 |
 |
I’m not going to bang on about the paid/free issue. Instead, I want to suggest one way in which writing “free” blogs could bring some real benefit to the writers. Paige’s original invitation said: “Regular bloggers are not paid currently, but have IT support, full editorial control, and opportunities to do paid science blogo-journalism...” It would be much more valuable for bloggers if they were not given “full editorial control” but actually had to deal with a picky editor who could tell then if they were planning to write about something terminally pointless. Writers would also benefit from the attention of an editor who went through the copy and pointed to writing lapses that needed treatment. Reading most blogs, including many by “award winning” writers, reveals that the authors have “full editorial control” to the point that they write crummy copy about ho hum subjects. Many potential clients will read this guff and run a mile. So slapping unedited copy up on even the most prestigious of websites does bloggers no favours, even though it fills the publisher’s need for words. I can think of no writer whose words do not benefit from an editor’s attentions. An editor would be far more valuable than “IT support”, whatever that is. Maybe that is part of the deal. If so, say so. That might provide at least some minor compensation for the lack of any payment. Of course, editors are even less likely than writers to work for nothing, so they may need paying. But it doesn't take a decent editor long to shred a sloppy article. Some editors can even do so constructively and with sensitivity, not attributes that you will find in the real world of journalism. MK PS I edited the subject of this message so that people can follow the discussion From: psci-com: on public engagement with science [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paige Brown Sent: 2014-July-19 00:35 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [PSCI-COM] PSCI-COM Digest - 17 Jul 2014 to 18 Jul 2014 (#2014-167) Hi all, Paige Brown, community manager of SciLogs.com, here again. I do not speak for Nature.com or Spektrum, but only for my own efforts in recruiting bloggers to SciLogs.com. I also blog at SciLogs.com, and have done so for many years without pay. I am not sure of the future plans of SciLogs to pay its bloggers. We are simply a network that offers science bloggers a place and community to blog with (hopefully) additional ease (with technical support). I personally have also always enjoyed the credibility that accompanies blogging for a platform affiliated with Nature.com, as bloggers must pitch the relevance of their blogs from the beginning and show some extent of expertise in the area they are blogging about to qualify. That being said, I understand the lament of science writers who are increasingly having to move their work to *mostly unpaid blogs. Many science blog networks pay little to nothing. However, many of our bloggers aren't blogging at SciLogs.com to earn a living through our network, but rather for their passion to communicate science as scientists themselves, as students, as science communicators at universities, etc. Many of our bloggers HAVE moved on and up from SciLogs.com to blogging networks that pay, or have been offered freelance science writing opportunities as a result of their blogging on this network. Again, that being said, I don't necessarily endorse science bloggers writing for free. I would always encourage SciLogs.com bloggers to pitch their work for pay somewhere else, and keep their SciLogs.com blogs for cross-posted material or material that gets cut from freelance pieces. In other words, SciLogs.com bloggers are encouraged to treat their blogs with us as personal blogs, to use in ways that benefit them the most. I personally spear-headed the OpenSciLogs initiative as a way to get science bloggers the financial support they deserve to cover topics in depth on their blogs. OpenSciLogs is not an official initiative of Nature.com or Spektrum, but was actually a class project of my own that I personally brought to Scilogs organizers, who were supportive enough to see it happen. OpenSciLogs is still very much an experiment, and we plan to continue it as long as SciLogs.com bloggers are interested and willing to contribute. I welcome any other questions and interest in our blogging community. Thank you, -Paige Brown Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 20:03:26 -0400 From: Paige Brown <[log in to unmask]> Subject: SciLogs Blogging Opportunity Update Hi, This is an update to the call for SciLogs.com bloggers. Due to a HUGE response (which is awesome!) I am now ending the official call for regular bloggers. You may still apply for a regular blog at any time by emailing me a formal blog proposal for consideration, but for now the official call is closed until a time in the future when we open our site up again for new blogging opportunities. If you have already sent a blog proposal or have contacted me about doing so, I will still try to respond to it as soon as possible. However, guest blog post pitches are always welcome! Please see this link for details: http://www.scilogs.com/from_the_lab_bench/pitching-science-blog-posts-a-guide/. Thank you for your interest! Paige Brown ********************************************************************** Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 12:30:04 +0100 From: Alastair McQueen <[log in to unmask]> Subject: Re: SciLogs.com Blogging Opportunities and Diversity Hi all I'm not active in the science blogging community and so hesitate to get involved, but I wanted to pose a question to the list: why is this type of call for free labour not frowned upon in the same way as unpaid internships? As a (currently) freelance writer, I was always advised not to work for free, the reason being that to do so surely reduces the value of my trade, and sets a norm whereby by media publishers can exploit writers. I notice this website is in association with nature.com, and the magazine spektrum, and I wonder how they are involved in this site? Maybe if there were clarification that this is an entirely not-for-profit community that receives no industry funding (like this email list I guess), and has no future plans for introducing advertising, I would feel more at ease. Otherwise, surely it is exploiting science writers and devaluing our trade? It reminds me of this article 'Other professionals don't work for free. So why are writers expected to? <http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/apr/23/professionals-work-free-writers-expected>' Interested to hear your thoughts, Alastair McQueen Freelance Medical Writer and Journalist On 15/07/2014 00:35, Paige Brown wrote: > Hi all, > > I am looking to recruit a few new regular science bloggers onto > SciLogs.com, sister network of Nature Blogs and Scientific American > blogs. I am especially looking for women and other minorities in > science, science communication, and other fields. Please contact me at > [log in to unmask] Regular bloggers are not paid currently, but > have IT support, full editorial control, and opportunities to do paid > science blogo-journalism via our crowdfunding initiative #OpenSciLogs. > > SciLogs.com also has a new guest blog for other scientists, students > and journalists wanting to get into science blogging within a friendly > and well respected blogging community. http://scilogs.com/guest_blog. > Please contact me if interested, and forward this request to anyone > who may be interested! > > Thanks, > Paige Brown > ********************************************************************** > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 12:49:15 +0100 From: Paul G Raven <[log in to unmask]> Subject: Re: SciLogs.com Blogging Opportunities and Diversity Hi, Alastair; On 18 July 2014 12:30, Alastair McQueen <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > As a (currently) freelance writer, I was always advised not to work for > free, the reason being that to do so surely reduces the value of my trade, > and sets a norm whereby by media publishers can exploit writers. I notice > this website is in association with nature.com, and the magazine > spektrum, and I wonder how they are involved in this site? > > Basically, that ship has already sailed, as part of the Great Armada of Digital Disintermediation; unless you're incredibly lucky, exceptionally talented or well connected, your only route to building a profile as a writer is to work for free or for peanuts at least some of the time. Bear in mind also that there's increased competition from other sorts of writers diversifying in order to survive; if you've seen the recent articles about how much novelists in the mid-list actually earn a year (about the same as the minimum wage, basically), you'll understand why so many of the science fiction writers I know also do tech articles and (increasingly) design-fiction work on the side. That said, while this may be the status quo, that's not to say I approve of it -- and *Nature* (or rather the conglomerate which owns it) is not exactly short of a bob or two, thanks to the rentier economics of academic publishing. So while I stand by my statement above about the effective necessity of doing some free work, and while flagging this up as strictly my personal opinion, I'd think twice about chasing this particular gig; personally, if I'm going to do cheap or free work, I'd rather do it for an organisation with some sort of ethical justification for not being able to afford to pay me (eg charities or similar). My two cents, anyway. Paul Graham Raven ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 17:07:06 +0100 From: Francis Sedgemore <[log in to unmask]> Subject: Re: SciLogs.com Blogging Opportunities and Diversity It is frowned upon by those who write for a living, and care about the state of the writing trade in general as well as their own lot. OpenSciLogs holds out the promise of funding through a crowd-sourcing business model, but the devil is in the detail, and potential contributors should look closely at that detail. It seems to me that OpenSciLogs is no more than a vaguely interesting hypothesis. Take the idea and reality of Creative Commons licences, which are central to the OpenSciLogs model. Within the NUJ, we are looking closely at CC. Whilst the union does not oppose CC per se, we are constructively critical of it, and many of us, myself included, do not see CC as having any more than a role in publishing limited to certain not-for-profit community projects. CC certainly doesn't help freelance journalists who rely on income for their creative endeavours. Freelancers should pay special attention to the licensing of their intellectual property in order to keep control of it, and maximise the long-term return from their work. Francis On 18 Jul 14, at 12:30, Alastair McQueen <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Hi all > > I'm not active in the science blogging community and so hesitate to get involved, but I wanted to pose a question to the list: why is this type of call for free labour not frowned upon in the same way as unpaid internships? — Dr Francis Sedgemore journalist, writer and editor telephone: +44 7840 191336 <tel:%2B44%207840%20191336> website: sedgemore.com twitter: @hesgen *************************************************************** ********************************************************************** Commands - send an email (any subject) to [log in to unmask] with one of the following messages (ignoring text in brackets) • set psci-com nomail (to stop receiving messages while on holiday) • set psci-com mail (to resume getting messages) • signoff psci-com (to leave the list) • Subscribe here https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=psci-com Contact list owner at [log in to unmask] Small print and JISCMail acceptable use policy https://sites.google.com/site/pscicomjiscmail/the-small-print **********************************************************************