Dee Madigan slams unsolicited request to blog for free for Huffington Post as ‘insulting’
Madigan
Media commentator and creative director and owner of Campaign Edge Dee Madigan has described an unsolicited approach from The Huffington Post to write for free as insulting.
Madigan said she was approached via email by The Huffington Post blog editor Chris Harrison to contribute blog pieces unpaid.
“It’s a very profitable organisation basically approaching me unsolicited to write for them for free,” Madigan told Mumbrella.
I think you pay your mortgage by being executive creative director of Campaign Edge.
While it is insulting – to professional writers – you can always say no.
When you are a known local media personality like Dee Madigan the value of the blogging opportunity changes to providing additional PR for her business.
For struggling writers the opportunity is actually less valuable.
Dee what about all your appearances on Sky – Sky is a very profitable business and I’m sure you do all of that for free, much like many others? Why is it ok for Sky and not Huffpo? What’s the difference there??
Hey David, Sky pays me. That’s the difference.
I agree with Dee, there has to be a line drawn. Exploitation is rife because so many people have allowed it – but it does not create opportunities in the long run. Writers need to be respected for their years of developing their craft and skill.
How do you break even making $146m when you exploit people for free articles?
Someone must be on a [Edited by Mumbrella] over there…
As for Dee, did she write the complaint for free?
Whenever I see Dee on telly I’m always really impressed.
But it’s tricky – as a professional, do you give away your IP/trade secrets/thoughts for free, or do you look at the other benefits, aside from cash, that writing a blog for Huff Post could bring?
Above all else, the ABC must pay.
On the ABC she said: “It is not run for profit, also they’re not profiting from me at all. That’s the difference.”
What a farce. The ABC is the most expensive media outlet in the country – and it is run without concern for ‘profit’ because it is subsidised by the taxpayer with barely any proper oversight.
I am sure the government would not complain if the ABC ran a ‘profit’ either through money-making enterprises (as it does with the ABC Shops – with free ads on the network) or through efficiences and savings.
I am sure the government would welcome back any unused funds.
As for the Huffington Post blogs – they are setting up in Australia and are currently hiring a bunch of Australian journalists/writers (according to this piece: http://www.theguardian.com/med.....news#img-3
Given they provide a platform with the potential to expose a writer to a couple of hundred million people worldwide, I would have thought it was a good opportunity for positive publicity – rather than trying to get it by whining through Twitter – a ‘platform’ for which contributors don’t get paid a cent either.
Not sure if this is a Mumbrella or Madigan error, but it did make me flinch, appearing as it does, in a piece asserting the value of “professional” writing:
***“You get what you pay for – if they want to put a call out there for unsolicited contributions from amateur writers for the blog bit, that’s fine and if amateur writers want to gain practice that’s there business, but don’t contact professional writers to write for free.” ***
What disappeared from my comment was:
THEIR business
I’m with Dee on this
geee what’s with the ABC hate?
not their fault they transitioned well online while the rest of the dinosaurs pretended the internet didn’t exist.
Sorry, but how is this news? Our whole industry receives daily requests from potential clients that are insulting.
As a big, big fan of Dee’s, I will not sleep tonight unless I correct some English issues……. ….. it’s not “for free”, it is just “free”
I left school at 14, 56 years ago, and all you professionals should not need to be corrected!
I am now free to watch Doc Martin!
As much as I agree with Dee in concept of writers being, it should be pointed out that The Huffington Post is not a “highly profitable site” as it has not, even once, made a profit.
Hey Lucy, there is a reason that the ABC is the most expensive media operation in Australia.
It is governed by a long standing Act of Parliament that in essence decrees that as it is a National Broadcaster of TV and Radio that it must deliver its service to all 23.8m Australians.
It doesn’t have the luxury of picking and choosing. It can’t say … No we won’t put the signal into Upper Kumbukta West as it’s too expensive to get the signal to just Mrs. Mac.
It runs over 60 radio stations and five TV networks (e.g. there is a state based ABC1 in each state) so its more like 30+ TV stations. These services require hundreds and hundreds of transmitters many in extremely remote locations.
It also has some of the best online content (e.g. iView) as well as having international news obligations. It also publishes around half a dozen magazines.
It also has to – by law – broadcast the biggest loss-leader in TV history … Federal Parliament.
The commercial channels have the luxury of saying no, we can’t make a buck out of that so we will either ignore that market or slash and burn until it is a compromised service.
Dee, Huffington Post is more influential than Campaign Edge (who?) will ever be. You can’t afford an hour a week to shore up your future for when advertising spits you out?
That’s all good and well JG, but there is nothing in the legislation that required the ABC to set up a 24 news channel, nor to compete with commercial interests online.
The ABC plays an important role in ensuring access – particularly to those that can’t access other services. But there is no justification for the ABC to be running online opinion pages and anything other than online sites for its programming – anything else is a waste of money.
That’s all well and good Lucy, but there is nothing in the legislation that prohibits the ABC from setting up a 24-hour news channel and running online sites that comtain content beyond programme listings.
Neither is there anything prohibiting the ABC from competing with commercial interests online.
You seem scared of some competition in that sphere – especially competition with content that people want.