| Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Media Issues > Topic: ANNOYED |
Topic: ANNOYED
| Author | Message |
| more food | Posted – 6/26/2007 10:59:23 PM | show profile i turned in this piece and it has practically been rewritten. I can see maybe only a few sentences that I actually wrote. I am really annoyed (ego bruise, yes) and don't even want it published any more. That's bad, right -- I can't do that, right? |
| more food | Posted – 6/26/2007 11:06:37 PM | show profile more... sorry, here's more background on why i am annoyed. i wrote a 3,500 word article for this magazine, and contracted to be paid $2 a word. i turned it in last year, they HELD the piece for a year because of staff changes that happened every month (seriously). During this whole time, they never contacted me about the status of my piece. I, on the other hand, had to constantly email them. My editor was one of the last people to leave the magazine, she didn't what happened to my piece when she left. i had to contact another editor there, now (a year after I turned in my original draft) they want a 500 word piece. i wrote it, and they totally rewrote the whole thing. I am so annoyed, and i just want to call the whole thing off. |
| seeattleme | Posted – 6/26/2007 11:37:17 PM | show profile On the one hand the professional asskissing good girl in me wants to tell you to suck it up, take the byline and enjoy the $$$ (they did pay you the whole amount, right, not $500?), that this happens all the time. And it does. But the problem is the more we writers and freelancers put up with this kind of behavior--and there's a fucking littany of it -- the more thy'll get away with it. You could professionally ask to have your byline removed. Show the original and say, "this isn;t my writing and I don't want my name on it. However, I did the story as contracted and I turned it in on time, ergo fulfilled my contract. The piece was held indefinitely, and now that it's running it's unrecognizable. I'm not comfortable with my name being on it, but require payment for my work." I mean jesus christ people. Enough is enough! |
| more food | Posted – 6/27/2007 3:15:04 AM | show profile thanks a lot, doglady for being supportive. I am thinking it over, weighing the pros and cons. Does this really happen a lot? |
| mad fingers | Posted – 6/27/2007 7:31:54 AM | show profile I'm afraid it does. I turned in a piece a while back that went through so many permutations and "re-thinks" it was almost a polar opposite to the original assignment when it finally saw the light of day. I had to apologize to several experts I'd tapped as sources whose quotes were used to support some hare-brained theory we'd never actually discussed. (Of course, I asked that my name be removed from the story, and I did get paid.) |
| Stressed | Posted – 6/27/2007 10:38:54 AM | show profile One of the magazines I write for does this all the time even though I stick faithfully to the brief. I think it is usually indicative of there being a whole slew of totally indecisive and insecure Eds reading an article and wanting to outdo each other when it comes to finding non-existent problems. Flip side: I have had pieces lovingly polished to the extent that they are far better at getting the point over than my original was. I think you just have to learn to let Ed rewrites go, as long as any changes that are made do not introduce innacuracies to the piece. If my Eds want to stay late and waste their valuable time fixing things that were not broken in the first place, that is their problem. I have also had the same Eds come back and ask me to add extra sections and sidebars that were not requested in the original brief, for no extra money, which really pisses me off. My reasoning is that if they had asked for those things in the first place I would have supplied them and that if they want to move the goalposts after the fact they should pay extra. |
| more food | Posted – 6/27/2007 11:05:15 AM | show profile thanks a lot, everyone he didn't introduce factual errors, but the "tone" he introduced in the piece is so condescending and smugged, for no reason at all but to make fun of the topic i am writing about. i am not sure i want to associate myself with that. |
| WordyBird | Posted – 6/27/2007 3:51:39 PM | show profile Stressed, in situations where they move the goalposts, why not just ask, "And how are you going to compensate me for the extra time and verbiage?" Honestly, I was all set to end up going freelance full-time when I get to NY, just in case I don't find a job right away, but I'm thinking maybe my freelancing will consist of editing and proofreading only. I'm starting to feel like Danny Glover's character in Lethal Weapon: I'm too old for this [bleep]! |
| HisGirlFriday | Posted – 6/27/2007 6:13:40 PM | show profile Just adding to the chorus: In my (very limited) experience I had a first-person piece re-written so completely only about 5 sentences of the original remained. I didn't know about it till the magazine arrived in my mailbox. In some instances, they inserted stuff that I never would have written in a million years. (It was a pregnancy-related issue and they added a passage advising women who crave sweets to eat apples instead of cake, or some whatnot. Personally, I ate me lots o cake when I was preggo.) Please tell us that you got the $2 a word for the original word count, not the 500, right? |
| seeattleme | Posted – 6/27/2007 6:43:42 PM | show profile And the problem is, folks, it's YOUR name on the piece. It's YOUR name readers will associate with whatever the editors WANT or make you say through rewrite. YOU are the one associated with whatever ideas or tone is expressed in thestory. Most people out there--including many journalists who have only worked with real editors (a REAL editor doesn't rewrite but helps the writer revise, works with the voice, the conclusion, the message, maybe tweaks the structure and asks for more information, that's it) have no idea that editors rewrite to the extent that they do. And so they naturally assume the views , tone, etc expressed in the story with our byline are YOURS and YOURS alone. Which is why we really need to start standing together to STOP this nonsense. Sure, you can assume that it comes with the territory and blow it off, let editors do whatever they want--like most do now. Or youcan step up and challenege it, take the hard road, win the war even if you lsoe the battle (and maybe a big payoff or two). I know it's hard, believe me, I left NY because I couldn't afford the late payment schedules these editors seem to work on (get paid for a peiece six months to a year after you turn it in, etc.). If we stop putting up with these practices in increasing numbers, the editors won't be able to take advantage of the freelancing lifestyle. They won't be able to take advantage of us if we, in numbers, start refusing to be taken advantage of. |
| more food | Posted – 6/28/2007 2:30:18 AM | show profile thank you.... I am getting the $2. too bad, i really want the clip, too.... thanks everyone for sharing. |
| ingride | Posted – 6/28/2007 3:31:38 PM | show profile | email poster I withdrew a piece once In my experience it is more usual for an ed to butcher a story I have written than not; take it out of my voice and put it in his. (I say "his"; haven't had a lot of grrl editors.) Often they'll toss in some gramatical errors and wrong facts. And I have written only for national publications. I hate to think what goes on at the little ones. Once an ed so butchered a piece I did -- reminds of "annoyed"'s story here -- made it humorless and condescending, that I actually withdrew the story. The ed was left staring at a blank half-page the day before shipping. I felt great. There was not much dough involved, though; $500 as I recall for this brief piece. It's not clear to me if you got yr $7,000. Given that they sat on it for a year, if yr getting less you should at least consider Small Claims Court where you can sue w/o a lawyer for, I think, up to $5,000. Did you sign a conract? |
| more food | Posted – 6/28/2007 4:08:31 PM | show profile yeah, signed a contract, for sure. but i just dont know, the masthead has changed to such a degree that the editors i originally wrote the piece for are not gone. so i hope they honor the contract |
| ingride | Posted – 6/28/2007 6:04:24 PM | show profile | email poster be careful There is surely a time limit on the enforcement of the contract and, who knows, a year might be it, so get on the stick and ask them some hard questions. Also, see if yr contract has a kill fee, which, under the circumstances, may exceed $2 a word if that's what they mean to pay you for 500 wds. Changing of the eds on the masthead has NOTHING to do with whether the contract is enforceable. You made the deal with the incorporated company, not the eds. How annoying for you. |
| JimmyG | Posted – 6/28/2007 8:31:32 PM | show profile I think it's worse when an editor wants to butcher your story but he/she wants you to do it yourself. I've had an editor want me to change an article from being balanced to combative, which meant I had to give more credence to a maniacal fringe than i would ever consider. And I had to do the research and rewrites myself. I much prefer the other extreme, which I encountered with a women's mag, where the editors arbitrarily sliced and diced a 200-word column item I wrote beyond recognition, but didn't bother me with the details and paid their $2 a word fee ahead of publication. Was it my "work?" Yes and no, but it didn't embarass me, either. I once edited an article by the late Issac Asimov who had language inserted into the contract that said, basically, he'd submit the work to length and we were free to do whatever we wanted with it, so long as we never bothered him for a rewrite. That's the ultimate ego if you ask me. |
| seeattleme | Posted – 6/29/2007 3:46:27 AM | show profile except that Asimov's condition is now the condition of writing for magazines--after editors have asked to rewrite the piece three times. |
| byallaccounts | Posted – 7/9/2007 6:31:03 PM | show profile Feeling the pain I just went through this experience, too. Interviewed two experts, wrote up a 300-word "short" that included just their direct quotes and a bit of paraphrasing, and had an editor take it apart like strands of ramen. She wanted to alter the direct quotes, changed the meaning of what my experts said, double-questioned every other phrase, and then tried to change the topic altogether...which is when I had to pleasantly point out that this topic was the one assigned. Another writer told me she'd had a similar experience with this editor; it makes me wonder if any of us in this forum are talking about the same person. (I know there are plenty of editors out there who fit the bill, but still, it sure would be nice to compare notes -- and warn others.) I was a magazine editor early in my career, and I remember learning? sensing? that a truly talented editor is one who is comfortable and confident enough to preserve the writer's voice, and discerning enough to alter only what's absolutely necessary. Good editing isn't about re-writing something the way you would have written it, nor is it an exercise in change for change's sake. I, too, feel the need to apologize to my experts about what they will see when this thing comes out, but they are also media contributors, and I'm concerned that somehow this could come back to bite me. Anyone have suggestions for how to do this tactfully and professionally? What if my experts know and love this editor? To add insult to injury, of course, I'm awating a late payment for my trouble. |
| onegreatguy | Posted – 7/9/2007 7:53:42 PM | show profile which pub's? I so wish we could out the mag's that are doing this. I know of one glossy that's done this to me and others way too frequently. I'm not comfortable saying which mag, but when I read these posts, it just screams out to me. I hate this part of freelancing. You have my sympathy. |
| lynsalyns | Posted – 7/9/2007 8:26:04 PM | show profile | email poster ASJA? I think you can report pubs like this to ASJA, and that org keeps a list of those that misbehave like this. At any rate, that story is enough to scare this girl, whose freelance career is just beginning after the slog that is community journalism. |
