to school to get my Bachelor’s, I had a classmate claim that all software should be open source and free. I tried explaining to him to that would be like telling a professional plumber to come over and fix your toilet for free.

  16. Yet Arianna sold the site for something like $350 million a couple years ago. Yes, it’s a great platform and someone like me would benefit from the exposure. But I got bills, and I also have a talent that has value. The problem is everyone thinks they can write. Maybe so, but not all of them are trained in journalism or, even then, GOOD at it.

  17. Apple has made their fortune getting developers to either give away their software or selling for chicken feed prices. As a consequence consumers now expect software for free for as near as makes no difference. HuffPost is just trying to do the same thing.

  18. Good for you! Working for free is ridiculous! Unfortunately there are enough people that will do just that which ends up hurting us all.

  19. Have you never thought about pushing a huge bunch of readers, gracias a Huff Post, to your personal blog where you are free to speak and market to them as you see fit, thus funding future generations of your precious art?

  20. I’ve published places for free, because I wanted to reach that particular niche. But this is a whole different ballgame, and HuffPo is notorious for acting like this – I don’t even read their site any more. Love your article (and tweets) – bravo!

  21. I can honestly say that when I read blog articles, I very rarely look at the author or who published them (unless the name jumps out at me as someone famous, which is rare). Sounds like free labor to me!! My goal is to one day have talented chefs come and cook for me, and thorough, reputable maids come do housecleaning — not for pay, of course. But I would totally take pictures and give them props on Facebook and Instagram.

  23. They weren’t asking for something in exchange for nothing. They offered exposure. You decided that was not a mutually beneficial exchange and declined the offer. They chose not to counter offer. The market works. I don’t see the problem here. Someone else in different circumstances might have decided a byline on Huffington Post would have been payment enough.

    1. This system does not work though…someone somewhere is desperate enough to do back breaking labor for fifty cents an hour. This does not mean that it is ethical nor does it mean that companies should be allowed to shirk the minimum wage just because someone is willing to work for less. Exposure does not allow you to pay your rent. You can’t buy groceries with exposure. Yet the article that Wil wrote would have generated views and ad revenue for HuffPo. Thus if they make any money off his work, they ought to pay him. Taking advantage of people should not be celebrated as a working market.

      1. And you have to believe that Huff Post has the metrics in place to know exactly what article draws traffic by the minute and then generates clicks to their ads. It would be fairly straightforward to pay the person who drove some ad clicks a share of the revenue. Even if it’s pennies, its compensation for value added.

    2. So if a wealthy person shows up at a restaurant and asks for a free meal, would you see nothing wrong with that? He’ll tell his friends how great the meal was, after all. OK, the restaurant will just turn him down and no one’s worse off. But isn’t he a jerk for asking?

  24. May I ask: If a national talk show (let’s say, one that reaches a pretty big audience) with viewers in the tens of millions invited you to appear on their show for a five minute chat (which would actually consume a full day starting uncomfortably early) for no pay (but EXPOSURE!): would you accept? If not, that would seem consistent with your position regarding to the HuffPost policy. But if you would be inclined to accept, I’d be curious to know why one but not the other.

    1. The difference here is that most TV appearances are for you to promote yourself in the way you see fit (i.e., a celeb stopping by to promote their movie or an “expert” giving tips that essentially promote their book or non-profit.) It is first-time, original content that creates a fresh, compelling interest in the guest who is being doted on by hosts and fans. Asking to republish an article with a byline — which many people won’t even notice in a sea of other bylines — is not even the same exposure. Unless it goes viral (which is less than .01% of content), they are essentially asking to take your original work and publish it as their own. For free. And to ignore that they pick out people with a self-made social media following in the tens to hundreds of thousands is criminal. Now they want your content, you to promote it, and your fan base — for absolutely no compensation.

      An article can pay as little as $50 and most freelancers would be happy to get that in the right situations. But they don’t want to pay anything. Not $5, not $50, not $500. Let’s also not forget that many TV spots will fly you in or at least give you dinner. Giving it up for free and no dinner? Not on my wishlist as a professional writer.

  25. This is so common in the freelance world that it’s hard not to get depressed about it. Editors want completely original material for free or next to nothing. It’s insulting. The “exposure” line is the standard b.s. — but if they use it even on you — with your celebrity and following — I have to wonder, if I fall for the “exposure” line, how long would I have to settle for “exposure” until my content is valued enough to be paid for? If the research/writing isn’t good enough to publish, that’s one thing. If it’s good enough that publishers want to use it, but don’t want to pay, that’s just wrong. Thank you for standing up and saying something about it.

  26. Good response, Wil. A publication such as the HuffPost can obviously afford to pay writers, or cartoonists, or any creative contributor. They must pay their staff, overhead expenses, rent, etc. or they wouldn’t be able to stay in business. Why not pay for the content that pays for the rest of it? To those who think so-called exposure (merely a lure to the gullible) is compensation enough, I cry “Bullshit” and maybe even “Scab”! And I refer you to Harlan Ellison’s famous “Pay the Writer” video.

  28. They wouldn’t ask to use it if they didn’t think it would bring readers (i.e. ad-views). They’re not publishing out of the goodness of their hearts, they’re publishing for profit. So damn right you shouldn’t give it away. If they’re making money from your work, so should you.

  29. Hi Will. Thanks for your insight and opinion on this matter.

    I think it’s well worthwhile for any writer, whether new or veteran, to determine standards for compensation. You’re right in that a line must be drawn and a writer should be willing to create and stick to a policy.

    Everyone’s opinion has value and simply accepting exposure with a multi-national giant in lieu of fair compensation only serves to benefit the giant, with little benefit to the writer – a nod, a wink and a pat on the back does not pay the rent. A writer should accept that his/her work has value and is worthy of fair compensation.

    Lastly, with your above statement: “the line must be drawn here” … did you also hear Captain Picard’s voice in your head from “First Contact”?

  30. It’s a new world with millions more people freelancing in almost all industries and now folks are starting to understand what musicians have been forced to contend with for AGES!!!!

    Oprah gets people to play for free for gawd sake!!! It’s unconscionable but I’ll bet everyone of the people reading this column has at some point thought “hey, your only playing [x-number of] songs, why do you charge that much?” for a family or corporate function.

    Some deep, latent belief that artists are doing it ‘for the love of it’ and that’s payment enough.

    Ugh. Welcome to the club, Mr. Wheaton!

  31. If it’s really the principle, and not the amount, would you have agreed if she offered you one cent? One dollar? $100? And how is this different than any industry that buys as low as possible, adds some extra value (curation, in this case), and sells as high as possible? “As low as possible” in this case is zero dollars plus some perceived value of “reach”.

  32. Thanks for this, Wil.

    Buzzfeed asked to use one of my Flickr photos from San Diego Comic Con in a sponsored post for the San Diego Tourism Board, and said they’d give me credit. I’m not a professional photographer, but I know that if they’re being paid for it, so should I, and I said so and told them they couldn’t use my photo without payment. Honestly, if they’d even offered $20 I might have said okay, but as you probably know by now, I heard nothing back from Buzzfeed after I asked about payment.

    It’s not easy, as someone who’s unemployed, to turn down a possible avenue for future money through exposure, but really, if a big site that makes as much money as Huffington Post won’t pay, who will? Please, everyone, patronize the sites that pay their contributors, and keep spreading the news about those who won’t. So many sites and companies want everyone to work for “exposure” instead of money. I understand small sites trying to get their foot in the door, but moneymaking sites like these are just being greedy and asking for charity from the little folks, and it’s JUST NOT COOL. The trickle-down theory doesn’t work if nothing actually trickles down.

  34. That’s how I get rid of telemarketers who want to take my time to do a survey. “What does it pay?” When I find out it’s nothing, “oh, so you just want to call me at home during my valuable time away from work and use my time to benefit you, for nothing?”

  35. Thank you, Wil, for taking a stand and for having the courage to take it in public as well as in private.

    Creative people rarely get paid at all, let alone enough, and I truly appreciate you for doing this.

  36. I know who you are, but haven’t kept up due to my own life obligations limiting my internet time. That said, I was exposed to your writing now because of this post. I wouldn’t have been had you just said “Sure, exposure is enough of a price for my work.” Did you make the right call? Who am I to say. But at least with this one random person, your choice brought you exposure on your terms, not theirs.

  38. I am a Huffington Post reader, or rather I was.. for a ‘social justice’ organization who’s stck is to criticize the rich and greedy to not pay contributors is hypocrisy at it’s finest. I dont do hypocrisy.

  42. Im a chef. Food is my art. I cook for my friends on my birthday, thats my present to myself. But if you want to taste my treats you will have to fork over cash.

  46. I always like how people offer nothing for something they will profit from. As a sometime cartoonist, I’ve been offered many publishing opportunities in exchange for “exposure.” It usually goes something like “Well, we don’t have any money to pay you, but you’ll be getting a lot of free exposure.” And my usual response is “Thanks, but I’ve found that any time I’ve exposed myself for free, it’s never worked out.”

  48. You just found out something musicians have known for the past 10 years. Exposure does not pay the bills. Welcome to the club.

  49. This has got to be the BEST advice, from a professional that I have seen in a looooooooooong time. Glad that you shared it with us, Wil. BTW…I’ve been a fan of your work, and glad to see that you continue to make your presence known and felt where it counts. Your image is your ticket, and none of us can afford to give our images away to ‘anyone’.

Comments are closed.

Related Posts

it’s in a book

I noticed something about the way I read books, yesterday. When I start a book, it's like I'm sitting in an empty space, completely surrounded by the fog of war. Over some number of pages, that fog is pushed back and the world in the book begins to populate the formerly-empty space. Eventually, that space is on the other side of a portal that I step through as effortlessly as I open the cover of the book. I guess I've been doing this my whole life, but I didn't actually notice and note it until yesterday.

Recent Posts

Discover more from WIL WHEATON dot NET

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading