What defines a non-nightmare, freelance gig?

GBrooks · **Posted:** Sat Oct 20, 2007 10:20 pm

First-time poster, former daily copy editor (OK, OK, 20 years ago!) here...

My company (a small marketing/PR shop) may take on projects requiring quite a few freelance copy editors. We're looking at options ranging from hiring full-time folks to packaging the work up into smaller chunks and pushing it out freelance.

The thing is, we want to do it right, in a non-nightmare kind of way. So I've got questions:

* If you're a full-time copy editor at a daily, is some extra work (handled as a 1099 subcontractor) on the side even attractive? Assume:
- The work would be completely non-competitive vis-a-vis your current employer.
- The deadlines wouldn't be so crushing that you'd be on the spot -- it's the kind of thing where you'd get a package of stories, art and dummies for, say, a 12-page publication and know that, 2-3 days later, you'd need to have it wrapped up.
- The pay would be enough to get and hold your attention. (I shouldn't even have to mention that, but having looked at what some small papers are paying copy editors, it bears mentioning.)

* If something like that were interesting, how would you like to be paid? By the hour? Flat fee per project? I'm pretty sure that whatever we do, it'll include some sort of bonus structure for performance, measured as both accuracy and throughput. (Assume all projects are about the same level of effort, same ad percentage, page count, etc.)

* Would added benefits make a difference? Example: Let's say you're interested but don't have a powerhouse computer or a copy of InDesign/Quark at home. If part we paid for half your computer and software when you signed on do to a minimum number of projects, would that matter? (Feel free to suggest other things - that's just an off-the-top-of-my-head example.)

I know answers will be all over the map depending on your individual situations. I'm not trying to hire anyone right this second... just trying to see what would motivate pros in this field.

Editer · **Posted:** Sat Oct 20, 2007 11:47 pm

I've done freelance projects while working full time on a news copy desk. It's no big deal if the projects don't come hot and heavy with short deadlines (my regular clients sometimes request a quick turnaround on something reasonably small).

I normally get paid by the hour, but I know other freelancers who get paid by the page or the word, or sometimes accept a flat fee per job, and I've occasionally taken on such a project. Most experienced editors will ask to see a sample of the work before agreeing to a flat fee; that's easier on everyone in the long run.

If I were considering a job that required expensive software that I didn't have, I'd appreciate help acquiring it. Some clients do that; others expect their contractors to have the equipment they need before starting work. Either approach is reasonable, in my opinion.

Now I have a question: Are you looking specifically at newspaper copy editors for these projects? If so, why? There are dozens, possibly hundreds of full-time freelancers who do what you're looking for, including some who specialize in PR and marketing materials. I'm not saying you're doing it wrong, just want to be sure you aren't narrowing your search unnecessarily.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:53 am

Quote:

Are you looking specifically at newspaper copy editors for these projects? If so, why?

One reason might be that newspaper copy editors are the best copy editors around. I can imagine that some goofy shit gets past copy editors who specialize in PR and marketing.

Editer · **Posted:** Sun Oct 21, 2007 10:05 am

Phillip Blanchard wrote:

Quote:

Are you looking specifically at newspaper copy editors for these projects? If so, why?

One reason might be that newspaper copy editors are the best copy editors around. I can imagine that some goofy shit gets past copy editors who specialize in PR and marketing.

I've learned a lot from the freelancers I hang out with online; they're a more talented bunch than you suggest. And lots of goofy shit gets past newspaper copy editors too.

Recruiting newspaper deskers for a freelance PR job will entail putting them in a situation they're not familiar with (different work situation, different type of job). If it were me I'd first think of hiring someone who specializes in the kind of work I want done.

Now, some publishers willingly take on beginning freelancers, giving them experience in exchange for paying *a bit* below the market rate, and if that's what GBrooks wants to do, that's fine and admirable.

GBrooks · **Posted:** Sun Oct 21, 2007 11:03 am

Editer wrote:

Recruiting newspaper deskers for a freelance PR job will entail putting them in a situation they're not familiar with (different work situation, different type of job). If it were me I'd first think of hiring someone who specializes in the kind of work I want done.

Now, some publishers willingly take on beginning freelancers, giving them experience in exchange for paying *a bit* below the market rate, and if that's what GBrooks wants to do, that's fine and admirable.

You're right -- it's a trade-off either way, and we'll likely staff with both types (daily copy editors and marcom) of folks.

My own bias is towards daily copy editors for several reasons:

* They tend to be outstanding problem solvers. We've all seen situations where the art sucks, or where the copy's too long/short/awful -- and there's no time or inclination to fix it anywhere but on the copy desk. Great copy editors grumble (behold, this board!), but they also get the job done on time without a lot of woe-is-me drama.

* They tend to appreciate being appreciated. Maybe it's different now, but when I worked on a copy desk several surveys said it was the newsroom job with the least satisfaction. In my experience, people like to be rewarded for excellence -- makes for happier employees/contractors, better results, etc. So that's why we're going to try and structure compensation with lots of performance bonuses. Unless, of course, someone wants gold stars instead.

* They're tougher. That's an odd thing to say, but anyone who's made the jump from daily newspapers to working in PR or marketing knows what I mean. Things are prissy on this side of the fence, with too many meetings and too much earnest drama. A really good daily copy editor, if you give him/her the art, the stories, the dummies and a brief on what needs to happen, is a fire-and-forget (in the military sense, not the Singleton sense!) smart weapon.

Editer · **Posted:** Sun Oct 21, 2007 11:20 am

GBrooks: Good points. It appears you've approached this with care.

I have one quibble:

GBrooks wrote:

* They're tougher. That's an odd thing to say, but anyone who's made the jump from daily newspapers to working in PR or marketing knows what I mean. Things are prissy on this side of the fence, with too many meetings and too much earnest drama. A really good daily copy editor, if you give him/her the art, the stories, the dummies and a brief on what needs to happen, is a fire-and-forget (in the military sense, not the Singleton sense!) smart weapon.

That describes the full-time freelancers I know, too. Freelancers don't do meetings or drama.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Sun Oct 21, 2007 11:50 am

Of course a lot of goofy shit gets into the paper; if it didn't, we'd run out of material pretty fast here. But I see a lot of marketing stuff at work and much of it is just this side of gibberish.

SusanV · **Posted:** Sun Oct 21, 2007 1:34 pm

I don't see that there is much--if any--difference between someone at a daily and someone at a weekly such as mine. We have daily deadlines all week, both for the magazine and for the website, and are quite adept at thinking on our feet, making snap decisions, and getting things out on time.

I did some freelance work for a PR firm a few years ago. It wasn't any more complicated than anything else I've done, just a bit heavy on industry jargon (but not nearly as much as the tech stuff I did for another client!).

I'm in the hourly rate camp.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Sun Oct 21, 2007 1:59 pm

I don't think I'd be allowed to do such work on the side (the Post is pretty strict about such things), but my hourly rate is probably prohibitively high anyhow. Regardless, I salute GBrooks for looking in the right place.

GBrooks · **Posted:** Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:27 pm

SusanV wrote:

I don't see that there is much--if any--difference between someone at a daily and someone at a weekly such as mine. We have daily deadlines all week, both for the magazine and for the website, and are quite adept at thinking on our feet, making snap decisions, and getting things out on time.

You're right, of course -- I shouldn't have made an unnecessary distinction like that. What I'm looking for is the mindset of a daily copy editor, and heaven knows you can find that on weekly desks, too.

SusanV · **Posted:** Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:28 pm

Phillip Blanchard wrote:

I don't think I'd be allowed to do such work on the side (the Post is pretty strict about such things), but my hourly rate is probably prohibitively high anyhow. Regardless, I salute GBrooks for looking in the right place.

We used to have a rule like that, although it was aimed mostly at writers. (For those of us on the desk, the rule was that we could not do outside work during downtime in the office.) It was eliminated after the 2001 pay cuts. I guess certain people realized that they couldn't take away our money and not allow us a means of replacing it. Especially given that the salaries were not completely restored until *last year*. Most of us on the desk have been doing outside work for years.

I've found that what people will pay freelancers varies wildly. I accept work that pays less than what I would normally charge if it's still what I consider reasonable and not an insult.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Sun Oct 21, 2007 4:04 pm

My rate is firm, probably because I really don't want much extra work. "Effort," you know.

copynomad · **Joined:** Wed Feb 08, 2006 12:07 am **Posts:** 623

GBrooks, I think you'll find expected rates will vary quite a bit, depending on how much experience someone has, whether he's looking for extra work or only freelancing, and maybe depending on the cost of living where he is.

If I were to do freelance work, I would do it only if the money were significant, because, if I were to be paid as a 1099 subcontractor, I would end up paying a hefty tax unless I incorporated. I'd also have to do quarterly estimated tax payments and the extra 1099 form(s) at tax time. I would do such work only if I could count on $10,000 net a year in work, at a rate of $50 an hour. I'm not looking for such work, but I hope that gives you an idea.

If you get closer to hiring and need someone great, I can put you in touch with a former copy desk chief at the WashPost who does only freelance work now. Her rate is high, but she's top-notch, completely reliable and can do quick turnarounds.

GBrooks · **Posted:** Sun Oct 21, 2007 9:04 pm

copynomad wrote:

...If I were to do freelance work, I would do it only if the money were significant, because, if I were to be paid as a 1099 subcontractor, I would end up paying a hefty tax unless I incorporated. I'd also have to do quarterly estimated tax payments and the extra 1099 form(s) at tax time. I would do such work only if I could count on $10,000 net a year in work, at a rate of $50 an hour. I'm not looking for such work, but I hope that gives you an idea.

We ran a test project based on a lot of assumptions that we'll be working with in the jobs ahead and a rate like that would work out fine for everyone involved, with wiggle room on both sides for someone who's inexperienced or someone who's a more-seasoned pro.

As for a minimum volume: That makes total sense, and back when I was freelancing that was my approach as well. Heck, if this project comes together I've got $10k a month in volume for multiple people if they want to drink enough coffee. (chuckle)

We work with a lot of first-time or occasional freelancers and looked into giving each one a "welcome package" that included a free hour with an accountant who could offer advice about their tax/deduction options, get new freelancers squared away, etc. Know what the accountant told us? Providing that constituted a benefit that potentially turned the contractors into employees. Feh.

copynomad · **Joined:** Wed Feb 08, 2006 12:07 am **Posts:** 623

Sounds like your accountant was giving you reasonable advice. There are companies that try the 1099 route to basically avoid paying taxes and benefits they should be paying even though the hires are essentially their employees. (Not saying that's you, of course.) Good luck with your enterprise.

Testy Copy Editors

What defines a non-nightmare, freelance gig?

Who is online

What They're Saying

Useful Links