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

Posted on By Wil

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.

blog random thoughts

Comments (947)

  2. Definitely should be paid for work done. That being said, you still can’t pay the rent with no. Let us think on these things.

  3. You did the right thing, and I hope more writers do the same and force this practice to end.

    I used to work for HuffPo’s partner company, Patch.com, and there was a point where, as an editor, I was told that I could no longer pay my freelancers but I was encouraged to ask them to still “contribute” to my site. You know, because it’s fun to work for free, or something. Most of them declined, but some did it. But asking people who do great work to do said work for free while I was taking home a steady paycheck and benefits was something that just didn’t sit right for me. So I quit.

    1. There will -NEVER- be a lack of content. There are 8 billion hungry mouths on this planet. And -EVERY DAY- technology unlocks more of their voices. “I hope more writers do the same thing” is wishful thinking. The reality is HuffPo probably turned around and found another article in a few seconds.

  4. The old saying was “Content is King.” Guess what? It still is.

    You can have all of the social buzz in the world and have a big name but if your content dries up, people are going to move on to the next big thing.

    These sites like HuffPo make enough to pay content contributors a decent wage to keep their readership and revenues up.

  5. Thank you Wil! I took this stand as a visual artist at the beginning of the year and I still question it every time I get asked to do crap for free.

    The world wants artists around but they don’t want to pay us, and that will not change until we say no to them. And then tell them why.

    Well I’m not going to hedge anymore. If Wil Wheaton is taking a stand then dammit so am I. Thank you!

  6. Will, why did you post it to Medium? I’m honestly curious as a writer who is always trying to figure out what to publish where. Medium’s another platform that is largely uncompensated but offers exposure.

    1. I’ve been experimenting with Medium as an adjunct to posting here, because I’ve discovered a lot of articles there that I wouldn’t have come across any other way. I have friends who publish there, so I thought I’d give it a try.

      Yes, I get the contradiction of posting at Medium for exposure when I wouldn’t let HuffPost do the same. The key difference is that I chose to explore Medium. I’ve also found that Medium lets people follow writers they like, and notifies them whenever that writer publishes something new. I’ve picked up a fair number of new readers that way, and they seem to be sticking around and reading my other stuff in ways that make the experiment worthwhile.

  7. As a former content writer, you absolutely did the right thing. You’re logic and principles are spot on.

  8. Value for value. Giving away something that took serious effort to create is never a good idea. However, the currency that is generated by your efforts does not always need to translate directly into dollars. Exposure, great reach, notoriety, the potential for this to lead to something bigger (partnerships, ad revenue, etc) is definitely worth exploring. Only accepting money in trade for your hard work is limiting.

    If you entertained that offer and said “Sure, instead of dollars, let’s talk about other forms of payment,” what do you think would have happened? Would it have been absolutely horrible to accept the lowest form of payment, which in this case is their unique platform and reach? Don’t get me wrong, I like money…a lot. But I also like to build relationships that turn into something meaningful for everyone. Only accepting money in return and refusing their request/offer shuts that door and makes it more difficult to do future business with them.

    Just some food for thought.

  9. It’s important as ‘consumers’ to apply counterpressure, too. When we’re aware that businesses choose to not pay people, we shouldn’t click links (HuffPo), buy their products (Oreo), etc. One writer’s refusal matters less than losing eyeballs.

  10. I have to be honest; I probably would have jumped at the opportunity to hand over my work in exchange for the exposure. I’m new enough at all of this that it never would have crossed my mind to say no.

    Thanks for giving me a new way to look at it. Not that I really expect to have to make that choice any time in the near future, but this is a great reminder to treat myself and my work with respect.

  13. My wife and I are professional photographers and unfortunately we run into this all the time. We get requests every day to either use one of our photos or provide photography services free of charge for the “exposure” it will give us or to build our portfolio. Now if it is for a non-profit or a worthwhile charity organization we do consider it and donate a lot of our time and talent to such endeavors (Cheryl is photographing a live performance of Rocky Horror Saturday night which benefits a local historic theater in Nashville) it seems that a lot of people just don’t understand that all the fancy cameras and equipment costs money! Not to mention paying for a degree in commercial digital photography! Seems like anything digital automatically equates to free in most people’s minds nowadays. If the trend continues pretty soon there will be no one left to create all thus content we are taking for granted. And yes, I have fed the burrito in the past! If you enjoy it and it is worth something to you support the artist before it is too late!

    1. *this. And Wil, if you ever come across one of our photos you really like just let us know and we will be happy to provide it to you free of charge, as a trade for all the hours of entertainment you have provided us. Thanks!

  14. I agree with your need to be paid.
    However (uh oh…) on occasion, I have taken others blog posts without offering compensation and used them in my newsletter.
    One slight difference though… I don’t just take the content, put it in my site and pray for ad revenue…
    I will either suggest people read a blog I am quoting with a link to the authors original source material or I actually use the first lines of the blog with a … And link back to the original post.
    In doing this, yes I am using content for free… But I am not just saying “check out their site… If you read the content 8 am sending you eyes (and potentially your ad revenue) instead of monetizing it myself.
    I have always felt this fair… Is it or am I living in a world of misguided douchbaggery?

    I’d love opinions on this.

    1. Did you ask for, and receive permission for, taking the blog posts you’ve used? If so, then fairness doesn’t enter into it because the writer has agreed to the deal. You don’t mention permission however, and doing what you’ve done without it is not cool.

    2. Quoting a line from another publication can be considered “fair use,” but bear in mind that ultimately, fair use is in the eye of the beholder. You might think it’s fair use, but as a copyright owner I might disagree and send you a cease and desist or worse. The ultimate arbiter is a judge, if you are sued for copyright infringement. As for using other people’s material (the first lines of the blog) and representing it as your own, then linking back to the original, doing that without permission is incredibly uncool, and yes, misguided douchebaggery ensues.

      A newsletter ripped off an entire article from our old site – an article we PAID the writer for – and then claimed that since they gave the writer’s name, that should be sufficient for copyright. No. We sent a demand letter asking them to retract the piece or pay the writer. They did one, but not the other. Guess which one.

      Look up the Cooks Source controversy on Google, also.

      1. Exposure is an over used and over valued commodity…I have never found that I benefitted from “exposure” as I was generally not “Exposed” to my target audience. Working for free when starting out is more for the EXPERIENCE than the EXPOSURE. But at a certain point in your career you have to decide “Do I want to take time away from a paying job/contract or from my personal time to do this?” If the answer is not really, then don’t. If you have no income at the time, your career is fledgling, or the engagement is so prestigious you can’t say no…then do it! But, remember knowledge, experience, talent, and craft all have value…
        Will was taking about a paper he wrote that he posted…he needed no exposure you are correct.

  15. THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU for posting this. Creating is creating, and you put a lot of yourself in to it… people need to understand that doesn’t come for free.

    1. Exactly what I was thinking! Capitalism is certainly a foreign concept to HuffPo and their ilk. How dare Wil Wheaton be greedy and not give them what they want for free?!?! o_O

  17. Absolutely. This “working for free” (or exposure or reach) for big companies who can afford to pay is getting ridiculous. Don’t give your talents away to their profits and investors! We need to revamp this whole system from the bottom up.

  18. Years ago when I started being asked for the free usage of my photography, I asked for compensation. When I am told they can’t pay, I always ask for something as a trade…such as free advertising in their publication or in their email newsletter to their huge mailing list. If they have a product, then I ask for that. Sometimes it works!

    1. This is a wonderful wonderful video. I remember seeing it before, but it’s still awesome to see again.

  20. Welcome to the club! I’ve been a freelance games journalist, columnist and translator for a few years now and it’s becoming increasingly difficult to get fair pay for my work. “Exposure” does pretty much nothing, except attract even more people who ask you to do create content for next to (or in fact absolutely) nothing. It boggles the mind how so many magazines and websites out there aren’t really willing to spend anything on what’s supposed to keep them going and what should attract readers – freaking content!

    The sad thing is, you can tell them no, you can refuse to just give your stuff away for free, but they’ll always find somebody else who will give them what they want in exchange for nothing but the proverbial 15 minutes of fame. Sure, they may not be incredibly talented or interesting, they might not spend as much time on their research, but that’s why everyone uses Google-optimized clickbait headlines and truckloads of flashy banner ads instead of quality articles. They’ll get the traffic one way or another. And you get nothing.

  21. What I took from this might be of a different take – so if I wanted the exposure and I approached Huff Post they would charge me to advertise on their site. But if they approach me about using my work to help them gain exposure they don’t have to pay.

    Regardless of any budget issues – what we need to understand is that it is always a two way street. You get what you want because you are willing to pay for it. The logic of “you scratch my back – I scratch yours” gets you nothing in return.

    If there was value in the “exposure” you would receive there should be a corresponding dollar value with that.

  22. It’s the principle of it. As a published author, I wouldn’t do it for them either. I did write an essay for free earlier this year for a local publisher, but it was for an anthology with all the profits going to a local Leader Dogs For the Blind organization. That made the difference in my head. For Huffington Post? No, thank you.

  23. Same people that complain the Internet is killing business, due to theft, are trying to get people to give them free content to sell. They would have advertisers on their re-post of your page. Would you get any of that click-through? Nope.

  24. I completely agree. Being a small press, we work a lot with drama students at the U of C for our audio books. One of the girls we work with told me they get a number of people/companies approach them to do free work saying, “We won’t pay anything, but it will be good experience.” Admittedly we don’t pay a lot, nowhere near scale, but the fact we do pay the students something is appreciated.

  26. Unfortunately I’ve been on both ends of this dialogue: asking someone to “donate” their talents for the “exposure” and being asked to do the same myself. In a few instances I’ve seen some convince others to donate their talents, only to turnaround and pocket the proceeds from the event themselves while the artists leaves without a days wages. But really, who’s to blame? From my perspective, too many artists diminish or discount their own talent (product). And as long as there’s someone willing to work for free or dirt cheap, those who control these “unique platforms” won’t hesitate to take advantage. In the end, all artists suffer (and not the good creatively inspiring suffering)

  27. This also applies to Consultants/ Subject Matter Experts who get asked to speak at events. Most of these events charge attendees a small fortune to attend and are quite profitable. But part of the reason their profits are so good is that they invite speakers to participate free of charge. That is like paying several hundred dollars to see JZ in concert and then not paying JZ for his talent. I personally enjoy speaking engagements, and from reviews I have received I offer value to the participants. It takes me several hours, often several days, to pull a top notch presentation together…why would I do this for nothing? The only exception to this is for charitable organizations, although I always invoice them I write-off my fee as a charitable donation….if you have a product or service that has value you should be compensated for it, period. Thank-you Mr. Wheaton for taking a stand and then publicly explaining it so that all understand your perspective. Well done!

  28. Good on you, Wil, and thank you for using your stature to draw attention to the issue. Sites like Huffington Post make the fortunes they do expressly because they capitalize on content written by uncompensated people gulled in by the promise of “exposure.” (As if YOU need exposure!) My blog was contacted by a major company a few years ago to be included in the database of one of their apps. They tried the same “exposure” enticement on me and were a bit less than enthusiastic when I inserted a payment formula into the standard contract they wanted me to sign. After having some fun back and forth with the legal types, I turned them down because they wouldn’t budge on the money. Affiliation with a known brand isn’t worth signing my work over to a corporation that could use my content in any way they saw fit, even if they so kindly permitted me to retain ownership of my own work.

  29. I got something worse, this company wanted me to submit my artwork for free, then there’s an “inclusion” fee.

    Check out the email I received, and my response.

    Email:

    “In the prestigious publications

    International Contemporary Masters

    and

    Current Masters

    Annual juried art books presenting noteworthy artists and photographers from all over the world.

    Please note that there is an inclusion fee if you are approved.

    In publication now for over 12 years, the books have a large distribution, primarily to a select readership of galleries, art dealers, collectors, interior designers, architects, consultants, art directors and other art professionals.

    Only artists who are up to the standards of the selection committee are approved.”

    My response:

    I find it insulting that there’s an “inclusion fee”.
    Without our work, you have zero content for the book.
    Not only are the artists involved not getting financially compensated, but you’re going to charge a fee? That’s laughable.
    What a great way to take advantage of artists.
    I hope your book fails miserably.

    Ben K.

  30. HuffPo is notorious for not paying freelancers, with the enticement that “exposure” has some sort of value. Since they are now under the flush umbrella of AOL, there’s no excuse not to pay for freelance contributions. As a freelance photographer/writer for over 15 years, I have yet to have “exposure” translate into paying work. Except for the occasional pro bono contribution to non-profits, I stopped doing this years ago. Expecting photos and writing for free has become rampant on the internet because so people are stupid enough to give away their work for nothing. I’m not one of them, and I’m glad to see I’m not alone. Thanks for taking a stand.

  31. Typical of their mentality. You are considered one of the elite due to your fame. You shouldn’t expect payment. You should feel obligated to do it for free because you’re famous (which automatically equates to fabulously wealthy, in their minds) and you’d be taking away from their ability to donate (our give free coverage) to their favorite democratic candidate. How dare you.LOL

  32. Thanks for sharing Wil. As a relatively new blogger, much of my content is reposted for free at the moment. But as I have been approached more frequently to either repost or write original content, I have wondered about compensation. Most places in my niche do not compensate, but some have offered. I asked around, and my professional writing friends indicate that the rate is about a dollar a word (or was a few years ago, can go up from there)–there is your estimate.

    And look for me in behindthemaskmd.com!

    1. $1/word is an achieveable rate for a bigger publication, if you’re already an established writer, particularly in print. you’d be very hard-pressed to find that in online publications and almost certainly will not get that from blogs.

  36. I’ve chosen to make many songs I’ve written and a huge number of photographs I’ve taken available for free and they are STILL in an obscure corner of the internet. But that was my call. You ABSOLUTELY did the right thing by holding out for payment.

  38. Just for the record…nobody FORCES anyone to use HuffPo as a platform for reaching millions of people with one’s voice, and they all sign up knowing it’s unpaid. Compare this: When people set up a WordPress to blog, they don’t get paid either, and their audiences are smaller. So really, it’s not like HuffPo is enslaving writers or anything…to the contrary, for those without a fan following or famous name like Will Wheaton (like my wife, she’s a HuffPo blogger on the topic of our transgender son), HuffPo offers an easy path to speak to the masses And those who find an audience on HuffPo may be able to monetize it by driving more readers to ad-supported blogs, etc.

    So yes, they should pay my wife because we like money, but I don’t think it’s some horrid system either. Mr. Wheaton, we’re all free to pursue payment, but many simply won’t find it, and silencing our voices if we don’t get paid is not what we all seek when we speak to the world with our blogs.

    Thank you Arianna for giving my wife a global platform for her blog!

  40. I work for Addicting Info, LLC. For those unaware, it is a political site similar to Huffington Post, not as big, but still sizable. We run three different websites, Addicting Info, If You Only News, and Reverb Press, each one targeting a specific audience. When Addicting Info began, it caused a lot of waves among the blogosphere, caused a lot of resentment, earned a lot of enemies. The reason why? Because they paid people to write for them. Not a huge amount (I earned a bit over $8k from writing several hundred pieces for them last year, for example), but something. What AI does is give our writers a cut of the advertising revenue our content generates. And because our writers were paid, unlike those of Huffington Post, we gained a lot of flack from other blogs and news aggregators.

    There is a general view that writers bring no value, that they are a dime a dozen. There is also a view that people who write should do so because they love it, and expect nothing in return for it. I have had other writers who work for other sites accuse me of being a sell out, a poseur, a fake, all because I pull in that ad revenue check every month. Unless you’re just this side of starvation, the general idea seems to be that you’re not in it for anything but the paycheck.

    I write because I love it. My first book sold all of three paper copies, no joke. You’d think that would discourage me, but instead I am in the final editing stages of my next book right now. Writing is my passion, telling people about the world around them, introducing them to new ideas and concepts, be it writing for a news site, writing a guide to new rocket for a NASA fan website, or writing screenplays and teleplays. Just me, a typewriter, and a universe of possibilities!

  41. I work for a blog that grosses roughly $120,000 a year. I am compensated $50/page for copy, as well as additional payment for sale content. I get paid enough from sales content that I in turn compensate people who contribute – usually $300 or so for permission to use a song or something like that. The fact that Huffington Post can’t pay is bullshit. Beyond bullshit.

  42. I don’t agree with you a lot. But I do agree with you 100% on this. I used to do a lot of volunteer work on political and social campaigns until I realized the folks running this stuff were driving $75,000 cars and wearing $2000 suits while the volunteers and donors were poor.

  43. I had no idea that Huff Post didn’t pay for content. You did the right thing obviously. I have friends that are musicians and they get the “exposure” training a lot. They demure.

  44. Many many bloggers make money pushing people to their site on advertising etc. For those people exposure is all they want because that is how they make money probably more than Huffington would have paid them and why they began blogging in the first place.

    1. How much money do you think blogs make from advertising clicks? Only a tiny fraction of the millions of blogs make more than ten dollars a month from advertising clicks. If you blog, you need to love your subject matter and can’t be concerned about compensation. Ad clicks on a blog will not pay your rent. I think of my blog as an online conversation more than about generating revenue. (I know there are the ‘experts’ who sell 20 page kindle books, who might disagree with me.)

  46. The bottom line is this: Somebody’s getting paid for the traffic you will generate or they wouldn’t be doing it. Paying everyone that works on the site except the creators of the articles that drive the traffic makes no sense at all.

  47. The problem is….. most people are more interested in being famous…..than being rich!!! If they can be whores to the man, the lowest common denominator will somehow pay them for their attention. This is everything I hate about the “reality TV” society we live in. “Become famous at ANY cost!”
    Thank you @wilw., for taking a stand and trying to reverse the “trend”!

  49. I am fully in agreement with this. I’m a Christian Music Blogger, and typically, I will not even post a youtube link that is free for all to use without owning the song myself. This is not a hard and fast rule of mine, but I believe that fair is fair. For one up and coming artist out of Australia, I bought a song for 3 times it’s value on bandcamp because I want to do my part to encourage her work. A Company as wealthy as Huff Post should be ashamed of themselves.

Comments are closed.