CANADIAN NOVELIST Russell Smith had a thought-provoking column in the Globe and Mail a few weeks back examining the growing tendency these days for young creative people, writers in particular, to work for free.
The spur for the discussion was (surprise surprise) the recent launch of the Canadian arm of the Huffington Post, which Smith dubs “that unapologetic exploiter of eager, clever people.” He notes that the HuffPo, which doesn’t pay its writers, is being sued south of the border by a group of ex-contributors who “are keenly aware that the online magazine was recently sold to AOL for $315-million.”
The matter has prompted heated debate in both countries about the difference between “canny self promotion and slave labour,” Smith writes. He continues:
The two sides are neatly divided by generation. Older writers, who have made a living from selling journalism, ghostwriting and corporate writing and who see their writing as a product with a quantifiable monetary value, are horrified that anyone would collaborate with the HuffPo, the Mordor of magazines. It’s not a start-up run by ambitious recent graduates, not an environmental or human-rights project, not a good cause of any kind, but the cash-cow possession of a giant media conglomerate. There is no question that the HuffPo can afford to pay, and pay well. You’d think it would be an easy target for a concerted boycott by Canadian writers.
But a recent graduate would say: It’s great for my career to publish (which is exactly what HuffPo says). I can publish an opinion piece, basically a blog entry, say anything I want, not be subject to rigorous editing or have to do any difficult research, and then I have something to my name. I’m building my brand. This will be good for me when I send my completed book of essays to an e-publisher, or when I go to investors to look for money to start my own online magazine (that I will then sell to AOL for a zillion jillion dollars).
Smith acknowledges that times have changed, and that older writers came of age in an era when there were limited outlets for their work, and as such, most were profitable; and making your mark was easier. Young writers today tend to wonder, “How are we supposed to get our voices known in an infinitely wider and more crowded room unless we speak loudly and often? We can’t afford to wait to be paid for it.”
The younger generation often doesn’t expect to be compensated for their imaginative work, Smith says, but maybe that’s not their primary concern. They’d rather have the exposure that a hugely popular site like HuffPo can provide. “They can get famous fast this way, and it’s gratifying to have a huge audience,” he writes.
What’s more, these writers can sound off on whatever topic they wish, and, unlike old-school young journalists, today’s aspiring scribes “never have to prove themselves by chasing down police radio calls on the night shift, or by writing a dozen numbing profiles on local hair-salon owners. They can go right into wise observations on Iraq and gender roles.”
Perhaps it is true that for today’s young writers, having a prominent place to share their thoughts and views is more important than making money. And fair enough. Problem is, they’re not operating in a vacuum. As Smith notes, their willingness to work for free stands to hurt the old farts. “If they don’t play along in the work-for-pay convention, then all of our incomes are undercut.”
Sadly, the argument that you get what you pay for becomes far less compelling when sites like the Huffington Post can make hundreds of millions on the backs of an army of narcissistic young slave labourers.
