I'm accustomed to getting it for free ...

I think sometimes newspapers are over-zealous in trying to make a "competition" where there isn't one. Outside of two-paper towns, there really are few such cases. The pecking order is pretty well established.

An excellent qualifier, sir. Fucka buncha lacquerheads.

 

I decided to formally complain by e-mail about the shakedown from the paper that wanted $75 last week for each picture from an assignment they were already working. I got a nice reply today, underscoring that the paper's policy, due to high demand, is to charge for sharing photos.

I can understand that ... but $75 a pop? How much labor is involved in dropping a JPEG in an e-mail and hitting the damn button?

I think that pricing is designed to discourage such requests altogether, or is an attempt to subsidize a shortfall due to poor management in their own photo department. I hope that's not a trend.

 

$75 for about 60 seconds to attach a photo to an email and hit "send" is pretty damn good work if you can get it.

Karma isn't always good. What goes around, comes around.

 

I haven't shared photos with a competitor, but I've traded scores. I used to work for them, which helps. There's another paper in our chain which has treated us like a JV team in the past. We're going to be busy when they want help this fall.

 

Do those who share photos with other papers clue in their photo dept., photogs or ME on this? They may have a say in it as well.

 

I would certainly hope so. Our policy of sharing, such as it is, was cleared at the top level long ago.

 

I prefer to go behind people's backs. They'll never find out.

 

It's been cleared, but it was never any formal thing. When we began to tell the photo editor, "Cooperate with so-and-so when they call for a photo; they've helped us out," it all became clear.

 

the last region i worked in, everybody charged ... stories, photos, whatever. where i work now, papers/departments send stuff back and forth for free with the thought "what comes around, goes around."

while the free thing works well and i kind of like it, i still wonder why photogs and writers here are more than happy to have extra scratch taken from their bank accounts. the practice of "free share" sure works out well for the millionaires who own said newspapers and not so well for the underpaid chumps.

 

We don't share anything with our two competitors. Just not smart business.
With other papers, we will send you a box -- no problem.
With stories and photos, it is paper policy to charge. Under old SE, we sent out anything and everything.
We do offer our stringer fee when we call looking for some help, so at least we're not trying to work the system one way. Was shocked last winter to find a paper southeast of us that would not let a staffer string the game for us. He could send us his gamer, but only if it was exactly the one he wrote for them and gave it out for free.

 

Seems like you have this kinda ass-backwards. If it was up to owners, if they gave it any thought, I'm sure they'd all suggest selling everything.

It's the "underpaid chumps," as you would have it, who realize we're all in this together. We seem to be the ones who have decreed that we'll share as long as everybody is willing to play nice.

In the example I starfted this thread with, I would have gladly slipped the shooter $50 for e-mailing me a couple of pictures, if that's what I needed to do.

But they overreached and got diddly.

And I still think the aforementioned paper (which I have not named, just referred to) makes a mistake in not distinguishing between requests from other papers in its state, which seems to be an issue for them, and some poor bastard 800 miles away who would just like to borrow a cup of help-a-brother-out.

Again, sometime down the line those people will need my help. They don't see it that way today, however.

 

henry - i used to make between $2-3k extra a year when i wrote fulltime in that region ... all paid for by other newspapers that wanted my stories. how is that ass-backward?

and when i say underpaid chumps, of course i lump myself into the mix.