Text Print Send

When is a freelancer not a freelancer?

Tuesday, 6 May 2008

Margaret Simons writes:

Share / Save Article

This morning 3AW’s Neil Mitchell had a good yarn about Steve Vizard handing back his gong. It was an exclusive on the front page of News Limited’s Herald-Sun.

Good luck to him. But hang on. Doesn’t Mitchell work for Fairfax Media, now the owner of 3AW? Indeed, there is speculation around town that if Age editor Andrew Jaspan gets the push in the next few months then Mitchell would replace him.

So how come Mitchell was allowed to scoop his employer in the rival news sheet?

I don’t have a problem with all this. As a freelance journalist myself, I think it is a damn good thing in the new multi-platform linked-in online yadda yadda of the future for journalists to stand alone and be able to sell their wares to whoever will buy. After all, content is king and we are the content makers. (I can understand, though, why shareholders might take a different view.)

But hang on...

Just last week Crikey reported on the new contracts being imposed on freelancers by Fairfax, under which anyone who writes more than three pieces for the organisation in six months is not allowed to sell to a long list of other media organisations, including all major rival newspapers, magazines, web sites and broadcasters.

So why doesn’t Fairfax Media have a problem with Mitchell, one of its star acts, working for the opposition?

We're told it's because he's a headline act. Just like Derryn Hinch. They can write what they want where they want.

Freelance foot soldiers, meanwhile, are thrown to the lions.

Noice. Are you a freelancer? How does this incongruity make you feel?

Already a Crikey Member? Login below to comment or click here to start a Free Membership now.

Your Email Password
Remember Me

Need your password?

Jeff Dowsing Tuesday, 6 May 2008 2:23:21 PM: Three articles in six months and Fairfax wants to own you! If it wasn't hard enough to make a living as a freelancer... That surely is a restraint of trade?
Food. Who needs it? Tuesday, 6 May 2008 4:08:27 PM: I'm oscillating between "they're out of their freaking minds", and "Jesus, where will the rent come from?". It seems utterly unenforceable, unless Fairfax seriously want all of their freelance articles to be written by hobbyists who think contributing to The Age might be a bit of a lark. Professional freelance writers contribute all over the place; it's what we do, and we have no choice - it's not as though Fairfax will be offering us extra work to cover our shapely behinds. My editors at The Age are apoplectic and a tad hysterical. I haven't seen a contract yet, and frankly, if the powers that be send me one, they can ram it into the orifice of their choosing. Plus, headline acts. Yeah. Great. Maybe I should change my by-line to Cate Blanchett.
Stephen Feneley Tuesday, 6 May 2008 6:57:06 PM: Fairfax's new contract is oppressive, odious, outrageous, even arguably unlawful, but not the least bit surprising. As an ex-Fairfax freelancer, who became an ex partly because of work I was doing for Crikey, I have experienced first hand the control-freakish behavior of Fairfax's new breed of officious functionaries . Leaving aside the fact that this is totally at odds with the old but regrettably dead Fairfax tradition of celebrating journalistic independence and media diversity, it seems to be at odds with some fundamental legal safeguards against unconscionable conduct and restrictive trade. It's unlikely any freelancer would have the financial grunt to mount a legal challenge, unless you're a headline act like Neil or Deryn, and we'd risk asphyxiation if we held our breath waiting for the insipid MEAA to do anything on our behalf, but any lawyer worth their child's school fees could have a field day with this contract. Maybe someone should complain straight to the ACCC.
Clifford Tuesday, 6 May 2008 11:48:44 PM: Unless Fairfax takes the new contract more seriously than the old one, any freelancer can safely just ignore it or return it with lots of clauses deleted or altered. There's no sanction. Noone who commissions the articles really cares.
Rosalyn Page Wednesday, 7 May 2008 10:44:09 AM: Yes, why doesn't someone make a complaint to the ACCC? How can a contract like this be fair or legal? Freelancers have to make noise or we'll be writing for nothing in the not-too-distant future. Relying on decent commissioning editors not to enforce the contract is not way to work.
un-fairfax Wednesday, 7 May 2008 1:37:33 PM: Part of the problem is that many journalists will not stand up and complain about the low rates and theft of our rights for fear of being blacklisted for work. With so-called "citizen journalism", online archiving (with not a cent going back to the writer) and re-printing of our stories in numerous print and digital publications in the country (but paying us just one measly rate and not even phone, travel and Net expenses), it's harder than ever to make a living. No wonder so many of us are prostituting ourselves to well-paid but soul-destroying corporate writing and editing. The public needs to know about this erosion of their right to know and the freedom of the press. If journalists lose their freedom to write for whomever they choose, the readers/viewers/listeners lose their choice too - they'll see the same story in more places. Maybe it's time for an old-fashioned writers' strike - staffers and freelancers - it worked in Hollywood.
Makaha Wednesday, 7 May 2008 3:28:41 PM: Whatever happened to fairness and respect? As a freelancer (like the majority of my colleagues) and member of the Alliance who adheres to the code of conduct, I do my very best to submit articles that are clearly written, cleanly edited and meet my editor’s requirements that we agreed upon when I first pitched the idea. It’s frustrating to the say the least. I am so bloody tired of rapacious, arrogant and bullying tactics from publishers – or their accountants – who keep us at a low word rates. In one case after asking to go permanent part-time after months of ongoing casual work, the publisher then grudgingly offered a contract, but said they would not pay the required superannuation. I hasten to add that these snakes are in huge contrast to the hard-working section editors who commission and without an exception, are sympathetic and supportive of freelancers. Yes, I chose this career. No, I am not continuing. If these publishers are not interested in treating my profession w
Plugger Thursday, 8 May 2008 11:49:38 AM: Can you imagine a News Corp radio network pushing the SMH? No? The Fairfax contribution on May 8 was columnist Shelley someone who spent her time laughing and laughing about how drunk everyone was at the Logies and banning kids wearing school uniforms in shopping malls during school hours. Four times the word Sun-Herald was mentioned -including Price adding at the end of the segment that he looks forward to reading her column this Sunday. Can someone prepare a quiz for Monday to check his comprehension skills for Sun-Herald retention? For Gawd's sake Fairfax management, just have Steve Price stop pushing News products. Just tell him not to do it or he'll get the boot.
barry rutherford Thursday, 29 May 2008 5:04:46 PM: So Mitchell is a headline Act just like Alan Jones and John Laws was. What Mitchell should be saying is that he has a vested interest in the story. If the Broadcasting Tribuneral were not such a PaperTiger they would be insisting upon it !
Stuart Wednesday, 4 June 2008 4:59:07 PM: Check out this new Australian Drudge like website:

www.thehenryreport.com

Its independant, update daily and gaining wide popularity.

29 Aug 2008

Rundle: We've just seen one of the great American speeches

SMH shows Mike Carlton the door

Dyer: interest rates will fall next week

WA Election gets down and dirty

Next Crikey Email 1300 hrs 1 September

Please login to continue

When is a freelancer not a freelancer?

Share / Save Article