Who Pays Writers?(whopayswriters.com)
whopayswriters.com
Who Pays Writers?
http://whopayswriters.com/#/results
11 comments
Shameless plug: We do the exact same thing on https://scotch.io [1].
* Publish near instantly through our writing portal called "The Pub" [2] or https://pub.scotch.io. We might open this up to other blogs one day too.
* Write with our easy-cake custom markdown editor.
* Your name and profile always stays associated with the post.
* You can write about almost anything web dev related for our "Tutorial" category [3].
* You can write about almost anything tech/dev scene related for "Bar Talk" category [4].
* Get tweeted with your handle by our Twitter account 40k+ followers, go through our RSS feed, and get in front of our 1-2MM monthly visitors
* Also, if you don't like ads but our writing tools, you can optionally host it on our site for free without ads in the community section.
Two of our guest authors got their current well-paying jobs through their posts. Not a bad way to show off your skills (obviously I'm biased though).
[1]: https://scotch.io
[2]: https://pub.scotch.io
[3]: https://scotch.io/tutorials
[4]: https://scotch.io/bar-talk
* Publish near instantly through our writing portal called "The Pub" [2] or https://pub.scotch.io. We might open this up to other blogs one day too.
* Write with our easy-cake custom markdown editor.
* Your name and profile always stays associated with the post.
* You can write about almost anything web dev related for our "Tutorial" category [3].
* You can write about almost anything tech/dev scene related for "Bar Talk" category [4].
* Get tweeted with your handle by our Twitter account 40k+ followers, go through our RSS feed, and get in front of our 1-2MM monthly visitors
* Also, if you don't like ads but our writing tools, you can optionally host it on our site for free without ads in the community section.
Two of our guest authors got their current well-paying jobs through their posts. Not a bad way to show off your skills (obviously I'm biased though).
[1]: https://scotch.io
[2]: https://pub.scotch.io
[3]: https://scotch.io/tutorials
[4]: https://scotch.io/bar-talk
Of the three featured posts I was shown on pub.scotch.io, two were get-rich-quick spam. I wouldn't want my name associated with that sort of thing.
http://i.imgur.com/HtrNbX5.png
http://i.imgur.com/HtrNbX5.png
> Also, if you don't like ads but our writing tools, you can optionally host it on our site for free without ads in the community section.
From https://pub.scotch.io/ideas:
> "Sometimes we just feel an article isn't a good fit for our readers."
Is there a way to submit a topic for an article for review without going through the trouble to submit the entire article? I'd hate to write an article that seems interesting to me but doesn't match Scotch's intended audience.
From https://pub.scotch.io/ideas:
> "Sometimes we just feel an article isn't a good fit for our readers."
Is there a way to submit a topic for an article for review without going through the trouble to submit the entire article? I'd hate to write an article that seems interesting to me but doesn't match Scotch's intended audience.
Definitely (that would blow and be a waste of time for everyone). Our FAQ [1] outlines that. Basically you have two options:
1. Email us at [email protected] first
2. Submit just the outline of the post for review as a normal post with comments at the top. We'll see it's just an outline and be able to provide feedback
We've been working with guest writers for well over a year now and really try to work with everyone as best we can. I would say almost all our writers have had a good experience with us.
You can imagine though that some of the post people want to write are really not fit at all for scotch.io (we have no choice but to maintain some sort of general theme and quality control). That's also why you can publish instantly whatever you want (well written, poorly written, on cats, tech, ice cream, whatever) to The Pub's community post section.
We just launched The Pub like a month or so ago to streamline guest writings, so any feedback is super welcome.
[1]: https://pub.scotch.io/faq
1. Email us at [email protected] first
2. Submit just the outline of the post for review as a normal post with comments at the top. We'll see it's just an outline and be able to provide feedback
We've been working with guest writers for well over a year now and really try to work with everyone as best we can. I would say almost all our writers have had a good experience with us.
You can imagine though that some of the post people want to write are really not fit at all for scotch.io (we have no choice but to maintain some sort of general theme and quality control). That's also why you can publish instantly whatever you want (well written, poorly written, on cats, tech, ice cream, whatever) to The Pub's community post section.
We just launched The Pub like a month or so ago to streamline guest writings, so any feedback is super welcome.
[1]: https://pub.scotch.io/faq
Similarly, Exoscale (Swiss cloud hosting firm) are paying writers on tech subjects. Again, it's for a tutorial that solves a real-world problem but also for introductory pieces designed to get someone new acquainted with a subject.
As a developer how would I get into technical writing like this? Start writing a tutorial and send it to them?
In many cases, a good place to start would be various online community-oriented sites that accept contributions from outside writers and have editors. They won't typically pay, but they'll give you experience and help you build up a portfolio that will be useful if you want to start doing this sort of thing more systematically.
"For example DigitalOcean pays $200 per 1500ish"
Most professional writers/reporters would consider that a terrible wage.
Most professional writers/reporters would consider that a terrible wage.
Speaking as a professional writer who covers technology and business, that's awful. If you want to write to have something to add to your programmer resume, go for it. Everyone else, just say no.
I would actually blog for tech companies on occasion if they were willing to pay 5 - 10k per post. It seems like companies are only willing to pay for very cookie cutter stuff though.
Generally speaking, unless the writer/organization (e.g. analyst firm) is a "name," companies are mostly looking for relatively vanilla straightforward content to educate users, keep eyeballs coming back to the company's site, etc. And because this is relatively commodity stuff, companies don't pay a lot for it.
I understand the economics. But if you look at firms like USV, you'd have to imagine that the dealflow from Fred & Albert's blog/twitter is worth at least $1,000 per hour. So it's not like the opportunity to create valuable permission assets doesn't exist in the marketplace, it's just that companies aren't willing or (more likely) able to invest in capturing those. This seems like a possible market failure to me.
There are actually tons of examples in that general vein. For example, CEOs regularly write books that their companies use as marketing tools because they're believed to (at least indirectly) bring in sales by positioning the company as a thought leader in some way. "Advertising Value Equivalent" is even used as a marketing metric for such things whether or not it's a good one.
But that doesn't mean that this can be replicated by just having a freelancer pretend to be writing as the CEO. (Though PR folks, editors, etc. help with such projects.) And even when books are largely ghost written for celebrities and such, the ghost writer is still just going to collect a fairly modest word rate.
But that doesn't mean that this can be replicated by just having a freelancer pretend to be writing as the CEO. (Though PR folks, editors, etc. help with such projects.) And even when books are largely ghost written for celebrities and such, the ghost writer is still just going to collect a fairly modest word rate.
> But that doesn't mean that this can be replicated by just having a freelancer pretend to be writing as the CEO.
The freelancers can just write under their own names. Mathematically, people who can create substantial value by creating high-end content who are also CEOs must logically be a subset of the total population of folks who can create valuable high-end content. So you would expect at least some market for high-end content creation, but nothing like that actually exists.
Right now there are a handful of individuals who have landed one-off gigs doing this, but there isn't any sort of marketplace.
The freelancers can just write under their own names. Mathematically, people who can create substantial value by creating high-end content who are also CEOs must logically be a subset of the total population of folks who can create valuable high-end content. So you would expect at least some market for high-end content creation, but nothing like that actually exists.
Right now there are a handful of individuals who have landed one-off gigs doing this, but there isn't any sort of marketplace.
>So you would expect at least some market for high-end content creation, but nothing like that actually exists.
There is. It mostly exists in the form of subscription newsletters and paid research reports of various types. Specific examples include subscriptions to IT industry analysts such as Gartner. (Typically subscriptions include personalized services in addition to reports.)
In general, this has become a much tougher gig outside of a handful of large firms--because of all the competition with free content.
There is. It mostly exists in the form of subscription newsletters and paid research reports of various types. Specific examples include subscriptions to IT industry analysts such as Gartner. (Typically subscriptions include personalized services in addition to reports.)
In general, this has become a much tougher gig outside of a handful of large firms--because of all the competition with free content.
maybe you should start a blog and capitalize on all this inefficiency.
I already run a publishing platform that allows folks to turn email conversations into blog posts, the idea being to get the same benefits as blogging but with 10x less work. E.g. here is something that was just published today:
https://www.fwdeveryone.com/t/ZxGZJm44TYa8DhcU0UAeGg/react-a...
https://www.fwdeveryone.com/t/ZxGZJm44TYa8DhcU0UAeGg/react-a...
5-10K per post?
That's what companies pay for a finished small-medium scale coding project.
That's what companies pay for a finished small-medium scale coding project.
> That's what companies pay for a finished small-medium scale coding project.
It's also substantially less than the 15 - 20k that people pay to make a two-minute startup demo video. Is there something about writing that makes it fundamentally less valuable?
E.g. look at that guy who was shorting Lumber Liquidators due to the toxic materials issue. That ended up blowing up anyway, but would you claim that if he had paid someone a couple hundred grand to create really compelling content around that issue (think Groklaw) that he would have been unlikely to see a good return?
It's also substantially less than the 15 - 20k that people pay to make a two-minute startup demo video. Is there something about writing that makes it fundamentally less valuable?
E.g. look at that guy who was shorting Lumber Liquidators due to the toxic materials issue. That ended up blowing up anyway, but would you claim that if he had paid someone a couple hundred grand to create really compelling content around that issue (think Groklaw) that he would have been unlikely to see a good return?
>Is there something about writing that makes it fundamentally less valuable?
For one, the logistics involved are infinitely simpler than for the video, which needs a team of at least 3 and usually 5 to 10 people, plus expensive equipment, props, a script, voice over talent and more.
Second, way more people can write decently than produce a decent startup video. Supply vs demand, etc.
Third, nobody much cares for a piece of writing. A two-minute startup demo video can catch millions of eyeballs. A writing will mostly go unnoticed.
Seriously, I've written for some media outlets and did some technical copy for a few companies. If you think you can get anything like $5K per piece, you're in for a very big surprise.
>E.g. look at that guy who was shorting Lumber Liquidators due to the toxic materials issue. That ended up blowing up anyway, but would you claim that if he had paid someone a couple hundred grand to create really compelling content around that issue (think Groklaw) that he would have been unlikely to see a good return?
He'd pay people "a couple hundred grand to create really compelling content"? Are you in ANY job market currently?
That's of the scale of the whole advance for a very popular book author (think NYT Best Seller list level, and not even all of them) -- not copy writers kind of money by any means.
For one, the logistics involved are infinitely simpler than for the video, which needs a team of at least 3 and usually 5 to 10 people, plus expensive equipment, props, a script, voice over talent and more.
Second, way more people can write decently than produce a decent startup video. Supply vs demand, etc.
Third, nobody much cares for a piece of writing. A two-minute startup demo video can catch millions of eyeballs. A writing will mostly go unnoticed.
Seriously, I've written for some media outlets and did some technical copy for a few companies. If you think you can get anything like $5K per piece, you're in for a very big surprise.
>E.g. look at that guy who was shorting Lumber Liquidators due to the toxic materials issue. That ended up blowing up anyway, but would you claim that if he had paid someone a couple hundred grand to create really compelling content around that issue (think Groklaw) that he would have been unlikely to see a good return?
He'd pay people "a couple hundred grand to create really compelling content"? Are you in ANY job market currently?
That's of the scale of the whole advance for a very popular book author (think NYT Best Seller list level, and not even all of them) -- not copy writers kind of money by any means.
> Are you in ANY job market currently?
Nope, working on my startup. When working as a consultant though I usually look at how much what I'm going to do is going to increase the paper valuation of the company, and then target making 10 - 15% of that as cash. That way the employer gets 85-90% of the upside, but they're also the one bearing the risk since there might not be any future payout.
Nope, working on my startup. When working as a consultant though I usually look at how much what I'm going to do is going to increase the paper valuation of the company, and then target making 10 - 15% of that as cash. That way the employer gets 85-90% of the upside, but they're also the one bearing the risk since there might not be any future payout.
No one, but no one, pays anything like that much.
Well, they pay that much for white papers. Which generally are 8000-10,000 words, so not a blog post.
Whitepapers are generally shorter than that. Our internal guidelines are about 2500 to 3000 words. They'll sometimes creep up to 4K words or so but that's pretty much the upper limit. (A blog post will typically be under 1K words.)
However, when you get into the $10K-20K price for whitepapers, you're usually not just hiring a writer. You're typically paying in part for a research firm's reputation and, possibly data.
I'm not sure how much we pay for straight writing under our logo. But it would be significantly less unless it came as part of a package with advertising etc. as deals through online news channels often do.
However, when you get into the $10K-20K price for whitepapers, you're usually not just hiring a writer. You're typically paying in part for a research firm's reputation and, possibly data.
I'm not sure how much we pay for straight writing under our logo. But it would be significantly less unless it came as part of a package with advertising etc. as deals through online news channels often do.
White papers traditionally can be almost any length. I've written some that are 3 pages long, others that are 15-20 pages. Each with variation in technical information, ranging from "Here's what's important to know in this knowledge domain" to documentation of a proprietary programming language.
While some of these are written by analyst firms, quite a few are not. They're work-for-hire, often by techies or journalists who know the area in great depth, and who can ask the in-house experts the right questions and turn those answers into something genuinely useful. (Well, when they're good. Mine are good. :-) )
While some of these are written by analyst firms, quite a few are not. They're work-for-hire, often by techies or journalists who know the area in great depth, and who can ask the in-house experts the right questions and turn those answers into something genuinely useful. (Well, when they're good. Mine are good. :-) )
>to documentation of a proprietary programming language.
We're probably just quibbling over terminology. The people I know use whitepapers to mean more business-oriented, less vendor-specific thought leadership pieces. And use other terms for technical deep dives--which can indeed be longer.
We're probably just quibbling over terminology. The people I know use whitepapers to mean more business-oriented, less vendor-specific thought leadership pieces. And use other terms for technical deep dives--which can indeed be longer.
I suppose we are. ::smile::
White papers are an entirely different kettle of fish. There you can get paid five-figures, but it's a much higher work load.
I think 100/200 is pretty reasonable. Plenty of news site don't even pay their writers.
that's pretty crazy. There's hardly a post you couldn't write in a day of hard work (because then it's too long! spend one day writing it, so someone can spend 20 minutes reading it, don't make readers take hours to read through months of your writing.)
So you want a monthly salary of 5k (your low end per day) * 24 days = 120k per month?
So you want a monthly salary of 5k (your low end per day) * 24 days = 120k per month?
> There's hardly a post you couldn't write in a day of hard work
I get paid a very high rate to edit and clean up articles written by techies who have this viewpoint.
When you are imparting technical knowledge that you know conceptually, it's easy to just jot down a few thoughts. They make sense to _you_, after all. But in most cases, experts don't recognize the assumptions that a reader might have, such as "what this is" and "why it's important." Like writing code, there's a difference between "make it work (at least the compiler doesn't crash)" and "make it wonderful." That's just the same for writing.
Personally, when I write in-depth articles, I spend a minimum of three days on it. It usually includes researching the topic, interviewing other people who know something about it (or wish they did), and writing the prose. Then I edit the prose. And I edit it again. Because I do my best to be clear and understandable, and to leave out the parts that people skip.
I get paid a very high rate to edit and clean up articles written by techies who have this viewpoint.
When you are imparting technical knowledge that you know conceptually, it's easy to just jot down a few thoughts. They make sense to _you_, after all. But in most cases, experts don't recognize the assumptions that a reader might have, such as "what this is" and "why it's important." Like writing code, there's a difference between "make it work (at least the compiler doesn't crash)" and "make it wonderful." That's just the same for writing.
Personally, when I write in-depth articles, I spend a minimum of three days on it. It usually includes researching the topic, interviewing other people who know something about it (or wish they did), and writing the prose. Then I edit the prose. And I edit it again. Because I do my best to be clear and understandable, and to leave out the parts that people skip.
this is interesting. could you give me a link to the kind of post you're talking about? If you don't want to link here you can also email me at the address in my profile.
Here's one example -- though I could give you hundreds.
Object Storage versus Block Storage: Understanding the Technology Differences: http://www.druva.com/blog/object-storage-versus-block-storag...
The authors really know their stuff. They spent that "just a day" writing down what they wanted to say. I spent two full days editing it for readability, querying them about technical details ("I'm not sure what you meant when you said... Could you clarify this point?"), and ultimately making them incredibly proud of the result. (Which was very popular in terms of pageviews, because it's good and useful data.) It still was their voice and their expertise; I was there to help them get the message across.
A good editor is like a good hairdresser. When she is done and you look in the mirror, you aren't surprised. But you think, "Yeah, that's what I WANT to look like!"
I'm paid a lot. I'm worth it.
Object Storage versus Block Storage: Understanding the Technology Differences: http://www.druva.com/blog/object-storage-versus-block-storag...
The authors really know their stuff. They spent that "just a day" writing down what they wanted to say. I spent two full days editing it for readability, querying them about technical details ("I'm not sure what you meant when you said... Could you clarify this point?"), and ultimately making them incredibly proud of the result. (Which was very popular in terms of pageviews, because it's good and useful data.) It still was their voice and their expertise; I was there to help them get the message across.
A good editor is like a good hairdresser. When she is done and you look in the mirror, you aren't surprised. But you think, "Yeah, that's what I WANT to look like!"
I'm paid a lot. I'm worth it.
If there is research involved, each sentence or paragraph could easily take an entire day. E.g. a couple years ago I wrote a post about deaths caused by drug use/misuse, and just getting an idea of how many deaths are caused by smoking involved reading through several chapters of the Surgeon General's most-recent 800 page report. So I figure more like one post every 50 - 150 hours, for something 2,500 - 6,000 words in length.
That said, even a monthly salary of 100k+ per month isn't completely crazy given that there are magazines that cost 100k per year to subscribe to, with dozens or hundreds of corporate subscribers. That's obviously not the market that most tech companies are going after, but there is precedent there in general.
That said, even a monthly salary of 100k+ per month isn't completely crazy given that there are magazines that cost 100k per year to subscribe to, with dozens or hundreds of corporate subscribers. That's obviously not the market that most tech companies are going after, but there is precedent there in general.
Nobody makes a salary of 100k per month. That is $1.2 million per year. The CEO of IBM, a company that had revenues of $80 billion in 2015, made salary of $1.6 million in 2015.[1] If you want to include stock or options or a revenue share or bonuses or whatever go ahead - but that's not salary and your figures are completely, utterly ridiculous.
>That said, even a monthly salary of 100k+ per month isn't completely crazy
yes it is.
[1] http://www.businessinsider.com/ibm-ceo-ginni-rometty-gets-a-...
>That said, even a monthly salary of 100k+ per month isn't completely crazy
yes it is.
[1] http://www.businessinsider.com/ibm-ceo-ginni-rometty-gets-a-...
>Nobody makes a salary of 100k per month. That is $1.2 million per year. The CEO of IBM, a company that had revenues of $80 billion in 2015, made salary of $1.6 million in 2015.
Actually lots of people do. In TV, for example, even for a small European countries, such as that I know of, you can make like $500K per year if you're one of the 20-30 "stars" of the various network channels (head presenter, show host etc).
In the US: "In the depths of the recession in 2009, there were still 236,883 individuals who earned more than $1,000,000 in the United States. We know from other research that, by rough estimates, 90 out of 100 men and women reaching this income level are self-made with little to no inheritance. Almost all have college degrees. Men dominate the field, and almost all own or started their own business or work as an executive for a large business".
I wouldn't call 230,000 people "nobody".
Actually lots of people do. In TV, for example, even for a small European countries, such as that I know of, you can make like $500K per year if you're one of the 20-30 "stars" of the various network channels (head presenter, show host etc).
In the US: "In the depths of the recession in 2009, there were still 236,883 individuals who earned more than $1,000,000 in the United States. We know from other research that, by rough estimates, 90 out of 100 men and women reaching this income level are self-made with little to no inheritance. Almost all have college degrees. Men dominate the field, and almost all own or started their own business or work as an executive for a large business".
I wouldn't call 230,000 people "nobody".
In the US news business, $100k/month is strictly the domain of TV on-screen personality presenters; i.e., not the reporters, but network affiliate anchors who are referred to in-house as 'the talent'. Absurd sums of money when you look at the rest of the newsroom staff salaries, but this is all about ratings, sweeps and very local/regional popularity.
> Nobody makes a salary of 100k per month.
The founder of the last startup I worked at made 100k per month and wasn't even the CEO, and that was pre-product and pre-revenue. He just raised a bunch of money on a pitch deck.
I'm definitely not saying that's common, but it's not unheard of either. Inside Silicon Valley there's a tightly prescribed set of norms that tend to be followed, but outside of there money tends to change hands a lot more quickly and fluidly. That's the benefit of being in a place like NYC, because people tend to be motivated more by self-interest rather than by trying to look cool or fit in, so it's a lot easier to pitch folks on stuff if you find a novel but rational opportunity.
The founder of the last startup I worked at made 100k per month and wasn't even the CEO, and that was pre-product and pre-revenue. He just raised a bunch of money on a pitch deck.
I'm definitely not saying that's common, but it's not unheard of either. Inside Silicon Valley there's a tightly prescribed set of norms that tend to be followed, but outside of there money tends to change hands a lot more quickly and fluidly. That's the benefit of being in a place like NYC, because people tend to be motivated more by self-interest rather than by trying to look cool or fit in, so it's a lot easier to pitch folks on stuff if you find a novel but rational opportunity.
I find it very hard to believe that was a a base salary. (Of course, I could be wrong.)
Of course it's possible to make a lot more than that! Just not as a salary. It would be interesting to know the details of their package. Also, how come you happened to know?
Of course it's possible to make a lot more than that! Just not as a salary. It would be interesting to know the details of their package. Also, how come you happened to know?
I know because it was publicly traded. (They raised a bunch of money and then bought a shell company.)
That wasn't the exact base salary, but that was basically total compensation not including stock. (So including a few hundred thousand dollars per year in an expense account and an additional couple hundred thousand for serving on the board.)
That wasn't the exact base salary, but that was basically total compensation not including stock. (So including a few hundred thousand dollars per year in an expense account and an additional couple hundred thousand for serving on the board.)
[deleted]
"If there is research involved, each sentence or paragraph could easily take an entire day." That's not how writers or the publishing business works. Presuming you made real-world top dollar, $2.00 a word, your $12,000 dollar article would bring you $40 an hour. Odds are you'll actually make a buck a word, so you're already down to $20 an hour. You can dream of a world where writers make 100K a month from projects like this, but with 30 years in the business I don't know anyone even close to that.
> You can dream of a world where writers make 100K a month from projects like this, but with 30 years in the business I don't know anyone even close to that.
I've never been, but if you go to some of the big leadgen conferences then I suspect that you'd meet or at least hear about a lot of folks like this.
I've never been, but if you go to some of the big leadgen conferences then I suspect that you'd meet or at least hear about a lot of folks like this.
>If there is research involved, each sentence or paragraph could easily take an entire day. E.g. a couple years ago I wrote a post about deaths caused by drug use/misuse, and just getting an idea of how many deaths are caused by smoking involved reading through several chapters of the Surgeon General's most-recent 800 page report.
Journalists for established media do all that (and more) as part of getting the facts for their articles, and still take in something like $2-$3 per month or less.
Journalists for established media do all that (and more) as part of getting the facts for their articles, and still take in something like $2-$3 per month or less.
At my peak as a free lance tech writer for various computer magazines, I was making .40/word. That was pretty high on the scale for freelancers. And since then the bottom has dropped out of the market since print articles are largely dead.
Well, no, that is _not_ high on the scale for freelancers. Far from it.
Compared to many of the writers for the stable of publications I wrote for, it was at the higher end. Perhaps a named writer could pull more in at a better publication, but this was a very frugal and profitable (for awhile at least) group of magazines.
I realize "its the web" is a thing but back when I was doing freelance writing for tech magazines I found the Writers Market[1] very handy. For print publications it had print calendars and editorial descriptions of what they liked to publish. I've not bought one since the rise of web journalism but I expect there are resources out there which have this info.
[1] http://www.amazon.com/Writers-Market-2016-Trusted-Published/...
[1] http://www.amazon.com/Writers-Market-2016-Trusted-Published/...
This is pretty much old hat. Duotrope[1] is one of the larger market listings. There was a big huff after they turned to a subscription model, which led to the creation or expansion of The Grinder[2].
At Aliterate[3] we've seen about 25% of our inbound submissions coming from each of The Grinder and Ralan[4]. The balance is some mix of Duotrope and smaller players.
[1] https://duotrope.com/
[2] http://thegrinder.diabolicalplots.com/
[3] https://www.aliterate.org
[4] http://ralan.com/
At Aliterate[3] we've seen about 25% of our inbound submissions coming from each of The Grinder and Ralan[4]. The balance is some mix of Duotrope and smaller players.
[1] https://duotrope.com/
[2] http://thegrinder.diabolicalplots.com/
[3] https://www.aliterate.org
[4] http://ralan.com/
What's amazing is the variance, even within one publication. Businessweek, for example, pays anywhere from $0.08 to $1.75 per word, which I assume depends on a writer's fame, relationships and maybe even writing skills. ;) Other key considerations, which this site can't really address, are who has a budget for freelancers, and when do they have that budget? Many publications have a yearly budget and by late fall, that budget is gone.
I was shocked to see $0.08 for Businessweek, but read the additional details -- that was a kill fee. I'm actually not sure why they included it.
[deleted]
What's a "kill fee"?
It is a cancellation fee for freelancers - if the publication sees your work and decides not to run it, you get the kill fee and you're free to shop the story to other publications. The fee is specified in the contract, commonly 25% but rarely higher.
The vague intention of the kill fee is as insurance against an article being a bad fit, but generally the contract wording is intentionally vague. You can imagine any number of abuses by unscrupulous publishers who have the option to solicit far more material than they intend to publish.
An analogous situation might be a software house outsourcing a task for a flat fee, then dickering around with payment and eventually announcing they've decided your software doesn't pass their new test suite and you can accept a 75% pay cut or gtfo. Bear in mind that day rates for writers aren't what they used to be, and generally can't do a great deal of investigative journalism in your pyjamas.
The vague intention of the kill fee is as insurance against an article being a bad fit, but generally the contract wording is intentionally vague. You can imagine any number of abuses by unscrupulous publishers who have the option to solicit far more material than they intend to publish.
An analogous situation might be a software house outsourcing a task for a flat fee, then dickering around with payment and eventually announcing they've decided your software doesn't pass their new test suite and you can accept a 75% pay cut or gtfo. Bear in mind that day rates for writers aren't what they used to be, and generally can't do a great deal of investigative journalism in your pyjamas.
Just to be sure, I'm more used to seeing 50% kill fees, at least from Asia and West Africa (for Western or Western-run publications). 50% is customary, and with established clients, unsaid until the time comes
It certainly depends a lot on the type of publication (and the nature of the article).
The treatment of articles upon which publishers "choose not to proceed" is very important knowledge going in. Perusing the whopayswriters JSON feed* there is a wide variety of behaviour described, not all of it making everyone look good.
* In the absence of full-text search, left as an exercise to the reader
The treatment of articles upon which publishers "choose not to proceed" is very important knowledge going in. Perusing the whopayswriters JSON feed* there is a wide variety of behaviour described, not all of it making everyone look good.
* In the absence of full-text search, left as an exercise to the reader
Featured snippet on Google for the search term "kill fee":
Definition: The kill fee is a negotiated payment
on a magazine or newspaper article that is given
to the freelancer if their assigned article is
"killed" or cancelled.Something you charge but don't write the piece. Either you or they decide they don't want it from you but it stops you being messed around so much and having your time entirely wasted by people who are being mean/indecisive/silly.
Is per-word pricing actually how writers still get paid, or is this site just reporting that as a common metric? Most of the freelance writers I've spoken to have gotten paid either per-piece (lots of blog shadow writing), or per-hour.
Per-word rates are the most common in English; in German language, it's per character. Sometimes news outlets will establish a relationship with a freelancer that use dto be called a dedicated stringer, and some of those contracts would include a base retainer for the month, with a specified sum extra for words or whole articles over the base agreement. Just recently I heard of a freelancer agreement with Forbes that included a low base sum for four articles a month (very low, tho I can't recall) and US$0.05 per click, and they'll take just about anything she pitches. Some people are excited about the model (including the freelancer doing it). I do think raises questions about whether important topics would not get addressed because they're not grabby enough, but that's less of a problem for an outlet like Forbes than it is for, say, a city or local newspaper (e.g., a routine city hall or school-board meeting)
Per-word is usually a rough yardstick that's invoked when trying to figure out the flat rate for pieces of various sizes. It lets publications quote 500x for shortish pieces of about 500 words; 1,200x for mid-sized pieces of about 1,200 words, and so on.
I've never known a publication to count the words exactly, once the story is delivered. A finished piece of 970 words or 1,050 words will get paid the standard rate for 1,000 words, without any adjustments.
I've never known a publication to count the words exactly, once the story is delivered. A finished piece of 970 words or 1,050 words will get paid the standard rate for 1,000 words, without any adjustments.
It's not a common metric, however, when you free lance right you are often told, "I need a piece about x & y, 500 words long." So based on that 500 words, let's say you make $200. So you just made 40 cents a word. But then next article, the editors says "I need a piece about x & y, 800 words" This time you make $400. So instead of trying to explain it like that in these metrics, it makes more sense to just aggregate the numbers together; because the piece lengths vary.
[deleted]
Per-word pricing is standard in trade fiction (short form -- e.g. magazine markets, which are mostly dead outside the SF/F genre field).
It's also how I used to be paid as a jobbing IT reviewer/columnist/journalist in the British newsstand computer trade press (caveat: I switched to writing novels full-time in 2005).
It's also how I used to be paid as a jobbing IT reviewer/columnist/journalist in the British newsstand computer trade press (caveat: I switched to writing novels full-time in 2005).
Accelerando is currently blowing my mind. Very cool stuff.
Glancing through the site, it looks like most writers get their writings published through referrals / relationships with the editors.
Are there avenues where people can send writings / research into with an opportunity to publish on being compensated?
My motivation is around analytics, data research, visualization, mortgages, finance and real estate
Are there avenues where people can send writings / research into with an opportunity to publish on being compensated?
My motivation is around analytics, data research, visualization, mortgages, finance and real estate
The phrase you would be looking to use in your pitch to the editor would be to offer it 'on spec'. Some publications mandate that the first piece they get from new freelancers will be submitted on spec. But when you're making a living from it, it sucks to hear that.
Is anyone else a bit surprised at these wages, on the high side? I mean certainly it's not a lot hourly and there must be a lot of uncertainty (writing pieces on spec etc) but Buzzfeed giving $.50 a word for a 6000 word article is $3000... Which is better than I had assumed. But maybe that's just me.
Heavy/Investigative reporting
These pieces involve lots of investigation and travel to meet sources, I'm pretty sure. The last BuzzFeed in-depth report I read certainly did. If so, this is really a paltry sum. It's not a 6000 word opinion essay we're talking about, there's heavy loads of research involved.
It's hard to say what "heavy/investigative reporting" means in the context of Buzzfeed. I don't expect we're talking multi-month government corruption investigative journalism. But a couple of weeks to a month is still pretty reasonable for a 6000 word story that requires setting up and conducting a bunch of interviews and doing other research.
My rule of thumb has generally been about 1000 words a day not counting any heavy research so your numbers seem pretty reasonable.
Furthermore, freelancers rarely have a fully booked schedule and they need to spend time on tasks like prospecting for new work.
In a prior life, we'd get paid very nicely on a daily basis for consulting and other custom/semi-custom work. But the reality was that we weren't actually on the clock very much and spent a lot of time maintaining the knowledge base that let us do those jobs when they came along.
My rule of thumb has generally been about 1000 words a day not counting any heavy research so your numbers seem pretty reasonable.
Furthermore, freelancers rarely have a fully booked schedule and they need to spend time on tasks like prospecting for new work.
In a prior life, we'd get paid very nicely on a daily basis for consulting and other custom/semi-custom work. But the reality was that we weren't actually on the clock very much and spent a lot of time maintaining the knowledge base that let us do those jobs when they came along.
Buzzfeed are producing some truly remarkable investigative work.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/markschoofs/jaw-dropping-investigat...
https://www.buzzfeed.com/markschoofs/jaw-dropping-investigat...
My tech writing was pretty lucrative since I was pretty fluent in the content. I spent more time coordinating review units, generating good photos (when PR provided imagery wasn't suitable), and dealing with editors. I could write 2-3k words in a day after having mentally written it in my mind over the previous weak. If the subject matter was something that I was unfamiliar with, the time investment to be able to discuss it consumed more. I was always better when I procrastinated anyways; pressure would require me to distill my writing down to the core essentials.
That reflects most of my experiences. I usually thought in terms of an average "production day" which was usually about half of an actual day writing with the rest of the day researching, "researching," and doing various client work.
Of course, it varied. We often talked in terms of "memo grade" writeups for things like summarizing an advisory day which fell more in the 2K words/day range. On the other hand, I've spent the better part of a day trying to figure how to get into a piece and then ending up throwing away the whole introduction the next day.
Of course, it varied. We often talked in terms of "memo grade" writeups for things like summarizing an advisory day which fell more in the 2K words/day range. On the other hand, I've spent the better part of a day trying to figure how to get into a piece and then ending up throwing away the whole introduction the next day.
"throwing away the whole introduction the next day."
Too true! My wife always talked about how much I was paid per word; not understanding that I might write 5000 words for a 2k article. I got much better over time, but that was due to honing my skills at procrastination more than anything else.
Too true! My wife always talked about how much I was paid per word; not understanding that I might write 5000 words for a 2k article. I got much better over time, but that was due to honing my skills at procrastination more than anything else.
I was in journalism school in 2004 and almost all the older journalists I met lamented the fact that high end publications were paying $1.00 per word and had been since the 1970s. There had never been any kind of adjustment for inflation.
With the rise of the internet, I think the written-word sector of the economy has inflated more than any other.
I find your comment puzzling. Are you arguing that volume has increased? I can't imagine how average compensation has increased, given the prevalence of free.
I sort of meant it in a reverse way, with words as currency. When a currency inflates there is more of it and it is devalued, that's the situation with article-style content these days. Instead of being obtuse, what I probably should have said is that we have a supply glut.
OK, I get it. Word inflation. Totally makes sense.
Average payments have gone down. In my experience, the best rates are for stuff that gets printed, where rates have historically not changed much for decades.
However, rates for web-only stories are often much lower than for print, and sometimes you get a flat fee regardless of length.
The result is that you can produce more words today for less money than you made in the print-only 1980s.
However, rates for web-only stories are often much lower than for print, and sometimes you get a flat fee regardless of length.
The result is that you can produce more words today for less money than you made in the print-only 1980s.
Sad, but true. I'm making pretty the same coin per word I always have. What was good in the 80s isn't so great after 30 years of inflation.
6000 words takes a lot of time to write. That's a lot of conversations with sources, research, etc.
Though hard to know depending on the article.
Though hard to know depending on the article.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Best I ever did was $2/word from ESPN the Magazine.
That's a little above 13 cents per word for a complex tutorial which solves a real problem and potentially has source code.