| "the unique platform and reach our site provides" | |
| Posted by: | Esther 01:19 pm EST 11/03/15 |
| In reply to: | re: Is a Seattle critic selling his press comps for profit & companionship? - JereNYC 12:54 pm EST 11/03/15 |
|
| |
| A blog from actor Wil Wheaton re: HP and compensation. | |
| Link | you can’t pay your rent with “the unique platform and reach our site provides” |
| reply to this message | | |
| Wait a sec | |
| Posted by: | Pir8Jenny 09:44 pm EST 11/03/15 |
| In reply to: | "the unique platform and reach our site provides" - Esther 01:19 pm EST 11/03/15 |
|
| |
| The correspondence from HuffPo which Wheaton copies repeatedly uses the term "bloggers." They don't pay their "bloggers." I don't think that necessarily means they don't pay their "critics." Honestly, I don't think this tells us anything one way or another on whether this guy gets paid for his reviews. More importantly, I don't see how it matters. Whether he gets paid or not for his reviews has nothing to do with whether he should sell his comps to the highest bidder. Since when does volunteer reviewing come with lesser ethical obligations than paid reviewing? | |
| reply to this message | | |
| re: "the unique platform and reach our site provides" | |
| Posted by: | Ann 01:52 pm EST 11/03/15 |
| In reply to: | "the unique platform and reach our site provides" - Esther 01:19 pm EST 11/03/15 |
|
| |
| Well, that's the Internet. I don't know about the Huffington Post, but most sites are limited in what/if they can pay. Writers either agree to that or they say no (a polite "no" instead of a scolding - all they did was ask him, and many non-famous people find the deal reasonable). | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| Well... HuffPo v. ATC | |
| Posted by: | DistantDrumming 03:25 pm EST 11/03/15 |
| In reply to: | re: "the unique platform and reach our site provides" - Ann 01:52 pm EST 11/03/15 |
|
| |
| I don't think anyone's suggesting that a niche site (with, a no doubt, devoted audience) like ATC should be forced to compete with major publications when it comes to compensation. But, HuffPo isn't some startup blog. They had nearly $150 million in revenue last year. It's true that they broke even, but I'm sure the editors get paid. I'm sure the executives on the HuffPo/AOL business side - marketers, digital developers, advertising sales reps etc - get compensated. If they can't find a way to pay contributors - ones whom they've solicited as opposed to ones who submit their own work for consideration - perhaps they need to reduce some of their expenditures on the administrative side of the business. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Well... HuffPo v. Talkin' Broadway | |
| Posted by: | Ann 03:32 pm EST 11/03/15 |
| In reply to: | Well... HuffPo v. ATC - DistantDrumming 03:25 pm EST 11/03/15 |
|
| |
| I don't think I referenced this site - didn't mean to. But they are just a larger example of the same model. Limited ways of making money, and not enough to pay writers. They compensate the positions that they have to - those who have other choices. There are few money-making choices for writers these days. I think people don't realize how hard it is to make money by such a site - it's not comparable to newspapers during their popular days. The advertising revenue is not at the same level (and readers fight it at every turn). Even harder is making money as a writer. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Well... HuffPo v. Talkin' Broadway | |
| Posted by: | DistantDrumming 03:36 pm EST 11/03/15 |
| In reply to: | re: Well... HuffPo v. Talkin' Broadway - Ann 03:32 pm EST 11/03/15 |
|
| |
| No, I get it. It's brutal. And now that social referrals are the source of the majority of the average news site's traffic, things are even messier than before. I've worked in media for a few years - most of it non-profit media - and the orgs I've worked for managed to find a way to pay their writers/contributors and their interns, too. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Well... HuffPo v. Talkin' Broadway | |
| Posted by: | ryhog 04:07 pm EST 11/03/15 |
| In reply to: | re: Well... HuffPo v. Talkin' Broadway - DistantDrumming 03:36 pm EST 11/03/15 |
|
| |
| I think what you are wrestling with is the fact that content has been devalued. A couple of examples: It used to be that, if you wanted an opinion on a show, you had the choice of a few newspapers and magazines. Now you have ATC and a bunch of other sites, blogs etc. (And I am not talking about the official reviewers on those sites, though I am not sure it affects the argument at all.) You can get damn good scholarship from ATC and other sites and blogs (mixed with absolute garbage, of course). People used to get to know critics so they could assess how they generally were or were not a good barometer. Don't you do the same thing here or on HuffPost or anywhere else? As I have written before, there is WAY more being written about the theatre now than at any time in modern history. The same thing applies to the reporting side. At one time, you needed the paper or TV to you what was going on in the world. Today, you don't because there are always people "reporting" on events around the world, pretty much in real time. So the value of having reporters on the ground (except perhaps in a war zone) is pretty low. Media that used to have outposts around the world don't any more. Why pay a stringer to report on a riot somewhere when everyone already knows all about it? There are, of course, a few organizations still fighting the good fight, the Times perhaps more than any other. But it is a battle of diminishing returns. What has value now is being able to organize and/or analyze content in a way people find useful. There are some people who write so elegantly that their words still have value (just as there are some actors whose work has value while most sadly do not). And when those characteristics surface and enough people respond, that creates value. But the reason that facebook has so much value is because there is more discussion and debate going on there at any given moment than at any time in recorded history. And when you add in twitter, reddit, etc., it is awe inspiring. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Well... HuffPo v. Talkin' Broadway | |
| Posted by: | Ann 03:41 pm EST 11/03/15 |
| In reply to: | re: Well... HuffPo v. Talkin' Broadway - DistantDrumming 03:36 pm EST 11/03/15 |
|
| |
| Yes, messy. I suppose if writers had paying choices, the big companies would find a way to pay them (and I guess we wouldn't have them - we are very grateful for our writers). But they don't have to. People love to share their thoughts, even if they also have to have a day job, and a site like Huffington Post is better exposure than most individual blogs. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Well... HuffPo v. Talkin' Broadway | |
| Posted by: | DistantDrumming 03:47 pm EST 11/03/15 |
| In reply to: | re: Well... HuffPo v. Talkin' Broadway - Ann 03:41 pm EST 11/03/15 |
|
| |
| Oh, I get that. And HuffPo has a somewhat similar model to Forbes in which practically anyone can "contribute" an article. It's why PR flaks love HuffPo - with pretty minimal effort, anyone can claim to be a HuffPo or Forbes contributor. LinkedIn is crawling with people who list just that as their secondary career. Reminds me a bit of that Chris Durang play - was it Beyond Therapy? - in which the guy tells the girl during their dinner date that he writes for People Magazine, but then it turns out that he's written a letter to the editor and seen it published. This is all fine and dandy. My problem is with the Will Wheaton example in which HuffPo approaches others to submit their work to the site for zero compensation and just the "prestige" and "reach" of HuffPo. It's one thing if you're a struggling or aspiring writer who actively submits your work, it's quite another when the outlet approaches you and then refuses to compensate you. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
All That Chat is intended for the discussion of
theatre news and opinion
subject to the terms and conditions of the Terms of Service. (Please take all off-topic discussion to private email.)
Please direct technical questions/comments to webmaster@talkinbroadway.com and policy questions to TBAdmin@talkinbroadway.com.
[ Home | On the Rialto | The Siegel Column | Cabaret | Tony Awards | Book Reviews | Great White Wayback Machine ]
[ Broadway Reviews | Barbara and Scott: The Two of Clubs | Sound Advice | Sound Advice Upcoming Releases CDs/Books/DVDs, etc. | Off Broadway | Funding Talkin' Broadway ]
[ Broadway 101 | Spotlight On | Talkin' Broadway | On the Boards | Regional | Talk to Us! | Search Talkin' Broadway ]
Terms of Service
[ © 1997 - 2015 www.TalkinBroadway.com, Inc. ]
Time to render: 0.058495 seconds.