Another issue that's related to exclusivity is journalist pay. This issue did not come up directly in my experience with ITT, but I had to wonder if the editor was in fact balking at paying for "old news." All paying outlets should pay for work even if it is not an exclusive. Many people have cars of the same make, model year and color. Many people buy the same brand of jeans or soda. A shoe seller cannot stay in business by only selling one pair of shoes per style. But the freelancer is often stymied in making sustainable money by limitations on the resale of articles. I remember when I inquired with Womens eNews about writing for them and the first thing they tried to do was to saddle me with a two-year exclusivity agreement. And their practice then was not to show the contract to the writer until after the article had been accepted. I balked at that practice and a senior editor relented. After reading the contract, I declined to submit the article on the grounds that I did not believe in exclusivity. The editor wished me good luck in finding publishers who would not demand it.
If publishers want to offer a full-time job in exchange for exclusivity, that is one thing. But freelancers should not be forced to trade their much-needed flexibility for a sale. In a world where a writer is often paid on the basis of how many eyeballs he or she can bring to a web site, such limitation of exposure is indeed folly.
Â
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
