Compensation for social media creation
Aug 6th, 2010 by roncin
For those daring individuals who dream of a career in journalism, salary/bonuses/benefits are less likely to be motivating factors than recognition/publication/reputation might be. Nevertheless, everyone needs to eat, and for many aspiring writers, the ‘big break’ never comes about. For decades, ‘getting published’ was a tricky business. Without the right connections, good timing and a lot of luck, your written word would remain little more than the tree falling in the empty forest – unpublished and doomed for non-existence!
…Enter blogs. I’m published, you’re published – everyone’s published! But are we professional journalists/writers making a carreer out of our talents, or are we mere hobbiests? I think a fair distinction to make here would be to divide those who make their primary living off of blogging from those who do not. But unless you’re an in-house blogger working for an established organization – as a self-employed blogger, it’s not easy to hit it big. Ad revenues are one source of income, made easier through systems such as Google Adsense and affiliate marketing websites – but at the end of the day, are consumers directly paying to purchase your creation? Another option is to build a name for oneself through blogging, and then translate that fame into successful publication of a physical/e-book (see Lifehacker, Maddox or Perez Hilton). But for the rest of the world’s blogging population, how likely are either of these alternatives to turn a living wage?
Or, (of equal concern) what are we, as bloggers, giving away for free?
Technically, through the act of creation (whether blog or printed word) a writer obtains automatic copyrights. But, in order to enforce these rights he/she would first need to register for copyright protection. Do bloggers regularly take this step? I would imagine that many of the more lucrative bloggers would take this step upon creation, but many others wouldn’t have the time or motivation to file. With the speed and force of our current shift to online self-publication, chances are high that many of today’s potentially-profitable ideas and creations are being left unprotected. Is there a business for online copyright stalkers – blog roamers on the lookout for brilliant ideas and writing that can be assumed through a copy/paste followed by their own copyright application? Not sure about that – but the possibility is out there.
Returning to the original question ‘how to be compensated for social media creation’, I think the answer actually lies somewhere between the value of zero-cost publication and the potential for significant revenues.
I’ll conclude with a question to consider: would you rather be a journalist/writer in the 1980s or in the 2010s? The barriers to entry have been significantly lowered, and the entry points have shifted – but does the prevalence of cheap and quick content creation (thin journalism?) overshadow the necessity of ‘thick’ journalism and creation?
Finally, in discussing these incentives, I am purposely excluding bloggers who maintain and create blogs during the course of gainful employment. A salaried employee who is encouraged to devote a certain amount of daily/weekly time to social media creation is already receiving adequate (at least in the eye of their employer) compensation.
I personally subcribe to Chris Anderson’s view that you can give something away for free to sell something else. A blog in this case may add value to, well, you for your employer or prospective employer. Successful bloggers can also make money through AdSense conversions or by selling additional merchandise if they are branded.
Just because people aren’t willing to pay for some things doesn’t mean they won’t pay for others. We’ve just got to raise the value of those other things by giving away something for free.
In Andrew Keen’s book “Cult of the Amateur”, as well as on his lecture circuit, he has suggested that writers and creators should be paid for their work. In many ways I do agree with that. I mean, if you’re a photographer which would you prefer: to be specifically hired by National Geographic to take on photo assignments? or would you prefer that your photos were crowdsourced by National Geographic, published in their magazine, not paid but given credit? (I would rather be hired!). However, having said that it doesn’t look like it’s going that way. I feel that, much like Andrew Keen suggests, it’s watering down our culture.
Also, I’m not sure about obtaining copyright for written works…I thought that it was automatic once the work is produced (this is why in Canada we can’t hand in the same paper for 2 different classes. It is considered plagerism). The only thing with online work is that it may be more difficult to prove. When most work was produced via typewriter or even on desktop computers, you could keep your fonds, rough drafts etc… to prove creation of original content. To make it easier for online publications, the creative commons licensing scheme was introduced, where the creator could state whether or not the piece could be re-used, how and whether or not any derivative works could be made from it. By no means perfect, but a step in the right direction.