Welcome to SPJ Blogs Sign in | Join | Help

The Ethics of Freelance Writing Part II

One of the blog's readers posted a comment with regards to the writer who is wanting to hire ghostwriters to pen non-fiction articles. I thought the issue so important, I wanted to address her questions on the main board. Star writes,
"I did not have the same reaction you did. He was offering 35 cents a word, which is below the occasional $1 we can find, but ballpark these days. No byline? No problem! Exposure is worth nothing, as these columns so often point out. He is responsible for the accuracy of what he turns in. The only way to make money is to have employees and not do it all youself. What are those writing companies besides a version of this? (No, I don't mean those stupid homework-doing companies.) My question--and I did write him--was where was he getting all this work!!?"
 
You're right, Star, exposure is worth nothing. It doesn't pay our bills. However, I don't think anyone who started in this business as a freelancer hasn't worked for the small community newspaper to gain investigative clips, reviews or whatever you wanted your writing specialty to be - for that $25 an article. I've never personally said that you'll die of all exposure, as it is with nature, you'll only die of exposure if you go outside without proper attire (not getting paid at all) and stay outside in the cold too long (writing for $25 for the remainder of your career- you won't make it).
I learned the identity of this writer the other day and sent them an email (and no, I won't reveal the identity as that would compromise my confidential source). I think my email says it all, but if you have further questions as to why not actually writing journalistic pieces (and this person does write for at least one major newspaper) is ethically repugnant, please feel free to post them. Good freelance writers always have more ideas than they can possibly sell, that's why we are able to make a living doing what we do. And as I point out to our creative friend, there are legitimate ways to hire office assistants while still maintaining ethical and quality standards - our own, as well as those of the publications for which we pledge that the work we are submitting is our own, original work.
Instead of responding to this person's ad and doing something that might have ramifications for the ad poster, the writer and the publisher, I would be asking myself if this person can get $1 a word, why can't I?
For anyone who replied to this ad, hoping to get a piece of the action this writer is promising, I would also ask myself, "If my editors found out I was helping another writer scam - and this is what this is, folks, there is no gray area here -  publications, how long could I maintain my business?" If that isn't enough to scare you off, as it was pointed out on one professional board where this is being discussed, anyone involved in scamming a publication by providing a false byline possibly could be subject to a lawsuit by the publisher.
 
Here's the email I sent this writer:
 
"My name is Kerri Fivecoat-Campbell and I'm a full-time freelance writer. I'm also the national chair for the Society of Professional Journalists Freelance Committee.
 
I'm writing to you as your Craig's List ad for ghost writers has made quite a splash on writing and journalism boards - and I don't mean in a good way. 
 
Your information was forwarded to me because I routinely write about people in the market to scam writers but I'm taking the time to write to you as one of my colleagues thought you might be a person relatively new to freelance writing, and therefore, not fully educated in how unethical that hiring a ghost writer to write non-fiction articles as a journalist really is.
 
Our profession is constantly bombarded with scam artists wanting to make a quick buck off the backs of hungry and aspiring writers. I'm sure you've received plenty of replies to your ad. However, asking other writers to do all your work and then paying them 1/4 to 1/2 of what you're getting, with no byline, is simply put, a writer taking advantage of other writers.
 
Besides the fact that it is a terrible writing business practice for the responders to your ad to sell their work for less than industry standard, as well as releasing all rights, it is highly unethical of you to present work as your own, especially when many of the contracts for publications for which you write require that it be your original work.
 
While your eagerness to use your own creativity to sell articles in this business is commendable, this practice is not. You might want to ask yourself these questions:
 
  • If my editors were to find out that I'm doing this, what would they say?
  • Many NY editors moonlight as freelance writers, and some of them have likely seen his CL post, as well, they're probably reading about this posts on various writing forums. If this person found me so quickly, what makes me think editors will not find out who I am?
  • How am I going to ensure the quality of the fact checking of these writers and protect my own writing reputation?  
I hope you will take this advice very seriously. This not only could affect your freelance writing career, but if editors find out that writers are pulling stuff like this, contracts are bound to become even more onerous than they already are in our profession.
 
There are areas of publishing where ghostwriting is a very legitimate and acceptable practice. I can think of two - book writing and corporate writing. But it is not an acceptable practice in non-fiction magazine and article writing, otherwise referred to as journalism. If people cannot trust the byline of the writer, they cannot trust the whole article or publication. There are also very acceptable ways writers can hire assistants to help them with their freelance business. Research assistants, for example, can conduct initial research for queries and articles, as well as do more routine office assistant things, leaving you, the writer, free to write."
 
 
Published Wednesday, April 04, 2007 10:45 AM by KerriFivecoatCampbell

Comments

# re: The Ethics of Freelance Writing Part II

Wednesday, April 04, 2007 9:17 AM by Kerri Fivecoat-Campbell
An update to this saga is that the writer did send me a note. The writer has removed the Craig's List ad and as suspected, didn't fully realize the ramifications of their search for a ghost writer of non-fiction pieces.
This person is now on the look out for a legitimate research assistant.

# re: The Ethics of Freelance Writing Part II

Wednesday, April 04, 2007 10:03 AM by Laura H
Hi, I'm a fellow Freelance Success subscriber and just wanted to say thanks for being on top of this.

# re: The Ethics of Freelance Writing Part II

Wednesday, April 04, 2007 10:12 AM by Laura H
Yikes, I meant to say Freelance Daily newsletter -- I used to belong to FLX for a year or so (and my sister's still there).

# re: The Ethics of Freelance Writing Part II

Thursday, April 05, 2007 11:38 AM by Star
I still don't think this was a scam. His reaction in looking for "a legitimate research assistant," what ever that means, seems to show that. His name would be on the piece, his reputation. The bigger risk to the profession is not that some successful freelancers farm out some work, but that so many people now give away the store, working for pennies.

# re: The Ethics of Freelance Writing Part II

Friday, April 06, 2007 8:17 AM by KerriFivecoatCampbell
I don't think it was an intentional scam by the writer, but if he and other writers would proceed with this plan it would be. Whether it was an intentional scam or not, it was ethically wrong. A legitimate research assistant to a freelance writer is laid out in my letter to the writer. Someone who does initial research for queries, lines up interviews, does filing, researches markets, etc. not doing the actual writing. I won't argue about all of the risks to our profession. In an era when freelancers are being questioned daily about our ethics in this business,submitting work and representing it as your own writing when your contract requires it to be your original work, is a threat.    

# re: The Ethics of Freelance Writing Part II

Friday, April 06, 2007 12:24 PM by Star
So now the "contract is requiring it be our original work." That might alter cases... I think they mean by that, original research and interviewing...not copied or "paraphrased" from other published sources, as so much SEO work is. I still don't think this lister was unethical.

# re: The Ethics of Freelance Writing Part II

Friday, April 06, 2007 2:04 PM by Kerri Fivecoat-Campbell
Most magazine and newspaper contracts have this clause or a variation of "You promise that the aricle is yours, original and accurate..." That does not mean, according to a contracts expert I talked to this morning, just original research and interviewing. It means it is *your* original writing. All of the publications for which this writer has done work for has that contract clause.
I'm not sure if you're saying the lister wasn't unethical or this practice is ethical. I've already said I don't think the lister meant to do harm. As for the practice itself, writers and editors alike have discussed this on professional boards all week. 100% all say the practice is unethical. I imagine SPJ's ethics committee, once they weigh in this weekend, will agree. We aren't discussing contract corporate, advertising or SEO work here, we are discussing journalism. When a non-ficition query is accepted by an editor of a magazine or newspaper, they expect to be getting the original research, interviews and writing of the contracted writer (unless of course, they are buying a reprint).  

# re: The Ethics of Freelance Writing Part II

Friday, April 06, 2007 2:49 PM by susan phillips plese
I'm surprised that there is even a discussion about the freelance ghostwriting. Of course it's unethical and the practice would compromise the credibility of any journalist. A research assistant receives credit in the publication; the writer has the byline. We have a name for those who pass off another person's words as their own: plagiarist. Journalists have enough problems with credibility as it is. We have no system of licensing or certification; we basically regulate ourselves. Trust is a difficult commodity to earn, but it is very simple to lose. Don't mess with it!

# re: The Ethics of Freelance Writing Part II

Friday, April 06, 2007 4:10 PM by Joseph Bean
I'm not sure I feel as outraged as some people about this so-called scam. I don't like it now, and wouldn't do it. But, almost 40 years ago, I did write rough drafts of articles for a very successful (actually very famous) writer. Being busy with books and film scripts, but also "known" in the celeb world, magazines wanted articles for the sake of the by-line he could give them. He wrote the final drafts, put his name on them, and they never failed to be published. He may have gotten big bucks for some of them, probably did. I got paid as much for those articles as I did for any of my own by-lined pieces at that time. But here's the thing that has me not so outraged: I learned more from the run-up interviews with this writer than from anyone who ever intentionally tried to teach me to write. Better yet, I learned still more from comparing my drafts with the published final drafts. So, I think younger or newer writers might look at a deal like this as an opportunity to get valuable experience which is much more interesting and useful than exposure and probably a greater treasure than the pay most beginners get. OK... there are still genuine issues to be worked out about contractual stuff, and even ghost writers end up with some kind of credit in the privacy of their portfolios (or should), but I think the problems can be solved--ethically and otherwsie--if the right people are involved and the right steps are taken.  

# re: The Ethics of Freelance Writing Part II

Friday, April 06, 2007 4:49 PM by Star
So now this is without a doubt unethical. I am saying I don't agree--so there is a shred of doubt. Here are things I do think are unethical: (1) paraphrasing the work of real journalists without credit or conscience. (2) making up composite sources. (3) Using source quotes from other stories without interviewing the source. Since the New York Times made up sources, I have had sources say, "You mean you really call people?" This has affected the business. I also consider it unethical to squeeze writers, try to make people think $5 is a story fee, try to make people think you need to write the first story free (to see if this is a match or if you fit the style of the publication), etc.

# re: The Ethics of Freelance Writing Part II

Saturday, April 07, 2007 10:08 AM by KerriFivecoatCampbell
You're right, Susan. SPJ's own Code of Ethics, which has set the standard for journalism since 1909, states — "Never plagiarize."
The dictionary defines "plagiarize" as to pass off as one's own the ideas or words of another.
Joseph, I'm glad you learned something from that writer. But contracts, if they even existed 40 years ago, were a lot less onerous than they are now. And we all know the rich and famous (even the writers among us) live by a different set of rules than we. But I believe the practice to which you are referring also cut down on the number of celebrity commissioned articles in publications just because everyone knew the celebrity probably didn't do all the writing themselves. In the instance we're discussing here, I doubt one young writer could learn very much from another inexperienced, new freelancer, as this one told me they are.

# re: The Ethics of Freelance Writing Part II

Sunday, April 08, 2007 8:01 PM by Andy Schotz
Good work, Kerri, for your letter and, apparently, the good result it got.

The argument about whether a person must write his or her own story brings to mind President Clinton saying "it depends what the meaning of the word 'is' is."
I can't imagine any other definition of "by" besides "I wrote this story."

If someone else contributes, that person is given credit, too. It might be a double byline; it might be a "contributed" line at the end.

Some people think it's a vanity issue, getting credit. For me, it's responsibility. If, for example, I ask a colleague to help me with a story by seeking someone's comment, that colleague is responsible for that quote, particularly the accuracy. I didn't hear it or write it; I add my colleague's name to the story.

If we start playing around with these essentials, we've gotten away from the principles of journalism.

Some relevant ideas from the SPJ Code of Ethics:
- Seek truth and report it.
- Journalists should be honest, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.
- Deliberate distortion is never permissible.
- Never plagiarize.

I agree with Kerri that there is no place for ghost-writing in journalism.
Is it different for an athlete writing an autobiography? I'd like to think it's not. At least some concession is needed, such as "By Star Athlete, as told to Well-known Journalist," which is how some books handle it.
Some books give Athlete and Journo a double byline.
From an ethical standpoint, that could work in the freelance situations described above. But it probably defeats the subcontracting concept, and its benefits, envisioned by the Craig's List poster. I'd be surprised if the ethics of the arrangement were part of the person's business plan.

The people who seem to be trying to rationalize the Craig's List plan, or some variation of it, should go back to one of Kerri's questions: Would you tell your editor that you didn't write some or all of the story for which you're taking credit? Why or why not?

Andy Schotz
chairman
SPJ Ethics Committee

# re: The Ethics of Freelance Writing Part II

Monday, April 09, 2007 9:34 PM by Scott Sherris
 I agree with Andy - how different are "auto"biographies and corporate writing?  If those are acceptable as non-fiction, then it's a short leap to journalism.
 I'm personally not a fan of any ghost writing.  However, I wanted to play devil's advocate to point out that the advertiser would have taken full responsibility for the content, whether he realized it or not.  But I think that's more of a legal liability than an ethical problem.  And if the advertiser actually got consistent quality work for his $0.35, to me that's an indication that editors are doing a lousy job finding talent.  The advertiser isn't outsourcing, per se, he's utilizing arbitrage in the content market.
 Seems like a smart editor would find a way to keep that $0.65 in his own pocket to get the same $0.35 writing the advertiser is buying.

# re: The Ethics of Freelance Writing Part II

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 7:08 AM by Lillie Ammann
Thanks for these posts. I referred to them in a post on my own blog about the ethics of ghostwriting.

# re: The Ethics of Freelance Writing Part II

Thursday, March 20, 2008 3:53 AM by zxevil164
UDrVxG Cool, bro!
Anonymous comments are disabled. Please log in or create an account to comment on this article.