Les Hacks - freelance journalists      



*
November 2006
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30    
Archives
Categories
Recent Entries
Links
journalism.co.uk
This blog is hosted by journalism.co.uk on a reciprocal link basis only. The opinions expressed on this blog are entirely those of the author and are not endorsed in any way by Journalism.co.uk. Additionally, all content remains the sole copyright of the authors.


*

March 24, 2006

Contribs & casuals

Apparently there are two types of freelance journalist, says a student journalist. There are casuals and contributors.

She's blogging on the new NUJ students site. But so far no one has answered her request for someone to explain the difference.

So here's my response.

A contributor is most people's idea of what a freelance journalist does. A news reporter, feature writer or columnist, they work from their own premises - office or spare room. They generally file their copy electronically to whichever editor commissions it. They have no contract of employment. They are free to come and go, work for whoever they fancy, and just get paid for what they manage to sell. Hence the term freelance.

But journalists do many other jobs. They can be news editors, subeditors, production editors... people who process other people's copy, making the pages fit, and getting it all delivered to the printer. These are not roles that easily take place outside the publisher's premises. Normally, therefore, they are staff jobs.

However, employers have a tendency to want to cut costs, keep flexibility and employ as few people as necessary. So there is a regular demand for "freelance" staff to come in, on a shift basis, to cover for absences or to get through a crisis. These are the casuals. They work on the employers' premises. They may typically be booked for a week at a time, or longer. Or just called in for single shifts. It is a haphazard and uncertain way of earning a living. I've never done it, but it sounds appalling. The worst of all worlds - you sell your time, not your produce - and can be summoned or dropped without notice as management fancy. But it suits some people, who like the variety and the challenges.

A purist might argue that casuals are not freelances at all. They are just temporary workers with very short term contracts. And that is how some are being regarded now. Many do not invoice their client with a fee that they set. They are put on the company's payroll and have tax and national insurance deducted. They even, thanks to employment law, receive holiday pay and some entitlement to maternity and paternity leave. That's the stuff that full blown freelances sort out for themselves.

But the name freelance seems to have stuck. Labels matter to people. It is probably sounds better to think of yourself as a freelance, rather than as a casual temp.

For an insight into the working life of a casual freelance sub - see this blog of someone who has been doing it, more or less happily, for years.

Les

Posted by leshack at March 24, 2006 01:29 PM | TrackBack