My friend and former boss Virginia Postrel points out an underreported reason you’re likely to be increasingly disappointed with the offerings from Big Media: Major outlets, bound by archaic “ethics” rules, are using fewer freelancers with real expertise.
Last summer, she was asked to write a freelance column for The New York Times about innovation in the business world ? a topic she’s well–qualified to cover.
She said no, notwithstanding the terrific exposure she would receive.
Why? For one thing, she says, the Times pays lousy rates to freelancers and doesn’t compensate writers for research expenses, including travel. More important are the Times’ hidebound ethics guidelines, which
now prohibit freelancers from taking honoraria or even travel expenses from anyone who might, in some theoretical future state of the world, be a source. In October, “Critical Shopper” columnist Mike Albo, a freelancer, was canned for taking a travel junket that had nothing to do with his NYT gig.
Meaning? The only people the Times are likely to find for freelance work are people who currently make healthy salaries (so they won’t command big fees), have free access to major research libraries, and aren’t likely to have frequent contacts in the commercial sectors they might be reporting about.
In other words: tenured academics!
Postrel’s advice to the Times, and other journalistic outlets trying to get by on the cheap and by relying on deteriorating brand recognition:
Instead of focusing on inputs, the Times should focus its quality control on outputs: what actually appears in the paper. Drop the absurd ethics guidelines, hire freelancers who know their subjects and how to write about them, and disclose any potential conflicts so readers can make up their own minds. Think about delivering value to the reader rather than ritualistically adhering to journalistic guild customs. Alternatively, the Times could shrink the paper to include only that reporting whose costs it can cover out of its own budget and stop trying to free ride.
