Rachel Lynn Brody's Blog, page 13

How Do You Pick Music To Write To?

I’m of two minds when it comes to music and writing. On the one hand, it can be a helpful shortcut to get me into a consistent emotional space for a particular story, cutting through whatever else is going on in my life to make sure I’m on the same “page” when I set pen to paper (or fingers to keyboard). On the other, I often find that once I’ve started writing, the lyrics of a song can be a distraction. Sometimes I solve this problem by listening to instrumental or electronic music once I get underway, other times I just shut the music off once I’m in the headspace I was looking for.

What I generally find challenging, however, is putting together a playlist to support the writing of the actual piece. A piece can have a “soundtrack,” but it takes vastly more time to write a few pages than it does to listen to one song, which I find can have an almost schizophrenic effect on the tone of a novel.

In working on a current project, I’ve found that each character has a few songs that help me find the feeling I need to write sections of their stories, but when it comes to assembling new playlists for new characters (each segment of the story is told from one character’s point of view) it can be challenging. Sometimes the songs that put me in the mind of a character are quite different from the songs a character would like or listen to, and sometimes I can’t think of more than one or two songs that fit, right off the bat. It’s annoying and unproductive to have to keep thinking of another song to add to a playlist, but putting one tune on repeat for an hour-long writing session is the best way to guarantee you will never want to hear that song again. (I used to have the same problem when I made fan music videos – hey, I was young once. I still can’t listen to some of those tunes without wincing.)

How do other authors put together their playlists? Is it instinctual or calculated? Do songs fly from your mind to your Spotify or iTunes? Do you use different playlists for writing than what you use for the “playlist” that’s eventually publicized to readers? I’m curious about how this process works for other writers, and hope some will comment to add their two cents.

The End of Autos?

Many moons ago, I saw an article that asked whether the auto industry was losing Millennials, and wrote a post about it.

Today I saw this article pop up in my stream and thought it was worth posting as a follow-up.

“Older people are driving less as they retire, and younger people are driving less, too, which Richard Florida thinks is because having a car just isn’t cool anymore.” - Max Ehrenfreund | April 1 at 12:00 pm

While the article is dated April 1st, it references other pieces written previously, so I don’t think it’s meant as an April Fool’s joke.

So what will it signify if car culture in the US takes a steep downward turn in the next few years? Will we finally stop letting oil giants pollute our drinking water? Will efficiency standards continue to rise? And what will lower numbers of drivers mean for America’s national infrastructure, which is widely acknowledged to be in need of serious investment? And can we have some high-speed trains already?

Anyway, I thought it was an interesting article, and hope you do too.

 

Freelance Writing Site PeoplePerHour takes sexism to an unfunny place on April Fools Day 2014

On April Fool’s Day, the internet is a treacherous place. What started many years ago as a gag where sites would make outrageous posts designed to fool readers into thinking fake news stories were real has evolved into a tradition of posting the most outrageous, click-baiting articles they can in the hopes of fueling false outrage.

Most years, I get taken in by one or two articles like many others, and laugh it off. This year, the April Fool’s Day “joke” that People Per Hour (a UK-based online freelancing site) sent straight to my inbox is so obviously an ill-advised attempt at humor that it highlights just how deeply ingrained sexism is in UK culture, and how little consideration the company gave to this “joke”..

People Per Hour apparently thought it would be funny to send an email telling their users they were going to split the site into two – based on gender. “MenPerHour” and “WomenPerHour”, complete with consultants to help users determine which category they fell into.

Leaving aside entirely the fact that they apparently thought it would be funny to exclude those who don’t identify as either male or female, and the fact that they have both clients and registered workers in countries that hold abominable records on women’s rights and safety, This is an international company, and such laddish humor is not just offensive, but highly culture-specific in its obviousness as a joke. Their “prank” is in unbelievably poor taste, and will hopefully backfire on the company. I almost hesitated to post about it, given that in the end I don’t want to drive traffic to their site and let them profit off this stunt, but have posted screenshots of the email and blog post below in the hopes that readers will look at them rather than going directly to the site (though I did include a link to the blog post for those who think this post is my idea of an April Fool’s Day prank).

In full, here is the PeoplePerHour April Fool’s Email:

And here is a link to the company’s blog, which I had hoped would be a blog saying, “Haha, got you!,” but which actually takes the joke to an even more offensive level, with guidelines on how men and women should look in their user photographs. The blog starts with the same information as above before moving into more “specifics” on the new policy:

People Per Hour Is Now Splitting Into 2 Sites Based On Your Gender

Or, if you’d rather not give them the pageviews, here are some more screenshots:

And, at time of posting, here are the comments that had been left on the blog entry:

This may be one of the least professional “April Fool’s Day” jokes I’ve ever seen a freelance website run. I’ve already forwarded the email concerned to the Everyday Sexism project, and tweeted about it, and hope PeoplePerHour realize the extent of their ill-advised attempt at joining in on April Fool’s Day fun.

While I “get” that this is supposed to be “funny,” it says a lot about the culture at People Per Hour that this was the best their team could come up with.

Edit: I’ve already started receiving comments from those who think it’s “embarrassing” that I “don’t get the joke” or “don’t understand humor.” Comments of this nature won’t be approved or published, as this is a well-known silencing technique that will not be humored on this blog. If you want to make a cogent argument as to why it was responsible for PeoplePerHour to make this joke, or why this is the funniest joke they could come up with, by all means go ahead – but personal insults, etc. are off the table.

Second edit: I’ve deleted my profile on this site. While PeoplePerHour decided to follow me on Twitter half an hour or so after I posted the original blog, they did not reply to a single tweet nor address the concerns of numerous others who commented on their blog post that the “joke” was in poor taste. Other users made similar points to those I made above: that the stunt was unprofessional and too culturally-specific for an international site with users in countries where women’s rights are severely curtailed. Coupled with feedback from those who have given endorsements to others on the site regarding PeoplePerHour’s unscrupulous email spamming and unnecessary unsubscribing complications, it became clear that this was not a site I wished to be associated with.

Everyday Sexism @ People Per Hour on April Fool’s Day

On April Fool’s Day, the internet is a treacherous place. What started many years ago as a gag where sites would make outrageous posts designed to fool readers into thinking fake news stories were real has evolved into a tradition of posting the most outrageous, click-baiting articles they can in the hopes of fueling false outrage.

Most years, I get taken in by one or two articles like many others, and laugh it off. This year, the April Fool’s Day “joke” that People Per Hour (a UK-based online freelancing site) sent straight to my inbox is so obviously an ill-advised attempt at humor that it highlights just how deeply ingrained sexism is in UK culture, and how little consideration the company gave to this “joke”..

People Per Hour apparently thought it would be funny to send an email telling their users they were going to split the site into two – based on gender. “MenPerHour” and “WomenPerHour”, complete with consultants to help users determine which category they fell into.

Leaving aside entirely the fact that they apparently thought it would be funny to exclude those who don’t identify as either male or female, and the fact that they have both clients and registered workers in countries that hold abominable records on women’s rights and safety, This is an international company, and such laddish humor is not just offensive, but highly culture-specific in its obviousness as a joke. Their “prank” is in unbelievably poor taste, and will hopefully backfire on the company. I almost hesitated to post about it, given that in the end I don’t want to drive traffic to their site and let them profit off this stunt, but have posted screenshots of the email and blog post below in the hopes that readers will look at them rather than going directly to the site (though I did include a link to the blog post for those who think this post is my idea of an April Fool’s Day prank).

In full, here is the PeoplePerHour April Fool’s Email:

And here is a link to the company’s blog, which I had hoped would be a blog saying, “Haha, got you!,” but which actually takes the joke to an even more offensive level, with guidelines on how men and women should look in their user photographs. The blog starts with the same information as above before moving into more “specifics” on the new policy:

People Per Hour Is Now Splitting Into 2 Sites Based On Your Gender

Or, if you’d rather not give them the pageviews, here are some more screenshots:

And, at time of posting, here are the comments that had been left on the blog entry:

This may be one of the least professional “April Fool’s Day” jokes I’ve ever seen a freelance website run. I’ve already forwarded the email concerned to the Everyday Sexism project, and tweeted about it, and hope PeoplePerHour realize the extent of their ill-advised attempt at joining in on April Fool’s Day fun.

While I “get” that this is supposed to be “funny,” it says a lot about the culture at People Per Hour that this was the best their team could come up with.

Edit: I’ve already started receiving comments from those who think it’s “embarrassing” that I “don’t get the joke” or “don’t understand humor.” Comments of this nature won’t be approved or published, as this is a well-known silencing technique that will not be humored on this blog. If you want to make a cogent argument as to why it was responsible for PeoplePerHour to make this joke, or why this is the funniest joke they could come up with, by all means go ahead – but personal insults, etc. are off the table.

Somebody Out There Hates Your Writing

There are a lot of articles about “coping” with negative reviews. One-star, zero-star, slams and takedowns can make even the most confident writer go through a moment of self-doubt. As a writer and reviewer, I’ve been on both sides of this equation. One time, an offended writer even came to my blog to object to my review in the comments. Which, I think we can all agree, is never a good move for a writer.

But I understand that it can be upsetting, particularly for new writers, when someone gives their work a negative review online. As an editor, I’ve even had writers who’ve even been upset by less-than-effusive (and I don’t mean negative, I mean less-than-effusive) comments made about their own work in reviews of larger collections.

It’s a big bad world out there, and not everyone is going to adore every word that comes off your pen (or keyboard). So here are my tips for quieting the “OMG I’m worthless!” voice that might pipe up when someone says something unflattering about your writing.

1. Any review is just one person’s opinion.

Find out who that person is, and see what other kinds of opinions they’ve shared. For example, the other day I noticed that someone had slammed one of my early plays with a 1-star review on Goodreads. Since the previous review had been much higher, it was a little annoying to see it fall by several stars with one fell swoop. But when I clicked on the person’s profile and checked out their website, I found out that not only was their independent review site dedicated to slamming books “so bad they couldn’t be unread,” but they also took issue with the work of writers who are widely acknowledged as leaders in their particular fields. Realizing you’re in good company definitely helps get rid of the bitter taste of a negative review.

2. People have different tastes.

Not every piece of work is going to connect with every reader. And you don’t necessarily want it to.

@girl_onthego @KayJayFDU exactly. Not my problem if someone I had no interest in connecting with when I wrote it didn’t get it.

— Daniel José Older (@djolder) March 29, 2014

When another piece of work was reviewed with one star, and I started doing my digging, I found out that the reviewer’s single favorite line in all of literature was from…50 Shades of Grey. Not to knock EL James, her work, or her readership, but it seems to me that someone whose tastes run so intensely to that particular piece is unlikely to be looking for, or interested in, a book of social-issue themed science fiction. In this case, I doubt very much that the reviewer in question would like any of my work. No harm, no foul.

3. Bad reviews lend credibility to the good ones.

Particularly since the rise of self-published fiction, there has been controversy about how authors acquire reviews. I often provide review copies to serious reviewers, and they note this in their reviews (and I do the same when reviewing the work of others – it’s called disclosure, and lets your reader know why your reaction to a piece of work might differ from that of the general paying public). But there has been a lot of discussion of authors paying for reviews, or recruiting friends to pump them up, and I’ve even seen some readers who say they don’t believe a book is good unless it has a range of reviews at different star levels. While you might lose a few stars early on in the game, keep drumming up reviews and eventually the law of averages will start to reflect a more balanced image of how readers are reacting to your books.

4. Take it as feedback, figure out what’s really being said, and use it to  make your work better.

Recently, my play Ace In The Hole had two scenes read aloud at a “scratch” night in Newcastle, England. After the performance, audience members were encouraged to write their reactions on cards and tack them up for the companies who had presented to read and learn from. When the company forwarded the comments to me, I was thrilled that, for the most part, people seemed to have engaged with the play on its own terms – but as with any group, there were a couple of people who hadn’t liked the work as much as others. Now, theater is a little different from fiction, since there’s usually an opportunity for development of work after an initial presentation to an audience, but the same rule holds true: when an audience member takes the time to review your work, no matter what they say, take it as an honest reaction. If you’re unhappy with what they’ve said, consider whether they might have a point.

In the case of Ace in the Hole, one comment that gave a little sting was that the piece might be better as a radio play. Now, one way to take that is, “This play sucks, it’s not visually interesting, cancel the production.” But if someone took the time to give the feedback, it’s probably because they think there’s something there worth developing. In this case, my interpretation of the feedback was that the action of the play was too static, not physical enough. After all, in a radio drama you only have the medium of sound, whereas on stage both the dialogue and the physical movement of the actors need to contribute to the overall dramatic action. As I redrafted and rewrote the play to its rehearsal draft, I took this as feedback and looked for natural opportunities to make the play more physical. The final draft features a lot more necessary physical action than the first one, and it’s all because someone was thoughtful enough to let me know what part of the play they found lacking.

5. Sometimes, you just have to ignore it and move on.

As part of the same session, one piece of feedback spoke about how the company’s mission was to engage young women, but the play itself seemed like it would speak more to the young men in the audience. There’s not a lot that can be done about that. Ace in the Hole is a science fiction play, set in space, featuring three female characters fighting for survival. To my mind, that feedback speaks more to the audience member’s presupposed notions about who likes science fiction in general, and military-themed science fiction in particular. Since I know plenty of women who enjoy those genres, and since the remit of the commission was to write a play with an all-female cast, set in space…this wasn’t a piece of feedback that I could let lodge in my head.

There are other ways to think about criticism – for example, my home town newspaper has one critic who I love to read because I know no matter what he thinks of a piece, I’ll think the exact opposite. That’s one reason why I’m a big fan of critics who let you know their bias when they’re writing – if you know someone swings for experimental poetic fiction, for example, you might take their thoughts on a historical bodice-ripper differently than if they exclusively review the romance genre.

While we’d all like to think that everyone who picks up our book or buys a ticket to our play is going to love it, writers shouldn’t be afraid of someone out there disliking their work.

After all, in art, as in life – if you’re not pissing somebody off, you’re probably doing it wrong.

Have you read my work? If you have a moment to give it a review – or even just a star rating on Amazon – it would be very much appreciated. Rather leave your mark over at Goodreads? Consider this your invitation! 

I love your comments. Akismet, on the other hand…

I’m hoping someone out there can offer me some advice, because I’ve been looking for a solution to this issue for literally months and I’ve had enough.

Every. Single. Comment. That anyone leaves on my blog. Is getting eaten by my spam filter. As you can imagine, this is having a stifling effect on the conversations here, and it’s become really frustrating. I check my spam folder and approve comments on a regular basis, so it’s not as if comments get disappeared (in other words, PLEASE leave one if you have a solution!) but when even my own replies to comments get stuck in spam until I un-spam them, something is wrong.

I’m using Akismet to filter out spam comments (and there are a lot that are actually spam – handbag and luggage brands, weird SEO pitches, etc) and one solution I saw suggested was to up the number of links that are allowed in a comment before it’s proclaimed spam by the filter, but even that doesn’t seem to be working.

Does anyone either know what more I could do, or can you suggest an alternative spam filter that might work better? I’ll be checking the spam filter throughout the day and over the next few days, so please, please leave a comment if you have any ideas – and now you’ll know why it might take a little time to show up.

Thanks to everyone in advance.

The City’s Son & The Glass Republic: The Best YA Fantasy Novels I’ve Read In Ages

A month or two ago, I won a competition for two books on Twitter. Author Tom Pollock (@tomhpollock) offered up the first two books of his Skyscraper Throne series, The City’s Son and The Glass Republic, and I figured I may as well enter.

I had no idea what I was getting myself into.

I just finished (like, ten minutes ago) The Glass Republic, which is the second book in the series. It was incredible. I haven’t read a book that captured my attention, with such a carefully-built and real alternative reality, in a very, very long time. I immediately took to Twitter and probably embarassed myself a bit by raving about the books, but you know what? If it means he sells a few more copies, I don’t even care. These books were phenomenal, and without wanting to give away spoilers, here’s what I’ll say:

The series begins with two friends, Beth Bradley and Parva “Pen” Khan, London girls navigating the complexities of high school and family and more. They’re quickly dragged into an alternative world where the streets of the city are alive and the son of the city’s Goddess is trying to save their world from destruction.

The first book, The City’s Son, is focused on Beth, while Pen takes a bit of a backseat (though not much of one – her story in this book is one of the most chilling depictions of a character being snatched up by the forces of evil that I’ve ever read). Beth joins forces with the titular City’s Son, learning about the alternative world beneath her feet and ultimately helping fight to save it.

Book two, The Glass Republic, is divided between the two girls, but it’s Pen’s story that’s front and center, here. In this novel, a new facet of Pollock’s alterna-London gets explored – London-Under-Glass, a world reflected in mirrors and filled with intrigue and danger.

Both books feature fully dimensional, well-drawn, independent, risk-taking female protagonists who develop over the course of their stories and find themselves. I preferred book 2 to book 1, but only by a smidge, and only because it’s a little more full-throttle. Don’t skip The City’s Son, though, because you’ll be lost among the creatures in The Glass Republic and besides, it’s a fantastic read.

Although Goodreads has a listing for the third book, I can’t find it yet on Amazon, so I’m assuming it’s not out over here yet. (Pollock is a British author). I’ll be checking back regularly to see if it’s available.

Links:

The City’s Son

The Glass Republic

Both by Tom Pollock.

Working like a Ninja (the Ninja Standing Desk)

Last week, to help counteract the negative implications of being a writer who also works a 40-hour-a-week day job, I bought a Ninja Standing Desk.

A friend had told me about the desk – completely adjustable for one’s height and the cheapest standing desk on the market – and after some thoughts about whether or not it was worth it, I decided it very much was, and sent in my order.

I set it up over the back of one of the doors in my apartment, although eventually I’d like to make it a permanent place on the wall, and so far, so good.

Here’s the only thing: the main attraction to this setup is that it’s movable and adjustable. There’s really not a lot of point in just tacking it to the wall, since you could accomplish more or less the same thing with a couple of (much cheaper) shelves from Ikea, or some boards from Ikea.

Do I regret the purchase? Not a bit. I’m a little wary of how long the velcro is going to last (the shelves are attached via velcro, and I can see some disastrous shit going down if the velcro ever stopped working), but even if that happens I think I could probably use my nearly-nonexistent sewing skills to make it work.

Being fairly tall, though, I already knew I had issues with the height of my computer monitor (both at home and at work) and at least this is solving the home part. Now, granted, I’m standing up for bouts of about ten minutes at a time and then lying down for an hour, but even having those ten minutes here and there – particularly given that it’s pretty comfortable – is making a difference. Plus, I’m supposed to try and stand up whenever possible to help keep my core from getting too pathetic during my recovery.

As a writer who deals with neck, shoulder, back and arm aches, and with both the monitor and the keyboard at the proper heights, I have the feeling this is going to wind up being a very solid investment.

The Independent’s New Stance on Gender-Biased Books

Graphic from The Huffington Post.

Reading my twitter feed this morning, I saw an article @AndrewDucker posted about the Independent on Sunday’s new policy towards reviewing children’s books:

“Any Girls’ Book of Boring Princesses that crosses my desk will go straight into the recycling pile along with every Great Big Book of Snot for Boys. If you are a publisher with enough faith in your new book that you think it will appeal to all children, we’ll be very happy to hear from you. But the next Harry Potter or Katniss Everdeen will not come in glittery pink covers. So we’d thank you not to send us such books at all.” – Katy Guest, Gender-specific books demean all our children, so the Independent on Sunday will no longer review anything marketed to exclude either sex

In theory, I think this is great idea.* Don’t offer free publicity to books that exclude one gender or another. Unfortunately, in describing how the policy will be executed, Guest stays fuzzy on the details, which makes it hard to figure out exactly what kinds of books — other than those with glittery pink covers – .the Independent on Sunday will no longer be offering column inches to.

While the headline statement – that the books will be excluded based on their marketing – seems fairly clear, I’m not comfortable with how Guest goes on to outline what books might or might not be covered. The Independent on Sunday won’t cover books with sparkly pink covers, but what about blue covers? Does her jibe at “Snot for Boys” includes the kids’ series “Captain Underpants,” which – for a time – was literally the only thing one of my younger cousins would even consider reading? The covers were done in bright, primary-colored colors, if I recall correctly. Would that wind up on the excluded list?

And although Guest speaks well of Harry Potter, as a high-placed member of the literary community, she must be aware that:

“Although she was christened Joanne Rowling, and is known as ‘Jo’ to her family and friends, millions of Harry Potter fans know the best-selling children’s author as ‘J.K. Rowling’.

The use of a pen name was suggested by her publisher, Barry Cunningham. He thought that young boys might be wary of a book written by a woman, so Joanne chose ‘K’, for ‘Kathleen’, the name of her paternal grandmother.”

–

Isn’t that a little more of an insidious marketing move than putting glitter on a book’s cover? “Sure, girls, you can be a famous and successful author, but only if you hide your name, because boys probably won’t read your stuff.”

What about books with content that specifically promotes gender and class stereotypes? Alloy publishing’s Gossip Girl, with its oversexed rich teens? What about something like A Little Princess, which not only has a gender-specific title, but takes its orphaned heroine from waif to princess? What about The Princess Diaries, for that matter? 

I see Guest’s point. I really do. And I agree with her intention of helping kids access a wider range of books. There’s no reason for books that have wide appeal to be sectioned off into “for her” and “for him” sections. There’s no reason that a boy shouldn’t read Matilda without having to be self-conscious about sparkly pink glitter on the cover, except that some little boys might very much enjoy having a sparkly pink book and some books have themes that might be inclusive but which are appropriate for a sparkly pink book cover. And what about grown-ups? Will the paper still publish reviews that fall under the general category of “chick lit”? (Now that Bridget Jones is back, by the way, are we still calling it “chick lit”?)

Because Guest avoids giving specific examples of the books that will be excluded from review under the new policy and fails to list specific criteria which books must fulfill (other than the “no glitter” thing, and why the hell does she have such an issue with glitter, anyways?), it’s very difficult to see this as something other than a broad stroke to generate positive publicity for the paper. Why restrict the judgment of a book to its cover? What about looking at the content of a book and deciding whether it reinforces positive gender values? (And whose values?) Twilight has completely unobjectionable covers, according to the guideline of gender-based marketing, but they also promote what many consider to be an unhealthy teenage relationship (codependent and borderline emotionally abusive/controlling, according to a star of a new teen franchise, the Divergent books, and written about over and over on the web if you care to do a quick Google search).

There are other layers to exclusionary marketing that Guest doesn’t even touch on. As many authors know, the cover art decision lays far outside a writer’s purview when it comes to most traditionally-published novels. Rather than singling out and punishing a single author, wouldn’t it be more effective to also ban reviews of books from a publisher who endorses gender-marketed books? In most cases, the publisher is the one walking away with the payday, after all.

What about other types of exclusion that demean all readers? Specifically, the publishing industry’s tendency to “whitewash” heroes and heroines on their covers. I don’t want to drag specific authors into the conversation, but I’ve had friends whose books, when published, featured covers showing white people when the character supposedly being portrayed was a person of color. Is that more or less demeaning – both to the reader’s intelligence and the author’s original intention – than a copy of Matilda that comes with a sparkly pink cover?

Overall, I admire what Guest is trying to do. But from my pre-coffee Sunday morning perspective, it seems that (while the motivation for this new reviewing tactic comes from a positive place) it might have been helpful for Guest and the Independent to more clearly outline the solid criteria that, in their eyes, makes a book’s “marketing” identifiable as being for girls or boys – and why this “marketing” is such a valid litmus test. 

Speaking of tests – the real one will be the next time a mega-hit book rocks up the charts and the Independent on Sunday sits out reviewing or covering it in their literary pages. When that happens, please, somebody give me a shout.

What do you think of this new book reviewing policy? Is it a step in the right direction, or a self-congratulatory and probably ineffective PR move?

*For now, I’m not even going to touch on the implicit endorsement of a gender-binary society, but I’ll also grant Guest that at the moment I can’t think of a single children’s title that endorses anything but the identities of “girl” or “boy.”

Edit: I went looking to see if the Independent on Sunday was featured in this year’s VIDA study, which examines who is writing the material that winds up in literary magazines. It wasn’t included, but if anyone has access to that information I would be very appreciative if it were passed on to me for inclusion here.

Please Bear This In Mind When Submitting Your Bid

© Kineticimagery | Dreamstime Stock Photos & Stock Free Images

The other day I was cruising one-off writing gig listings and came across an ad that hacked me off to no end. Here’s the part that got me riled up:

“This job should be easy for a professional writer, please bear this in mind when submitting your bid.”

I’m going to try this the next time I walk into my dentist. “This root canal should be easy for a professional dentist, please bear this in mind when sending your bill. Now that’s out of the way, dose me up on that laughing gas!” Bet we’ll both have a good giggle, don’t you think?

The prospective client who posted this ad either doesn’t care about quality content, or – I very much hope – is unintentionally doing themselves a great disservice.

Professional writers are professional for a reason. They’ve put thousands of hours into perfecting their craft, and they are the ones who are qualified to determine what their time is worth. They’re also the ones who are qualified to decide how “easy” a job is, and how much skill and time it will take to complete. For a client to assume they know the full extent of the effort a copywriting  job will take tells a writer they’re likely to be difficult to work with and overly demanding, and may even try to evade payment once the job is complete – under the cover of belittling the professional work and effort put forth in good faith. Not what any professional, in any field, looks for in a client.

If a client is sure that a job is so “easy,” surely they have a sister or neice or an unpaid intern happy to do it? Whatever the content, writing even a few hundred words takes time, and that’s time a professional writer is using to give their client the best possible chance at making a splash with potential customers. It’s also time during which they are not getting paid more by another client, or time that comes out of the non-work portion of their schedule. Does any genuinely professional small business want to come off as hackneyed and corner-cutting when it comes time to make an impression on their customers?

Furthermore, do they want their customers to walk in and insist that if their business is “professional,” they’ll give a cut rate for their services?

Businesses who imply that they’re entitled to the best professional efforts of others without fair payment give the impression that aren’t looking to provide quality, they’re looking to increase their bottom line. At any expense. By (intentionally or unintentionally) insulting the professional integrity of the best writers out there, these businesses shrink the pool of people who will even consider submitting a bid.

Which brings me to my next question: why even bother putting this requirement on an open job? For those unfamiliar with services like oDesk and Elance, these online clearinghouses allow clients to post the equivalent of a classified ad, outlining a writing job and opening it to bids. If a client doesn’t want to accept a high bid, all they need to do is skip it in favor of a bid by a writer working at a lower rate. No explanation or justification is required for turning down jobs that don’t fit a project’s budget. So why alienate writers who might pick up the job to fill time between other commitments instead of just letting the open market work its magic? And if, upon receiving all the bids, there are none that fit a client’s planned budgetary specifications…maybe it’s time to reevaluate the plan.

The moral of the story? Don’t expect to get the best writers to compete for your job by rolling out a condescending advertisement. If you really don’t want to deal with bids from professional writers whose time is worth more than your company can afford, be direct and place a ceiling on what you’ll accept – a simple “due to budget constraints, bids over $15/hr will not be considered” does the job nicely, and without the not-so-subtle implication that anyone asking for more than that is trying to pull a fast one or is less than professional. Meanwhile, writers who charge rates more in line with professional standards will still steer clear, but without the bad will. Instead, you’ll wind up with writers happy to work for what you’re willing to pay, whether that’s their usual rate or they’ve decided upon review of your advertisement that the job really is simple enough to warrant charging less. If their work isn’t up to snuff…it’s another indication that maybe your plan needs to be modified. (Moreover, since the economics of these sites often require newly-registered writers to build a portfolio of reviews to get higher-paying jobs, you may still get a bargain.)

I’d love to hear from those who’ve used these services as clients, regarding how they list jobs and what sort of rates they feel are reasonable, how they select their writers, and what might prompt a well-meaning business owner to post this kind of ad. Is it simply a case of a non-writer being unable to convey their intentions clearly? Or do you think it’s an intentional effort to belittle and bully a writer into accepting an otherwise unacceptable rate?

Similarly, copywriters – what’s your reaction to this sort of ad? Do you submit a bid anyways and see what happens, or scroll past the listing in favor of jobs without implied pay restrictions?

Looking forward to hearing what people think.