It is one thing to have talent, but, if you can’t market it successfully, getting your freelance business off the ground isn’t going to go so well.

Most freelancers have a few fool-proof ways to stay visible and keep projects coming in. Whether it is attending networking events or using social media, these tactics ring tried-and-true for successful self-employed professionals.

1. Use social media.

This one is somewhat obvious — you should certainly have a LinkedIn profile and consider using Twitter. Aside from just having social media accounts, what else can you do to get the most out of these channels?

“If you can combine social media with in-person networking, it is so much more effective,” says Ilise Benun, founder of the Marketing Mentor business coaching program for creative professionals and author of The Art of Self Promotion. She recently attended a conference and reached out to the keynote speaker via Twitter before the event. When she spoke up during the session, he already knew who she was because her tweet had broken the ice. It was an instant “in.”

Benun says that prior to attending an in-person networking event, find out who is going to be there and tag their name in a tweet — just begin conversing. “When you get there, you’ve already given them a head’s up… you’ve raised your hand. It really does give you access to people that otherwise wouldn’t take your call.”

“If you can combine social media with in-person networking, it is so much more effective.”

2. Network smarter.

Networking is a valuable way to promote your business, but interacting with the right group of people to meet your specific needs is important. If your goal is to find a job, look for a group that is comprised of professionals with different needs. That way, you’re more likely to meet people who may be able to use your services. On the other hand, freelancers looking to connect with other self-employed professionals will likely do better attending a group with others in similar roles; this is more of a support group. “You really want to make sure that your prospects are going to be where you’re going,” says Benun.

To find a good group, do not simply rely on the Internet to get a feel for it. Pick up the phone and call the organizer to get the inside scoop on the organization, its purpose and the members. Why? Because nothing stinks more than shelling out for a fancy lunch only to end up with zero prospects or contacts.

“Marketing is about building relationships, real face-to-face relationships. If you believe the size of your online list needs to be big, it’s time to think that about the real world as well,” notes Tammy Furey, a personal coach to freelancers. She says that contractors should make themselves as useful as possible when they join a group. “All of this will make you memorable and valuable,” she says.

But don’t expect to reap the benefits of networking right away, Furey adds. “The frustrating thing is results take six to 12 months to show up. I have seen so many people give up before the networking really starts to work.”

“Be clear about your intentions and simply ask for what you want.”

3. Ask for what you want.

No matter what techniques you use to market yourself and your business, it__?s important to be clear about what you want. When Holly DeWolf, an illustrator and author of Breaking Into Freelance Illustration: The Guide for Artists, Designers and Illustrators, wanted to secure a publisher for a book, she asked a friend for advice. “I came up with an idea, wrote the proposal, wrote a sample chapter, and then I asked them to have a look at my work through my query letter. I had a book deal three weeks later,” she notes.

Although publishing a book may not be that simple, DeWolf’s point rings true: Be clear about your intentions and simply ask for what you want. If that’s a new client, connect with them and then ask the prospect to review your portfolio or to set up a meeting. If you want to network with other creative professionals, ask questions about the group before you sign up. It’s all about putting your intentions out there and being direct, whether through promotional mailers, email lists, or your website. You need that kind of initiative as a freelancer, because no one else is going to toot your horn for you!

“Promotion is basically your own form of show and tell with a permission-marketing twist,” DeWolf says. “In a nutshell, you create your own opportunities by asking for them.”

4. Provide exceptional customer service.

Treating customers well and going above and beyond is key — it gets your clients talking about you and referrals pouring in, a result of strong marketing.

“For a small town freelancer, customer service is crucial,” explains Meredith Marsh, a Web designer. She says most of her clients run their own businesses and organizations and appreciate her ability to leverage technology to create, revise and deliver files promptly. They like that she can deliver — and do it quickly.

“They often seem desperate for someone they can trust, who has the knowledge and skills to fulfill their ideas,” she explains. “Doing work that your clients are happy with is a given… but also provide over the top, better than anyone, smile-and-agree-and-make-everything-right customer service so your clients are also happy with you.”

By exceeding expectations, clients will talk positively about you and not just your work. When this happens, you know the marketing efforts you have made are working.

5. Be consistent.

The biggest problem Benun sees from those she coaches is that they are not consistent with what they do, no matter which marketing strategies they employ. “They have too many things that they think they should be doing instead,” she says. She advises selecting three tools or strategies and working on them daily. “It’s all about execution and consistency.”

It’s easy to want to focus your days and nights on simply writing articles, designing logos, or copy editing if that’s your field. But longtime self-employed pros know that marketing is just as, if not more, important as those tasks, because it’s what brings in new business. Without it, you really are free-lancing.

NEXT >> 5 Signs It’s Time To Kill Your Blog

---

Kristen Fischer is a Certified Professional Resume Writer (CPRW) living at the Jersey Shore. Visit www.kristenfischer.com for more information.

Magazine editors may not use red pens to edit articles anymore, but they still find a way to rip up your work. At first look, the article you spent hours perfecting may seem like a gigantic failure. The truth is, however, that editing is a natural part of the writing process.

Janene Mascarella didn’t know that as a newbie. She turned in an assignment and was shocked when the article came back with battle scars — several editors were bickering via comments, and the ladies got unladylike. “I felt very belittled. Some of the things they were writing were a little catty. I actually started to cry,” admitted Mascarella, who has published articles in WeightWatchers and Family Circle. She emailed the editor, who realized she had not sent Mascarella an edited version of the marked-up document.

Hopefully you never have to see what really goes on as editors clash about your work, but you will likely have to revise pieces. Luckily, these tips can help you navigate the process.

1. Relax — revisions are normal.

Why do revisions tend to get your heart racing a bit? Denny Watkins, a Chicago-based freelance writer, thinks it’s because writers feel a huge sense of relief after completing an article.

“When you get the marked-up draft back___it makes you have to revisit that mental anguish of the writing process,” said Watkins, who has written for Scientific American and Maxim. “You’re surprised they didn’t see your writing as the same level of perfection that you thought you turned in.”

Danielle Braff, who has written for Women’s Health and Self, agrees. “It always looks overwhelming when you see your piece all marked up,” she said.

Articles at major magazines typically go through more than one review: The assigning editor takes a pass; then it goes on to a committee or a senior editor. Multiple rounds of changes aren__?t unheard of; you may wind up reverting to your original concepts after changing them because editors have conflicting views (in Mascarella’s case, maybe too many).

“If you’re feeling really stressed or ticked off at some of the edits or requests, don’t reply immediately. Give yourself time to cool off.”

“It can be frustrating when you’re asked to do an initial revise when it’s clear that the higher-ups haven’t weighed in yet. That pretty much guarantees a second revision request,” said Melissa Daly, a Rhode Island writer who has penned articles for Health and Men’s Health.

Tip: “If you’re feeling really stressed or ticked off at some of the edits or requests, don__?t reply immediately. Give yourself time to cool off,” advised Daly. Then you can cheerfully respond with “Sure, no problem!”

2. Get source contact information from the get-go.

One way to accommodate editing requests is to jot down contact info from sources during the interview stage. “[Then] you’ll be able to get back in touch with your sources real quickly,” Daly said.

Mascarella believes being polite can also go a long way if you need more information later. An editor recently asked Mascarella for more details on an article she wrote; she was out that day and came home to find out edits were due the following morning. Thankfully, her source responded quickly. “It was really just because after I interviewed him, I sent him an email to thank him personally,” she noted. “So be nice!”

Tip: If you go through a PR contact for the interview, make sure to get the source__?s direct info, as well, so you can contact him or her directly if you’re in a time crunch.

NEXT >> 4 Things Editors Do to Drive Freelancers Nuts

3. Ask questions.

When your article comes back with vague instructions, get clarification so your updated draft doesn’t warrant even more rewrites.

“I used to have a major phobia of calling editors___I was afraid I was bothering them or wasting their time,” recalled Terri Huggins, a New Jersey scribe who has crafted pieces for Redbook and Sister 2 Sister. “I would do the worst thing you could possibly do: I’d just guess what the editor wanted and make my edits based on that.”

“Sometimes a senior editor will seek clarification about aspects of the piece that the initial editor did not cover in her requests,” added Braff, whose editors tend to be specific in their demands.

Meryl Davids Landau, an author and writer featured in Prevention, More and others follows up to any revision requests on the phone. She asks what the editor wants the reader to come away with after reading the piece and if the publication has covered the topic before to see if they want a fresh angle.

“I try never to revise anything until I have a clear sense of where the editor thinks my version went off the rails; otherwise the next version is just as likely crash,” she explained.

Tip: Pay attention to each comment; if an editor brings up a point once, they do not want to have to do it again.

“I try never to revise anything until I have a clear sense of where the editor thinks my version went off the rails.”

4. Know the mag.

Writers who don’t familiarize themselves with the tone and style of the publication in advance are just asking for revisions later.

“I read the magazine, so I can see how they execute things,” Mascarella said. “I get more information just from actually picking up a few copies of the magazine.”

Even if you follow the writer’s guidelines, revisions are still probable. “No matter how good you are, there will be some level of edits,” said Daly. “Recognizing that it doesn’t mean either of you is right or wrong goes a long way toward adopting a more Zen attitude about revisions.”

Tip: Get inside information about a magazine on the cheap: Grab a latte and browse an array of titles at your local bookstore. Take note of contacts, sections, formats and the writing style.

5. Think back to your query.

Staying on target is another way to prevent a large number of revisions. One way to do this is to peek at your query or assignment details before you start to write, so you recall the proposed idea.

After she gets an assignment, Mascarella sends an email to the editor to verify the angle. “I reiterate exactly what I’m covering and how I plan to execute it,” she said. Mascarella said she’s also had fewer revisions since she started asking editors for guidance during the writing process.

Tip: Upon confirming an assignment, refer back to the original query or any other communications you have had with the editor to reiterate the slant, prospective sources and length.

6. Speak up if an editor goes overboard.

Occasionally, revisions can take on a life of their own, and an editor can change direction of a piece completely.

“I’m just not shy to speak up,” said Mascarella. She suggests bringing up what you originally agreed upon, so the editor sees the revisions have gone above and beyond. In some cases, a magazine will come back with more money to compensate you for the extra time needed to refocus the article.

Be careful with this one, though, or you could get pegged as the high-maintenance writer and likely not get another assignment.

Davids Landau recalls a time when an editor told her the editor-in-chief simply didn’t like the piece after signing off on an outline. She argued for the ability to revise, but even the updated draft wasn’t accepted. She got lucky, though; she collected the kill fee and wound up selling the story to another magazine — making more than she would have originally.

Tip: Keep a copy of your initial query and contract handy, so you can remind the publication what they agreed to.

The bottom line

Here’s the skinny on revisions: Sometimes they’re a hassle and you wind up putting double the time you did writing into editing the work. That is par for the course. “Your job isn’t over when you send in the file,” Mascarella pointed out.

And even if your original work ends up looking like a bloodbath, if you’re cooperative and easygoing about it, you could earn repeat assignments. “When you don’t balk at the revisions or give the editor a hard time, they remember that,” Mascarella said. “Be a team player.”

NEXT >> 4 Things Editors Do to Drive Freelancers Nuts

---

Kristen Fischer is the author of Ramen Noodles, Rent and Resumes: An After-College Guide to Life.

On the marquee for the Internet’s top movie websites, the hierarchy is clear: For tracking film favorites, it’s IMDb and Yahoo! Movies. Buying tickets? Head over to Fandango and Moviefone. But, when all you need to know is what the critics (be they actual journalists or just finicky fans) are saying about The Avengers or if the premise of Abe Lincoln killing vampires is genius or just ridiculous, Rotten Tomatoes is king.

And, with new parent company Warner Bros. behind it, RT could be poised for even more clicks. The site joined forces with Flixster to create an even bigger smorgasbord of evaluative movie data, there are plans to syndicate that infamous Tomatometer, and there’s even a Sirius XM show hosted by editor-in-chief and veteran film journo Matt Atchity.

We caught up with Atchity to talk about some of the criticisms leveled at RT’s movie rating system and the insanity of critics who pull out their smartphones at press screenings. Call it a “Fresh” look at the entertainment Internet trenches, from a man who has been there since the very beginning.

---

Position: Editor-in-chief, RottenTomatoes.com
Resume: Except for a 2000-2002 sojourn with advertising agency Chiat/Day, Atchity has worked mainly on the consumer content side of the Internet with Aol, Warner Bros. and Yahoo!. He was also briefly director of production for the music download platform Jrae Live.
Birthday: December 18
Hometown: Kansas City
Education: University of San Francisco, 1989-1991
Marital status: Married
Media idol: Roger Ebert
Favorite TV shows: Game of Thrones, Mythbusters, The Office, 30 Rock
Guilty pleasure: Comic books
Last book read: Last Call: The Rise and Fall of Prohibition by Daniel Okrent
Twitter handle: @matchity

---

People occasionally suggest having a third, more neutral way of categorizing reviews on your site, like “Ripe” to go along with the “Fresh” and “Rotten.” Do you agree, and what tweaks to the overall ratings system are currently being considered?
I’m not sure I agree with that, partially because we feel that there’s great value in our simplicity. The Tomatometer isn’t meant to represent an overall grade for a movie; it simply measures the percentage of favorable reviews. We’re pretty transparent with our system, and anyone can look at the way reviews are marked and see how we arrived at the Tomatometer score. However, when reviews come in, we do allow critics to add a numeric rating, and that results in an “Average Rating” figure that’s displayed on a movie’s Tomatometer page. Admittedly, that number can be easily missed, but that’s probably as close as we’re going to get to the type of categorization you’re talking about.

Every once in a while, an early review on RT gets savaged by reader comments, like a negative take of a heavily anticipated summer comic book movie. What are a couple of your favorite examples of RT users interacting with critics and why?
I have to be honest. I have really mixed feelings about the way some of our users respond to reviews. It seems particularly bad with comic book movies. I can’t say that I have a favorite, because we end up spending a lot of effort policing the outlying reviews to keep comments in line with our terms of service. I’m all for a healthy debate about movies, but so many of the comments are often so out of line that it can be a bit depressing. We’ll never get rid of our commenting system, but we may move in the direction of not allowing comments from anonymous users. In other words, if you’re going to comment on a critic’s review, you have to use your real name (in the hopes that the discussion would be a bit more civilized). But that’s a bigger debate for another time.

“The studios’ marketing machines have done more to try and drown out critics than the Internet ever has.”

What’s your “state of the union” view these days on the state of film criticism? Has it evolved as it always will, or is it in a bit of tangled lull?
I think that criticism has changed, and is still changing, but it’s still pretty healthy. There are more people writing about movies now than we saw 30 years ago. It’s easy to point to bloggers as the death of criticism, but I think that’s a simplistic view of the world. There was a time when a local critic really had a lot of influence on the movie-watching habits of their community, but I think the studios’ marketing machines have done more to try and drown out critics than the Internet ever has. Admittedly, there are some less than stellar online writers out there, but there are some dodgy print critics out there, too.

On RT, we try and make sure that we’ve got the most important writers with the broadest reach. It does bother me that critics are some of the first on the chopping block when a newspaper, for instance, makes cutbacks, and I know that what we do at RT is a part of why that happens. But I would never want to see what we do replace actual criticism. I strongly believe that professional critics are extremely important. We absolutely ought to be analyzing the media we consume.

NEXT >> So What Do You Do Richard Lawson, Senior Writer for The Atlantic Wire?

You are currently hiring a senior TV and film editor for the LA office. Has the position been filled yet? And what generally do you look for when hiring?
That position is very close to being filled, as a matter of fact. I’m looking for someone who has as much a passion for pop culture as they do for movies, because I think that will help connect to the audience.

What’s your take on people who use smartphones in the theater, and how prevalent is that these days at free, critics’ preview screenings?
I think texting or using your phone in a theater is simply inexcusable. If you’re messing with your phone in the theater, you’re either stupid enough to think it won’t be distracting to others, or you’re simply too selfish to care. The sad thing is that you’d think critics’ screenings would be safe from this, but you’d be wrong. I’ve seen more than a few film journalists using smartphones while the movie is playing. (There’s one person, in particular, I have to try and sit in front of if I see him, because he’s always using his phone.) At a recent screening of Snow White, some jerk in front of me actually answered a phone call. To me, the theater is sacred ground; it’s a shared experience, and we should be respectful of those sharing that experience with us. When the theater owners talk about actually encouraging texting (as they did at Cinema Con recently) it makes me think they’re simply going to drive away an already shrinking audience.

“If you’re messing with your phone in the theater, you’re either stupid enough to think it won’t be distracting to others, or you’re simply too selfish to care.”

The discrepancy sometimes between the critics’ aggregate Tomatometer rating for a title and that of the public is hilarious. What is the widest margin that’s ever been recorded on that front?
We’ll see margins as high as 70 percent sometimes, and I think that happens when an audience’s expectation and movie experience don’t match up. For instance, critics loved Drive and most of the audience hated it, because I think people were expecting something like The Fast and The Furious. It’s more interesting when the audience score is lower than the critics score, because I think the audience score is usually skewed too high. I don’t usually put too much stock in audience scores, because I think it’s a self-selecting pool. As a culture, we’re usually pretty successful at picking movies we think we’re going to like, and I think the audience scores reflect that. If people were more willing to see movies they were on the fence about, I think the audience scores would be a lot different than they are now.

What are some of the golden rules of engaging readers that remain as true today as they were when you started out with AOL in the mid-1990s?
With film journalists, there’s a pitfall of getting too indie-focused. When you’re seeing three, four movies a week, Hollywood formulas can be boring, and so it’s easy to start paying more and more attention to indie and foreign films, because that’s what’s interesting. But there’s not a lot of traffic in covering indie movies, compared to coverage of mainstream movies. I think ending a piece with a question for the user’s thoughts on a subject is still a good way to get engagement. Lastly, users never get tired of photo galleries. As long as the user experience is good (i.e. not reloading the entire page for each new picture), photo slide shows are something that audiences really respond to. Slide shows with good captions are an easy traffic win for online writers and producers.

NEXT >> So What Do You Do Richard Lawson, Senior Writer for The Atlantic Wire?

---

Richard Horgan is co-editor of FishbowlLA.

Last Halloween, Sarah Fenske officially began what she described at the time as an impossible-to-turn-down career opportunity: editor-in-chief of Village Voice Media’s L.A. Weekly. The position still ranks as one of the city’s juiciest journalism perches and represents a big jump up for the Cleveland native, whose career with VVM began in 2004 as a columnist for the Phoenix New Times.

At the time of her L.A. Weekly appointment, some media critics took issue with the fact that Fenske lacked L.A. living experience, while others cynically focused on the fact that she used to date VVM executive Mike Lacey. But in the heat of her first L.A. summer, Fenske can point to a still profitable print side, robust monthly page views and three reporters vying this weekend for various “Journalist of the Year” honors at the 54th Annual L.A. Press Club Southern California Journalism Awards.

All told, L.A. Weekly is up for 18 L.A. Press Club honors including “Best Facebook Presence by a News Organization.” Not bad for less than eight months on the job.

---

Position: Editor-in-chief, L.A. Weekly
Resume: Enjoyed brief successive stints at the Lorain Morning Journal (reporter, 1999-2001), Cleveland Scene (staff writer, 2001-2003) and the Houston Press (staff writer, 2003-2004) before joining Phoenix New Times in 2004 as a columnist. In 2011, became managing editor of Riverfront Times in St. Louis and picked up a prestigious Livingston Award for local reporting for “Mr. Big Stuff,” a piece on corruption in Maricopa County, Arizona. Named editor-in-chief of LA Weekly in October 2011.
Birthday: April 17
Hometown: Cleveland, OH
Education: B.A. from The College of Wooster
Marital status: Single
Media idol: Joan Didion
Favorite TV show: Mad Men
Guilty pleasure: Gin
Last book read: Say Nice Things About Detroit by Scott Lasser
Twitter handle: @SarahFenske

---

The biggest challenge you faced as editor-in-chief was replacing Pulitzer Prize-winning food critic Jonathan Gold. What were the essential qualities you looked for when interviewing his replacement, and what finally made you choose Besha Rodell?

I really wanted to hire someone locally — if only to make up for my own weakness as an outsider. But, the more I dug into the situation, the more I had to reexamine that priority. I began to realize every good food writer in town knew every other food writer in town — and many not only knew the top chefs, they’d collaborated with them on a cookbook or something. What the Weekly needed was someone who didn’t have allegiances, someone who could assess this town with a fresh eye and call a spade for what it was. Jonathan was — and is — an incredibly beautiful writer, but he never writes negative reviews. That worked for him, wonderfully, and it still works now that he’s over at the Times. But what is the Weekly if not the alternative: the smart, edgy voice that calls bullshit? We needed someone who could be critical when it was called for, and who had no loyalties, and who was not interested in befriending the city’s chefs. And that would make the praise mean all the more when it came. We needed someone fearless. The minute I read her clips, I knew Besha was it.

“What is the Weekly if not the alternative: the smart, edgy voice that calls bullshit?”

Once Rodell was announced as food critic, Eater LA made it its mission to publish a photo of her. They failed miserably, but what is your personal take on the topic of food critic anonymity. Is it still necessary and beneficial, or — in this wired day and age — an outdated concept?
Anonymity is less important to me than a lack of allegiances. Sure, some maitre d’ might figure out who Besha is, and Eater might actually get an OK photo one of these days. (We hope not, but we aren’t actively trying to thwart them, either.) As long as she’s keeping a low profile, not befriending the people she’s writing about, and not accepting freebies, she’s likely going to get the same experience as any no-name diner, and she’s going to have an honest take on whether the restaurant works. That’s what matters to me.

Since you took over in the fall of 2011, you’ve presided over some highs (Gene Maddaus’ con man cover story) and lows (Simone Wilson falsely reporting that the L.A. Weekly had done very little original L.A. riots reporting ). How, as an editor, do you try to comfort and support a reporter when things go wrong rather than right?
That “goof,” as you say, was a tough one, and in retrospect, I could point to six or seven things that went wrong along the way. Had any number of checks and balances kicked in, that wouldn’t have happened, and I have to take full responsibility for that reason. Simone may have had the byline, but that was a team failure, which makes it my failure.

NEXT >> So What Do You Do, Janice Min, Editorial Director of The Hollywood Reporter?

But the thing is, with online journalism in particular, we are moving so quickly that mistakes happen. It’s a fact of the job these days, much as I hate it. So, I try to stress owning our errors instead of erasing them, no matter how embarrassing. And then I try to analyze what happened and figure out how to prevent it from happening again. Of course, it’s like Whack-a-Mole: You fix one flaw in your system and another pops up. That’s the online beast. But everyone here is working their ass off and devoted to getting things right. That means it’s less about the blame game and more about putting systems in place, and best practices, that help these very talented reporters succeed even when they’re working at an incredibly fast pace.

Speaking of talented reporters, Gene’s scoop was just a joy to edit -– and, frankly, a joy to read. Stories like that make up for the days when we screw up to some extent, although in retrospect the lows always linger longer than the highs.

For several years, there have been rumors that L.A. Weekly might one day go Web-only. What is the current print vs. Web circulation, and how do you see that playing out over the next few years?
I think we’re at 170,000 copies out there every week and roughly 7.1 million page views a month. Online is growing; print, obviously, isn’t although the paper still gets scooped up as fast as ever. That said, it’s impossible to imagine we’d ever go online-only. The print paper is quite profitable and, I think, a damned good read. It’s great we can supplement it with all these online extras, but print is still where my heart is and where the revenue comes from, too.

“It’s like Whack-a-Mole: You fix one flaw in your system and another pops up. That’s the online beast.”

Also, have you found a big difference in L.A. Weekly Web traffic since the L.A. Times switched to a paywall in March? And is it fair to say the L.A. Times is your main competition?
The paywall hasn’t affected us much, which is probably a sign we need to hustle even more to get the word out about how much interesting stuff we’re posting online. There are just so many choices for people who want to read the news, or kill time, online. As much as the Times is, and always will be, our main competition to sources and the arts community and real news junkies, that’s a small percentage of the people online every day. And every reader that the Times loses has a million other choices for reading material even if that’s just LOLcats. It’s a constant battle to make sure they come to our site.

Whether it’s L.A. Weekly, Patch, TMZ or Huffington Post, there is a certain relentless quality to Internet journalism. What are, in your opinion, the keys to ferreting out and keeping effective 21st century digital journalists?
Frankly, I think part of it is giving them a chance to take a break from online. Dennis Romero, who’s our lead blogger and just kills it every day, just wrote a cover story — which, by the way, is awesome. The L.A. Weekly has a few perks that online-only sites don’t have: We can give you the chance to write about music or art if that’s your thing. And, hopefully, we can help you find the time to mix it up and write a 4,000-word cover story, too. But it is tough. I have no idea how most bloggers can sustain that pace. I used to fill in for our news blogger in St. Louis when he was on vacation (the perils of leading a small staff!), and it just about killed me. I have the utmost respect for anyone writing multiple posts per day.

Finally, in the time you’ve been editor-in-chief, can you highlight (without naming names) one or two of the worst pitches or job candidate experiences you’ve deal with, and why?
I had an L.A.-based PR person email me this kind of condescending note about how we really ought to write about startups — L.A. was becoming such a hub with Silicon Beach, etc. — [and] if I had any questions, to just let her know. Well, at this point, we’d been running a column in the very front of the book for four months or so called, yes, “Startups,” profiling companies that were doing just that. I wrote back suggesting she check out the column and to let me know if she had any ideas for it. I never heard back.

NEXT >> So What Do You Do, Janice Min, Editorial Director of The Hollywood Reporter?

---

Richard Horgan is co-editor of FishbowlLA.

All of us would be lucky to land our dream job at least once during our careers. Josh Elliott has hit the jackpot three times before his 40th birthday. The newest face of Good Morning America arrived at the ABC morning show after six years of ups (SportsCenter) and downs (Classic Now) at ESPN.

But don’t let the boyish good looks fool you — while Elliott has a face for TV, his breakthrough was actually as a writer for Sports Illustrated, covering primarily the NFL for six years.

“I was a subscriber to Sports Illustrated like so many of us, and I was overwhelmed by a toxic mix of naïveté and arrogance and just thought to myself, ‘I think I can write like this,'” recalls Elliott, who landed what he thought would be a short stint at the mag after graduating from Columbia. “This little spot opened up and I went to work for 17 consecutive days, because they told me it would be a three-month gig. So, I kept going back day-after-day until I think they finally took pity on me and gave me a full-time gig.”

With his print days behind him, Elliott talks openly about trading in Brett Favre comebacks for Joplin natural disasters and gives advice for those contemplating a leap into broadcasting.

---

Name: Josh Elliott
Position: Newsreader, Good Morning America
Birthdate: July 6
Hometown: Los Angeles
Education: Bachelor of Arts in English literature from University of California-Santa Barbara. Masters of Science from Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism
Resume: Started out in film and TV production as a film production junior executive at 20th Century Fox, comedy development assistant for FOX-TV, and a producer for Galaxy Productions. Wrote for Sports Illustrated for six years. Became host of ESPN’s Classic Now in 2005 and anchor of SportsCenter in 2008. Joined Good Morning America as newsreader in 2011.
Marital status: Single
Media idol: Jim Murray
Favorite TV show: Top Chef, All In The Family, Lost
Guilty pleasure: UFO conspiracy theories, Simon Cowell, March Madness on a workday, Häagen-Dazs chocolate peanut butter ice cream
Last book read: The Wave by Susan Casey
Twitter handle: @JoshElliottABC

---

How did you make the transition from Sports Illustrated reporter to Good Morning America anchor?
While I was at SI, I had some opportunities to be a guest on some television shows on several different networks. In 2005, ESPN came along and had cast a very wide net for a show on ESPN Classic. It was a great opportunity that I couldn’t pass up. I made the jump and the show lasted for about six months. It was a brutally hard schedule and, at times, a painful transition. Learning a new job on national television, albeit before an audience of seven people that included my family members, was still not easy. It was a long day, but it was like going to anchor college. When they finally cancelled it, I still had some time left on my deal, so the folks in Bristol brought me up and had me on a couple of ESPNEWS shifts. SportsCenter came along and I was lucky enough to work with Bob Ley and Chris McKendry on the weekends.

When they decided to go live with SportsCenter in the morning, they hired Hannah [Storm] to do the 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. shift and they needed the right person to be with her. We found a chemistry that was very rare in television. It was just a joy. As luck would have it, my now boss — the new president of ABC News, Ben Sherwood — was in Los Angeles writing books and living a great life with his wife and two young sons. His five-year-old boy was a L.A. sports nut, and he would wake his parents up at the crack of dawn and ask for SportsCenter. It got to the point where he said, ‘Karen and I would want to watch just to see you and Hannah [Storm] and the vibe play between the two of you.’ When the opportunity came for Ben to take over as the president of ABC News, I guess he had it in his mind that he would like to maybe find a spot for me on the roster, so to speak.

Soon after you started at GMA, you were tossed feet first into fire with breaking news stories in Joplin, Mo. and Springfield, Mass. What challenges did you face in covering those two tragedies?
The tarmac at the [Joplin] airport was essentially a de facto M.A.S.H. unit. Just to step off a plane and see that happening next to you was dismay. You had a sense of how bad it was. It was momentarily overwhelming. I’ve watched the tape back 100 times, and I don’t know if I would describe myself as nervous, but just not really having a sense of the technical aspects of it all. My second hit on Good Morning America was better than my first. By the time Springfield hit, I had already covered a tornado, which was surreal in itself. That allowed me to feel more thorough as a journalist. The challenges? I’m going to be doing the big thing for the first time, and I’m happy that I work at an organization that believes I’m the man to do it.

“In early to mid-August, I still feel like I should be in a rental car, driving the back roads of Wisconsin, on my way to far flung college campuses that are beset by infernally hot weather, to talk to professional athletes who are literally having the worst time of their lives.”

You had a Twitter account while at ESPN, but you weren’t really active in social media until you touched down in Joplin. How did you leverage Twitter to your advantage while in Joplin?
When you open your mind to [Twitter], you see it’s a way to interact with people and viewers. When I got to Joplin, I suddenly felt the need. The ability to simply tweet what I was seeing and provide photos… and to give the photos a bit of context and have it stand as part of the rough draft detailing what had happened there was something that suddenly felt very vital to me. I didn’t even have a sense of trending topics and what that meant, and someone told me I was #4 in the first couple of hours after daybreak that first day. It suddenly hit home of the real power of social media and Twitter specifically.

GMA has famously been No. 2 in the morning show “wars.” What do you think it would take for the show to finally snag the top spot away from Today?
I think it will take diligence on our part. I think it’s going to take continuing to develop exactly who we are. I completely respect what Today has been and what it is. They are collectively a very, very impressive show unit. The anchors are terrific at what they do. I do think there is room for more than one take in the morning. It will take a real push by GMA, but I would be lying if I said part of the excitement and joy of going to GMA right now is engaging towards that push to the summit. Like any climb, those last steps, that final push, is always the hardest. Maybe it’s the athlete in me or coming from the culture I was in, but I love competition and that there’s a competitive aspect to this. I truly love my team.

What advice would you give other print journos looking to make the leap into TV?
Be prepared to fall out of love with your words. I’m still too verbose at times. [Ed. Note: The unedited interview clocked in at over 4,500 words.] At ABC, there’s nothing that I’m doing in terms of on-air reads to pieces or during the news updates that runs more than 11-12 seconds. And be prepared to fail. Lord knows I did early and often. As a writer, you’re really in control of almost everything. That’s not the case in TV. You have to be prepared to work with a lot of people to make something happen, and you got to be prepared at least in the beginning to not be too good at your specific task. Hopefully, you have a lot of people like I had with patience enough to let you catch up to your medium.

“A lot of the very basics of journalism tend to be things that you’re born with or not.”

There’s a lot of debate about whether a journalism degree is necessary to succeed in the industry. Since you didn’t study it as an undergrad, what’s your take on it?
For me, it really does depend on the very specific curriculum that a student would take while majoring in journalism at the undergrad level. By and large, I would say it’s not necessary. A lot of the very basics of journalism tend to be things that you’re born with or not. You can learn to a degree but you also have to have a natural desire to do them. As a graduate degree, Columbia was an intensive yearlong program that meant all the difference in the world to me personally. I realize that it’s not for everyone and that there’s a lot of debate about the importance and the need for it. I respect the people that don’t agree with me. I just happen to personally think they are wrong.

With NFL training camps opening up, do you ever get the itch to write again?
Absolutely. There’s still part of my genetic makeup that feels like in early to mid-August, I should be in a rental car, driving the back roads of Wisconsin and parts of America, on my way to far flung college campuses that are beset by infernally hot weather, to go talk to a bunch of professional athletes who are literally having the worst time of their lives. The NFL will always have a real special place in my heart. It’s the secular religion in this country.

What do you see yourself doing at 50?
I have no idea, and that’s the best part of my career. That’s the best part about being a journalist. I have absolutely no idea what I will be doing when I’m 50. I do know however that if history is a guide for me personally, it will be something that I love.

NEXT >> Sound Off, Superfans: Get a Gig as a Sports P.A. Announcer

---

Marcus Vanderberg is co-editor of SportsNewser.

For anyone who works in the content business, Google can be like the object of a romantic crush: You want to get its attention, but you don’t know how. That’s where SEO comes in. SEO or “search engine optimization” simply means strategically grooming your work to improve its ranking on search engines like Google, Bing or Yahoo. Think of it as a way to create “something everyone ogles.”

The higher your work shows up on a search results page, the better your chances of gathering an audience. So, how do you make your articles SEO-friendly? Here are five tips from experts who are virtual matchmakers when it comes to helping attractive young articles connect with choosy search engines.

1. Know Your Keywords

When it comes to SEO success, keywords are key. These are the words or phrases that best and most specifically identify the focus of your article. Your article’s two to three keywords should match the words or phrases your potential readers would be plugging into a search engine to find just such an article. You can come up with keywords yourself or use a resource like Google’s highly-recommended free keyword research tool, which generates popular search terms based on Web addresses, words or categories you suggest.

But knowing your keywords is only half the battle — where and how often you place them into your article is crucial. “The integration of keywords into headlines, subheads and the upper 20 percent of an article can make the difference between being placed on page one and relegated to obscurity on page five,” said Andrew Barnett, director of digital strategy at Elasticity, a digital communications agency.

2. Optimize Your Headline

When matching search terms to articles, Google looks more closely at headlines than the rest of the text, so it’s important to know how to make your headline more noticeable. First, make sure your keywords are in the headline — and as close to the beginning as possible. “The importance of a keyword exponentially decays the further to the right it shows up in a title,” said David Wolf, an SEO expert and CEO of InBusiness, Inc.

Next, make sure your headlines and subheads are specific and on-point. “Headlines that are not specific enough do not come up in searches,” said Lisa Hickey, publisher of The Good Men Project, an online men’s magazine. “You want your headline to communicate one simple idea, specific enough so that people know what the post is about. This will not only help SEO, but will also help make the article more sharable. And the more it’s shared, the more search engines will see it as a post worthy of showing up in searches.”

“Where and how often you place those keywords in your article is crucial.”

Many writers want their titles and headlines to be clever, but “clever” and “SEO-friendly” don’t often play well together. Jeff McRitchie, V.P. of marketing for MyBinding.com, recommends simply considering “what topics searchers are looking for and what keywords they’re using.” He added, “If your title is too creative, off the wall or clever, the article will be difficult to find in search results.”

Jonathan Rick, digital and social media director of Levick Strategic Communications, says you should try to strike a perfect balance between self-explanatory and catchy. “Instead of sacrificing one for the other, try blending creativity with keywords,” he said.

3. Do Some Body Work

After the headline and subheads, the next most important place for keyword placement is in the body of your article. While you want to avoid having your article hijacked by your own keywords, know that repetition indeed helps. Layla Masri, president of Bean Creative, recommends the following keyword location recipe: “Once in the main header, once in every sub-header, two times in the first paragraph, two to four more times throughout the document, and two to three times in links and image alt text on the page.”

Sounds like math, but Masri cautioned, “Remember you’re writing for people, not for search engines. Search engine optimization is an important marketing tool, but a page optimized for computers instead of readers can be painful to digest.”

Brian Patterson, a partner with MangoCo, an online reputation management firm, agrees there’s a limit to keyword usage. “Unnatural use of the keywords, over and over, are easily detected by the search engines as ‘keyword stuffing’ and could end up blacklisting your article,” he said.

NEXT >> 9 Ways to Get More Comments, Tweets and Likes for Your Story

Francis Santos, search manager for Benchmark Email, says Google has an eye out for stuffers. “In the early days, cramming as many key phrases into an article or blog post actually improved your search rank — not anymore. An article stuffed with too many key phrases will not only hurt your rank, but make your writing seem awkward and forced, turning off readers and shrinking your audience.”

“Google is cracking down on all forms of SEO manipulation,” said Wolf. “It’s okay to optimize your content so search engines know what it’s about, but don’t even think about negatively affecting the user experience to please a search engine.”

4. Write Well

Good SEO won’t help the quality of your writing, but good writing can help your SEO. One tip covering both goals is staying on topic. Gennady Lager, director of search marketing for dealnews.com says the single most important aspect of writing for search engine optimization is to “write every article and page with a singular focused contextual intent.”

“If the content of the article strays across multiple topics, it will often dilute the ranking ability of that article for any particular keyword,” he said.

Kari DePhillips, owner of The Content Factory, an online PR company that specializes in Web content and social media, said in-depth articles often have more SEO value than shallower ones. “We’ve found that the standard 300-400 word post isn’t enough to catch the eye of search engines,” she said. DePhillips also said longer articles can take more keywords without sounding keyword-stuffed and are more likely to be shared through social media, which also increases SEO value.

Santos says, “At the end of the day, good writing always wins. If you write an interesting, fact-filled article of real substance, readers will happily pass it along to their friends, boosting your traffic. A well-written, popular article with tons of views will definitely rank well and can easily beat out an average, unremarkable article with the same key phrases.”

“You should never create a hyperlink out of a phrase like ‘click here’ in an article.”

5. Link Out (And In)

Links, both embedded in text and placed around or at the end of articles, can also make a difference. “The SEO success of an article is mostly based on its reach. The more links it attracts and the more social shares it receives, the better… Google relies heavily on this to determine rank,” said Marisa Brayman, director of Web and marketing for StadriEmblems.com.

Wolf says linking to your older content is a no-brainer. “Links are the most powerful way to get your content to rank higher. The more times you link back to an article you wrote previously, the better it will do in the search engines.”

But don’t blow the SEO potential of that link by using generic text. “Rather than using link text of ‘click here’ or ‘this article,’ use keywords,” said Patterson. “This text is one of the strongest factors in Google’s algorithm.”

“You should never create a hyperlink out of a phrase like ‘click here’ in an article. It has no value,” said Caitlin Bergmann, social media manager for interactive agency The Concept Farm. “You should link to something that has some meat to it, like ’20 Best Hair Tips for Blondes,’ something people could be searching for.”

All of these tips won’t make you a better writer, and good SEO doesn’t guarantee Google domination. But think for a moment about what got you to click on this very article ___- and learn to leverage that power of attraction for your own work.

NEXT >> 9 Ways to Get More Comments, Tweets and Likes for Your Story

---

Joel Schwartzberg‘s keywords include writer, Internet executive, and author of “The 40-Year-Old Version,” a collection of personal essays

Love him or hate him, there’s no denying Roland Martin’s work ethic.

The man of a 1,001 jobs went from county and government reporter at the Austin-American Statesman to becoming one of the most recognizable and outspoken political commentators on television.

While being a CNN contributor would be more than enough for most journalists, that’s just the tip of the iceberg for Martin — he’s also a senior analyst for the Tom Joyner Morning Show, host and managing editor of Washington Watch on TV One and a nationally syndicated columnist.

Martin’s desire to juggle multiple jobs is all part of building and developing his brand. “If companies are able to have multiple revenue streams and have their hands in multiple pools of money,” he told us, “then why shouldn’t the people who actually work for those brands be able to do the exact same thing?”

---

Name: Roland Martin
Position: CNN contributor. Tom Joyner Morning Show senior analyst. Host and managing editor of Washington Watch on TV One. Nationally syndicated columnist.
Resume: Started as a county and government reporter for the Austin-American Statesman and city hall reporter for the Ft. Worth Star Telegram before transitioning into the black press where he won several local and national awards as the top editor for Houston Defender, Dallas Weekly and the Chicago Defender. Founding news editor for Savoy magazine and BlackAmericaWeb.com. Talk show host for WVON-AM in Chicago, news director and morning anchor at KKDA-AM (Dallas) and morning drive reporter for KRLD-AM (Dallas). Joined CNN in 2007.
Birthday: November 14, 1968
Hometown: Houston, Texas
Education: B.S., journalism, Texas A&M University. Master’s degree in Christian communications from Louisiana Baptist University.
Marital status: Married
Media idol: Vernon Jarrett
Favorite TV show: The West Wing
Guilty pleasure: “Golf, golf, golf.”
Last book read: SNCC: The New Abolitionists by Howard Zinn
Twitter handle: @rolandsmartin

---

Looking back, what are your thoughts now on your month-long suspension from CNN for your Super Bowl tweet about David Beckham?
First of all, my thoughts were the same then — I was cracking on soccer and that’s what I talked about. It happened, you deal with it and you move on. My deal is, if you spend significant amounts of time freaking out and going nuts, you’ll simply go crazy. My philosophy is very simple: You keep it moving.

What did you take away from your meeting with the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD)?
We had a meeting, and it was exactly what we said it was in the press release.

Do you think the fallout over that incident and others like Ashton Kutcher’s Popchips ad or ESPN’s Jeremy Lin debacle leads to better coverage of minority groups or just confuses things? Are we becoming more sensitive or too sensitive?
First and foremost, in terms of this notion if we are becoming more sensitive or too sensitive, I believe context is everything. I think it’s important for people to always understand what is the context is in what is being said, because that obviously determines what folks are talking about. That’s first. Secondly, I don’t believe the Jeremy Lin issue somehow improved coverage of minorities. Even though we are a nation that’s becoming a minority country, we still have this view where everything is seen through the prism of the dominant culture, which really means white. We still are challenged with having diversified coverage, just like we are challenged to having diversified talent on the air, who are in critical positions on-air and behind the scenes, as well. Things are certainly getting better in a micro way, but it can be a hell of a whole lot better than what it is right now.

“What always cracks me up is when people want to come at you and give you attitude, and, when you return it, they want to get all sensitive about it.”

You recently had a Twitter dust-up with Touré over the NBA playoffs. Has Twitter become more of a distraction than a resource for you?
Oh no, no. Twitter is a huge resource. Look, I had my own morning drive and midday radio show on WVON in Chicago. I also streamed it on U-Stream, and the beauty of that is you are able to communicate with people all across the city, all across the country, all across the world. What always cracks me up is when people want to come at you and give you attitude, and, when you return it, they want to get all sensitive about it. It’s sort of like when someone calls you on a radio show and they want to criticize you; then, you hit them back and they get all sensitive. My whole deal is, “Why did you pick up the phone and call?” The way I look at it is some people can’t handle the heat. My deal is stay off Twitter or don’t respond to somebody. But, again, the beauty of the medium is that you’re able to interact with people instantaneously when something happens. That’s what I love about it. For me, it is a tremendous source for information. There’s no way in the world I can read everything, see everything, so it’s always great when people can send you something and say, “Hey, did you catch this?” So, that’s what I love about it.

You’ve worked for several black newspapers throughout your career. How do you think they will fare against the mainstream newspapers and alternative weeklies? Do you think they stand a better or worse chance in the digital age?
If black newspapers are able to understand how valuable their niche is and if they are truly able to make the switch to the digital medium, then I think they can do extremely well… I always make the point that the mainstream papers could never out-black me. What I mean by that is it’s not my job to try to compete with them everyday on the news of the day. You cannot win that fight. But when it comes to stories that are unique to our audience, I’ve made it perfectly clear that they can’t beat me at my game. That means you got to have quality talent; you got to have the leadership that’s going to do what’s necessary. There’s a place for black newspapers just like there’s a place for Hispanic media, media targeting women. But those black newspapers can’t keep thinking that the printed world is still going to be there. They have to understand that we are now operating in a digital and mobile world, and they must be able to keep up.

NEXT >> So What Do You Do, Joel Hyatt, CEO and Co-Founder of Current TV?

Are you surprised by the lack of diversity on the Sunday morning news shows? Which minority talking heads should the networks be targeting for their programs?
I am not surprised about the lack of diversity on the mainstream Sunday morning talks shows, because the hosts of those shows, as well as the people that produce those shows, as well as the other staffers that produce those shows look the same as the guests they book. Look, this is something that’s not new. I’ve said it before. Also, those shows are stuck in a time warp. Those shows are all so locked in on what’s happening in Washington D.C., they don’t have the ability to understand or think about the rest of the country. And, so, it bores me every Sunday when I see the same senators, the same folks, as opposed to being able to introduce different and varied guests that I think would be of interest to a diverse audience.

Now, when you talk about who should they talk to, I think, first and foremost, they have to get out of the “Who’s the one black person?” [thinking]. It happens all the time. There’s always the “black person” to go to when it comes to various issues. Here’s what cracks me up: Anytime there’s a race-based conversation, it’s amazing how these shows can find three, four, five, six guests to talk on stuff. I always go, “Hmm, I wonder if those people can talk on other issues?” That happens. There’s no one particular person, but I think there are a number of voices that could do very well in terms of expanding the line of thought.

You’re an outspoken Christian and your wife is a Reverend. What’s your take on President Obama supporting gay marriage, and how much do you think his stance will impact his reelection bid?
It was not a surprise. Remember in 1996, as I said on CNN during that week, the President signed a questionnaire when he was running for the state Senate, saying that he supported same-sex marriage. Then, in 2004 when he ran for the U.S. Senate, he then said he believed marriage was between a man and a woman. So, it wasn’t a surprise that he took the position. The impact on the election is still unknown, because national polling data shows that a majority of Americans support same-sex marriage, yet when you have the referendums in 32 states, supporters of same-sex marriage are 0-for-32. It sort of says people are saying one thing in a poll but actually doing another thing when they actually go to vote. I think it’s way too early to tell in terms of what the potential impact will be.

“The idea of being objective is a ridiculous one.”

In March, you wore a hoodie in support of Trayvon Martin while hosting Washington Watch on TV One. Do you think journalists can openly support issues like the Martin tragedy and still remain objective?
The idea of being objective is a ridiculous one. Let’s just be honest. Everybody — I don’t care who you are — you have a viewpoint on something and on an issue. The difference is whether you chose to say something publicly, whether you chose to advance it… a whole different deal. I chose to wear the hoodie, because it was important beyond just the Trayvon Martin issue but to call attention to the issue of racial profiling. Also, you’ll notice the hoodie that I wore was my college hoodie. I wanted folks to know this is what a college graduate looks like. This is what somebody looks like who is successful. I’m not a thug, never been a thug, but the problem we have in this country is you have people that have these perceptions and they continue to use these perceptions to drive their viewpoint. To me, that’s dangerous.

What’s your secret to developing your brand?
Know exactly who you are. The second thing is you have to have no fear in being able to work it. Companies today will fire you, not renew your contracts and when it’s gone, it’s gone. So you’re left with what, saying that I use to be with so-and-so and I use to work with so-and-so? I love this scene from the movie The Insider where Al Pacino says, “Lowell Bergman, 60 Minutes, I wonder if my phone calls would get returned if I didn’t have 60 Minutes after my name?”

When you build your own brand, people will still return your phone calls regardless of the call letters or where you actually work, because they now know you and they trust you in what you have to say and what you’re doing. That, to me, is the most important aspect when it comes to building your brand. If companies are able to have multiple revenue streams and have their hands in multiple pools of money, then why shouldn’t the people who actually work for those brands be able to do the exact same thing?

NEXT >> So What Do You Do, Joel Hyatt, CEO and Co-Founder of Current TV?

---

With the economy looking up, many independent professionals are grabbing new opportunities and returning to the ranks of traditional employment. But, the move comes with a series of critical decisions and planned actions that will have a long-term effect on your time, money and career trajectory.

So, are you really ready to ditch the freedom of freelancing for the stability of regular paychecks and flesh-and-blood co-workers? If so, use this to-do list to save yourself a few headaches down the road.

Moonlight Carefully…
You’ve spent a stretch of your career cultivating clients, learning their needs, and providing them a valuable service, so it’s not surprising that you’ll want to keep one or two on the side. However, moonlighting comes with a few caveats. Barriers to this arrangement could come from either party in the form of non-compete agreements or other contracts.

Rose Reterstoff is certified in human resources and has seen the issue from both sides. “This is especially a concern with government entities or in companies that have government contracts. Some employers will require that any contract work be approved first. Even if this isn’t the case, the employee should look for contract or policy language such as ‘conflict of interest’ or ‘ethical behavior.'”

Other than contracts, she noted that such limits are often found in employee handbooks or other HR policy statements.

So, if you’ve made a living freelancing for Magazine X, and are brought on as a staff writer for the competition, you’re going to need to look more closely at your arrangements with both. Check old and new contracts, non-compete agreements, non-disclosure agreements and employee handbooks. Then, tread carefully.

“I would definitely wait to make sure that the job works out before deciding to move any retirement account.”

…but Maintain Your Networks
That’s not to say that keeping a side gig or two is completely off the table. In fact, it’s probably not a bad idea to hold on to a few of your contractual clients and maintain the networks you’ve built.

Kona Gallagher went from freelance writing to marketing work at the county level. Despite having to ditch some of her contacts due to conflict of interest issues, she found a unique way to keep her portfolio and connections fresh. “I still do a little work for free, here and there. Having just one employer is a weird feeling for me, and I always want to have something in my back pocket. Plus, if something happens to this job, I don’t want my most recent writing sample to be from several years ago.”

Now, if you’re definitely ready to shed some of your old network, choose carefully. Keep tabs on those who are related to your new position — maybe you can impress your new boss by pulling in some fresh business. Also consider keeping those with whom you’ve built the strongest bonds and the most lucrative ties. As for the rest, be honest about your new undertaking, and the limitations it puts on your elbow-rubbing time. Then, use your found time to cultivate a new network. Be proactive about nurturing relationships with people you meet on the job, at industry events, and even within your new building and locale.

Make Informed Financial Decisions — Slowly
Many a former freelancer has raced into the cubicle world with visions of regular pay and health insurance dancing in his head, but when it comes to your financial bottom line, slow and steady is best. Handling your new tax burden, insurance choices and retirement funds requires careful decision making.

“Normally, you have 30 days from hire to choose insurance coverage and retirement designations. However, after that window, you may have to wait to make changes until the next open enrollment,” said Reterstoff. She says the initial time period gives you space to read the materials provided to you, check out websites, ask questions and understand your options.

NEXT >> 7 Things They Don’t Tell You About Freelancing

There are occasions when you can prolong this process, too. For example, one of those includes certain retirement account situations. If you managed to build a nest egg such as an IRA account, you don’t necessarily have to combine it with your employer-sponsored retirement account.

Jan Rolls is a certified public accountant who specializes in QuickBooks accounting for private clients. “I would definitely wait to make sure that the job works out before deciding to move any retirement account. If the job then looks to be long-term, I would contact a financial advisor to help determine whether to move a self-funded IRA.”

Um, Are You Really a People Person?
One of the benefits of full-time employment is having your supervisor and team mates to help shoulder the load, brainstorm ideas, cover for you on sick days, etc. But working with people also means you actually have to, you know, work with people. In the past, you likely made all the decisions, chose your co-workers (perhaps the furry kind with no opinions?) and controlled the music, temperature and noise level of your office. These kinds of challenges are very common among solo acts, and horror stories abound.

Natasha Bourlin said she left independent PR to throw her weight behind a project that she believed in, but an environment replete with micromanagement, unfulfilled promises, back biting and gossip drove her back to freelancing. Another recurring theme from freelancer-turned-employees was learning to deal with the loss of autonomy. Kristine Gasbarre, a journalist and published author, described the frustration.

“I’d grown accustomed to seeing my ideas executed. If a light bulb went off, I would put [the idea] into action. When I returned to the office, it was a challenge to have a supervisor hear an idea, tilt their head and say, ‘Well maybe that could work.’ It’s frustrating to suddenly find yourself running into walls.”

“It was a challenge to have a supervisor hear an idea, tilt their head and say, ‘Well maybe that could work.'”

Gasbarre suggests a thorough vetting of the work place, power players and team members prior to accepting a position, while Bourlin focused on preparation from Day One. “Creating personal boundaries in a professional organization is critical,” said Bourlin. “If people are back biting or throwing each other under the bus, try to discourage their involving you by simply not participating in the conversations.”

And, if your supervisor is the one being a pain in the project, just gently remind her of why she hired you in the first place. Often, the hovering will ease once you’ve proven yourself at the company and she’s more confident in your abilities.

Do a Reality Check
Say it with me: “The do-what-I-want-when-I-want days of freelancing are done.” Instead of bemoaning your current situation, go with it. For example, move your morning workout to a noon class near your office, or use your now higher income to get groceries delivered in advance. By 1) acknowledging the change, and 2) finding ways to integrate activities from your former life into your new one, you’ll find the adjustment to the cube much easier to handle.

And, before you start bellyaching about the boss, take a long, hard look in the mirror — or at least at your invoices from the previous year. Yes, having the Apple store all to yourself at 11 a.m. was nice, but you likely left freelancing for more security. So, relax, and accept your new gig for what it is: a steady paycheck that might lead to something great.

Allena Tapia is a freelance writer and editor specializing in education and Latino topics.

NEXT >> 7 Things They Don’t Tell You About Freelancing

The words in Dan Savage’s nationally syndicated “Savage Love” column are similar to how many people like their sex: raw, crass and in your face.

Savage has been fascinated by the topic of sex since his days as a gay teen reading his brother’s stolen copies of Penthouse (for the articles, of course). So, when a chance meeting with the founders of Seattle alt-weekly The Stranger led to a job offer for an advice column, the recent grad quickly packed up his things in Madison, Wis. and headed west.

Now, with a mix of Ann Landers meets Xaviera Hollander, Savage has been doling out sex advice for young and old, gay or straight for more than 20 years. His column is syndicated in over 60 newspapers and featured in a weekly podcast, his It Gets Better Project has helped countless gay teens cope with bullying, and even MTV tapped him to bring his trademark wit to college campuses for Savage U.

Surprisingly, getting young people to discuss their sex lives is a lot easier than you might imagine. “Try not to get them to open up about their sex lives on camera,” Savage told us. “That would be the real trick.”

---

Name: Dan Savage
Position: Editorial director of The Stranger, host of MTV’s “Savage U”
Resume: Debuted “Savage Love” in The Stranger in 1991. Got initially syndicated by just a few newspapers before slowly expanding to over 60 titles. Launched the podcast “Savage Lovecast” in 2006. Named editorial director of The Stranger in 2007 and host of MTV’s Savage U in 2012.
Birthday: October 7, 1964
Hometown: Chicago, Illinois
Education: B.A., theater, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Marital status: Married
Media idol: “Let’s say Sean Hannity because it will piss him off.”
Favorite TV show: The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and The Colbert Report
Guilty pleasure: Stale cake
Last book read: Martyrs and Murderers: The Guise Family and the Making of Europe by Stuart Carroll
Twitter handle: @fakedansavage

---

Since The Stranger launched in 1991, how do you think media coverage of sex and homosexuality has changed?
Hopefully, a lot has changed since when you could get fired as Surgeon General for mentioning that people masturbate. I feel like people are much more realistic when they write about sex in the media, and talking about sex is much more of an acknowledgement. It’s still a little schizoid. When I started writing “Savage Love,” one of my goals was to write a column about sex using the language and the sense of humor that people typically use when they talk about sex with their friends. There seemed to be one way we all discussed sex privately and amongst friends and another way it was written about. People weren’t writing about the sex we were actually having but this kind of pre-agreed-to idea of the sex that everyone ought to be having even though anybody wasn’t.

I think there’s a lot more realism out there about sex then there was 21 years ago. When I started the column 21 years ago, The Village Voice wouldn’t pick it up because it was too dirty for New York, which was saying something. I was writing this column for kinky, rainy Seattle, and the then editor of the Chicago Reader told me that if I wanted to be in the Chicago Reader I had to write less about anal sex. I think that has changed and the Internet helped change it, because suddenly there was this place for sex writing without the gatekeepers and this paranoia that some child somewhere might pick up this newspaper.

Newspapers are in serious trouble right now. Why do you think alternative weeklies like The Stranger will fare any better in the digital era?
I don’t! The print media is in trouble everywhere and is having to transition and transition fast to the new economic models. Like I said earlier, I have a degree in theater and I actually think what’s happening to print media is kind of what happened to the theater 100 to 120 years ago. There were lots of jobs in the theater. There were legit playhouses by the score in every major American city. There were lots of jobs out there for actors and directors and theater technicians. That all came apart. Radio and television, a new technology, came along and just decimated — destroyed really — the profession.

“Advice columnist is such a sweet gig that it will be pried from my cold dead hands one day just as Ann Landers’ was pried from hers.”

Suddenly, if you wanted to be an actor, you had to be willing to work for free and often for years before anyone would pay you to do it. That’s kind of what writing has become. Reporting now, people will do it for free before anyone will pay them to do it. You have to have a blog and already be on the beat that interests you before anyone will think about hiring you. When I look around and listen to people in the journalism field, or journalism students, or journalism professors complain about what newspaper and print jobs are like now, for me, it echoes the history of theater classes I took in the ’80s when they were talking about the coming of radio and television and what that did to live performance.

At what point did you decide to branch out into radio, TV, speaking tours, etc? Were those ventures deliberate moves on your part or did other outlets just start coming to you?
People began reaching out to me. I get letters every day from people asking me how to syndicate a column — because obviously I must know since I have one — and I have no idea how you syndicate a column. I started writing a column and people started contacting me, asking me if they could run it too. I never got out there really and marketed the column. The person I’m doing the television show with, Brian Pines of Hypomania Content, he was trying to get a meeting with me for two years before I would have lunch with him. And even then, he had to fly up to Seattle to meet with me — I wasn’t going to fly down to L.A. I’m too lazy and self-hating and self-loathing to run around in circles and saying, “They ought to put me on television.” Brian had to convince me to go out there and do this, and I’m glad that he managed to do that.

Since you didn’t study journalism in college, what advice would you give a college student looking to become the next Dan Savage?
[Laughs] That position is currently filled. Advice columnist is such a sweet gig that it will be pried from my cold, dead hands one day just as Ann Landers’ was pried from hers. You don’t walk away from an advice column. It’s just too much fun. It’s good work if you’re doing it right. But it’s just such a blast. If you want to be the next Dan Savage, I don’t know how to help you. And if I did know how to help you, I wouldn’t, because I’m interested in being Dan Savage for as long as I can.

You’ve said that Savage U aims to counter the fact that young people don’t get good sex education. How much do you think the media is to blame for that?
I don’t think the media is to blame for it. I think politicians are to blame for it. I think there’s cowardice. There’s not a lot of good sex ed. on television, but television I don’t think is the venue. I don’t think television, the medium, is charged with providing young people with good sex education. I think that’s parents and schools and [students are] failed by it. There was just another bill passed in Tennessee; any kind of sex ed. is abstinence-only, and this new abstinence-only education in Tennessee has to encourage children from gateway sexual activities like hand holding. I read about it and said they should just start calling these bills the “Dan Savage Employment Protection Act of 2012.” I will never be out of work so long as politicians keep churning out kids who have no info and don’t know their holes from asses in the ground. I will be employed. We need good sex ed. in the schools. That’s about parents and teachers, politicians and churches. I don’t think that’s about the media.

“I will never be out of work so long as politicians keep churning out kids who have no info and don’t know their holes from asses in the ground.”

How do you and your producers at Savage U get college students to open up about their sex lives on camera?
Try not to get them to open up about their sex lives on camera. That would be the real trick. Anyone who wanted to come on the show and do a one-on-one had to nominate themselves, volunteer and be pre-interviewed by producers. We wanted to make sure we were talking to people that weren’t making stuff up to be on television. We also wanted to make sure we were talking to people who were going to be comfortable being on television talking about this stuff. And we wanted to make sure we weren’t talking to people who might regret the stuff they wanted to talk about in five to 10 years. We didn’t want anyone to look back on the show and regret it. I will say, there are kids that I sat and talked with about sex issues, or problems, or relationship problems that I, if I were suffering similar problems, wouldn’t talk about on TV. But young people have different ideas about privacy and what’s public and private. They live their lives online, and they kind of broadcast a lot about their personal lives and sex lives in ways that old farts like me almost can’t wrap our heads around. Sometimes, I would get uncomfortable, or I would have to be reminded by myself usually or the kids that I was talking to that they were fine with this and this for them was normal.

After 20 years of hearing about other people’s sex lives, is there anything you think is absolutely weird or abnormal in the bedroom?
I think if you’re doing things in the bedroom that you don’t enjoy, that’s weird. That you shouldn’t do things that you don’t enjoy. You should advocate for yourself. That doesn’t mean there won’t be times when you’ll do things for your partner that your partner really enjoys but that you could take or leave. They don’t scar you emotionally, or you’re not sobbing on the floor in the fetal position afterwards. But you take some pleasure in giving pleasure. There are so many people out there that have really unfulfilling sex lives, who are going through the motions, who can’t bring themselves to articulate what turns them on and really are wasting so much of their lives, because they’re afraid of opening their mouths and telling the truth about who they are, what they want and what turns them on. I think that’s weird. I think that’s freaky. There’s not a kink in the world that’s as freaky. I think boring, vanilla intercourse with someone who bores you is freakish.

NEXT >> How To Sell Sex Articles

---

Photo Credit: Monte Isom

You might not know the name, but even the casual sports fan has heard the voice of Jim Lampley during his iconic 38-year career. Whether covering one of his record 14 Olympic broadcasts or some of the biggest boxing matches in the world on HBO, the four-time Sports Emmy Award winner has replaced the late Howard Cosell as the voice of the sweet science.

The 63-year-old, who’s calling the May 5 HBO pay-per-view fight between Floyd Mayweather and Miguel Cotto, stumbled into the sport after his former boss at ABC attempted to force him out of the network, something Lampley now calls “a tremendous piece of good fortune.”

“By way of trying to force my exile and get me to leave, he assigned me to sports which he thought I wouldn’t be interested in,” Lampley told us. “One of the things that he did was assign me to boxing. I think it was purely for the purpose of making me uncomfortable and trying to get me to leave. He wasn’t aware that boxing was my favorite sport.”

The rest, as they say, is history.

---

Name: Jim Lampley
Position: Boxing commentator, HBO Sports
Resume: Hired in 1974 by ABC as the first college football sideline reporter and also covered boxing, the Super Bowl and five Olympic games in 13 years. Hired by KCBS in Los Angeles in 1987 as a news anchor and by HBO as host of the network’s boxing and Wimbledon coverage. Left KCBS for NBC in 1992 where he covered an additional nine Olympic games. Soon to be host of The Fight Game with Jim Lampley on HBO and the undisputed voice of boxing.
Birthday: April 8, 1949
Hometown: Hendersonville, North Carolina
Education: B.A., English, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Marital status: Engaged
Media idol: Mike Wallace
Favorite TV show: Breaking Bad
Guilty pleasure: “Breaking Bad. It’s not on HBO.”
Last book read: Boxing’s Best Short Stories, edited by Paul D. Staudohar
Twitter handle: None

---

You’ve worked with several former boxers who made the transition to broadcasting. What makes a good sports analyst in your eyes?
Point one would be self-confidence. In order to be a critic, you must feel invulnerable to criticism. You have to feel the security of being willing to critique your peers and it’s not all that easy for them to do. Whatever translates to candor, the ability to speak the truth and not worry about the political consequences, that’s the most important element.

You were the executive producer of HBO’s On Freddie Roach and also own a production company. How does broadcasting compare to working behind the camera?
It’s all the same thing. In 37 years of working on one side of the camera, I don’t think I’ve ever been out of touch with what goes on on the other side. I’ve certainly learned a lot from every producer whom I’ve ever worked with — some of the greatest producers in the history of television, starting with my first boss at ABC Sports, Roone Arledge, and going straight on through. And so it just stands to reason that I get a chance to perform as a producer. I’m channeling all the things I learned from all the great producers who have been in my ear and told me what to do.

“The one [call] that people most remember is Mike Tyson and Buster Douglas.”

Why do you think it took so long for the sport of boxing to get a studio show like Fight Game, which debuts May 12 on HBO?
I think it required a moment in time when the most integral and committed boxing telecast network specifically saw a good reason to do that. If it was going to happen somewhere, it was going to happen at HBO. Within the past year, it’s abundantly clear that HBO has renewed and refurbished and reenergized its overall commitment to boxing. That’s manifested in a dozen different ways — you’ve already mentioned On Freddie Roach — and, within the overall broad based new commitment to boxing that this network is constantly attempting to portray, the idea of doing a boxing studio-based show was something that evolved from the top. It came from Richard Plepler and Mike Lombardo, the two guys who together are in charge of programming. It was their specific suggestion that we do this, so it’s an honor to be able to do it.

Which sports call during your illustrious career stands out above the rest?
The one that people most remember is that I called Mike Tyson and Buster Douglas, which is still, to this day, the most significant upset in the history of boxing. To have been privileged to call that would be point one. And point two, George Foreman winning the heavyweight championship for a second time at age 45 when he was our regular ringside expert commentator. To call an accomplishment that historic of someone who was legitimately a colleague and a friend, I still get chills thinking about it to this day.

NEXT >> So What Do You Do, Josh Elliott, Good Morning America Newsreader?

ABC hired you fresh out of college, and you were the very first college football sideline reporter. Nearly 40 years later, how much has the role changed since you defined the position?
I would say the circumstances of college football and commercial television defined the position more than I personally did, but, because of the circumstances of commercial television in college football, it’s pretty much the same today. I’ve never felt as though it was an extremely vital role except in instances here and there. It’s more a piece of the presentation, a colorful element and a personality element. I’ll leave the debate about its value to other people but, by and large, I did injury reports and stayed out of the way from the middle of the first season on. That is what I still think they are doing to this day.

What role will social media play in the 2012 Summer Olympics? Do you think the emergence of Twitter ultimately forced NBC to change the way they broadcast the games?
It should. I was recently at a seminar on the campus of the University of Southern California to discuss the Olympics and television. One of the biggest points I tried to make was this is the first post-Twitter Summer Olympics, and there will be a huge effect because we’ve already seen the degree that it facilitates person-to-person contact, particularly between athletes. The energy of the [Olympic] village is now going to be changed from day to day by the waves of Twitter. It’s the most influential social medium, because of the spontaneity and the immediate wildfire effect it can create. A great lesson to us was watching the ratings for On Freddie Roach, and we discovered that over a six-week period that we could correlate increases in On Freddie Roach ratings to Twitter trending.

The blogosphere was all over your 2007 arrest following a domestic abuse incident with Candice Sanders. Do you think sports blogs act as a check and balance with traditional sports journalism outlets?
Well, certainly in theory. I’m a big believer in the Jeffersonian market of ideas and I don’t have a problem with the fact that the Web creates access and exposure for people with no background in what we would use to think of as journalistic skills and journalistic discipline. I was in my own personal instance disappointed in the number of stories or commentaries that I saw which bore zero relationship to the facts. But that I think is inevitable in this environment, and you have to hope that, at the end of the day, somehow or other, the truth balances it out.

“I was not as well versed and deeply based as a political commentator as I am a sports commentator.”

By and large, over the long haul, I think the truth does emerge. It’s just frustrating to watch the process. What was it that President Obama said? “You don’t want to watch sausages being made, and you don’t want to watch legislation being constructed.” At the end of the day, you don’t want to watch the agonizing process through which a public figure has to try and clear his name in the wake of whatever it is that has put me in front of the public on the Web. It’s never going to be completely satisfying. It is what it is, and you have to try to make the best of those situations.

In 2005, you used an incorrect source when blogging about the Iraq war for Huffington Post, and many readers called you out for it. How did that situation affect you?
I didn’t think of it as rebounding. At the end of the day, if people want to disagree with what I say, that’s certainly part of the process and their privilege. I read my political commentaries and, over time, I decided that I was not as well versed and deeply based as a political commentator as I am a sports commentator. I had been persuaded to do it by someone very high up in political media who has specific purpose in mind for me, and at the end of the day I decided I wasn’t interested in that purpose. That was the beginning and end of that.

Do you think media personalities should be vocal about their personal views or politics and take a stand when necessary, or just stick to more objective reporting?
Given that I’ve been outspoken, I guess it would be a little hypocritical of me to say they shouldn’t. I used to always prefix any political or social comments I made on the radio by saying “I’m about to give you my personal opinion. I happen to be a commentator by trade, not an editorialist… so you take it as you see fit.” And then from time to time I would speak out. Ultimately I wound up substituting for Ed Schultz on his radio show and doing other things that amounted to political talk radio. It was only for a brief period of time; it didn’t last very long.

NEXT >> So What Do You Do, Josh Elliott, Good Morning America Newsreader?

---