Junkets and Freelancers' Standards

Curious to hear freelancers' views about the NYT's blanket prohibition on press junkets and/or what your own publication's policies are. (Case-by-case discussions? Or do freelancers have to sign an overarching waiver?)

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/03/opinion/03pubed.html?scp=2&sq=public%20editor&st=cse

 

many, many years ago the production company paid for the college paper i managing editor at to fly to hollywood for the premier of the movie, necessary roughness, which had been filmed on campus. thought it was payola then and think it's payola now. couldn't believe the editor let her take the trip (don't think the adviser knew about it until too late).

in the nyt's case, if the freelancers know beforehand that it's a no-no, then it's a no-no.

 

It's not good deal for the writer if they had to watch Necessary Roughness.

 

just mute it and fast forward through any scene not involving kathy ireland

 

The NYT is free to pursue any policy it wants, but it has no business enforcing that policy in someone's dealings outside its work with the paper. If you want full control of a writer's dealings, put them on staff and pay them a full salary and benefits. NYT wants to have its cake and eat it too here.

 

You mean eat its cake and have it, too. Having your cake and eating it is easy. Eating it and still having it, not so easy.

Actually, the Times is free to establish any rules it wants for writers, whether those rules apply to outside work or not. And the writers are free not to take the Times' money and not to have their bylines appear in the Times.

Would you apply the same standard to judges? It's OK with you if the judge hearing your case owns stock in the company you're suing, as long as that's "independent" from his job as a judge? No, of course not. You'd say, find me another judge.

If your outside work compromises your independence from the people you're covering, or even appears to compromise your independence, then the Times is right to say, you can't write for us. You can't take money from 3M and write for the Times about 3M, even if you took that money for your other work. That's a good rule.

 

David Pogue wishes the NY Times let him accept free stuff.

 

The 3M example I don't disagree with. But it goes beyond that. The Times wants to stop you taking money from 3M and writing for the Times about IBM. And the Times, more importantly, wants its freelancers to live by all the rules that govern its staffers while receiving fewer of the benefits. It's free to do that, of course. Doesn't make it right.

 

Has that been corrected?

 

I know there was a spat were he had a disk repair company comp him for recovering his data. But tech journalists are the worst when it comes to getting free stuff.

 

I don't know how NYT runs things, but AP has a pretty detailed freelance contract that specifies that freelancers can't take gifts, accept travel, etc. So I'm not surprised to see this.

 

That's very zen.