Hypocrisy on the Left
Folks on the Left are the first ones to point out that people are overly obsessed with money. Money (they would argue) is far less important than, say, self-improvement.
So why is it that it is impossible for progressives to understand that someone might be willing to work for something other than money? For the skills, or the experience, or the resume fodder, or even, in this case, for ego?
I don't write for Huffington, but I do write for Forbes.com which appears to be pursuing a similar model (mix of paid and unpaid bloggers). You know how much money I get paid? Zero. Any time I get tired of writing for zero dollars, I can quit. But I have not because I get lots of things out of the relationship -- a new audience, experience trying to meet a regular deadline (that's not as easy as it seems from the outside), and an ego boost. Heck, far from feeling exploited, all the folks who have learned of my relationship with Forbes have thought I was lucky to have the opportunity. And I am.
People blog for free all the time -- I have done it for 7 years (gulp!) at this site. The author at the link seems to feel that the fact Huffington or Forbes makes money from our writing somehow makes a difference. Why? My web host makes more money from my blog than I do, but should I care?
Besides, my understanding is that CPM's on news-related sites run in the $10 range, plus or minus. At Forbes, there are 2 ads on the page and my posts get 1000-4000 viewers (with a few outliers). So that's, what, $20-80 at most and probably less? The five or ten bucks a week I might extract from them for my work is trivial compared the the other benefits I enjoy. And I can't believe the average Huffpo unpaid blogger is really contributing a lot more. Ariana may be making millions, but the incremental contribution of the 419th unpaid blogger to that is trivial.
Postscript: By the way, the linked writer also displays one of the more abusive mindsets of the labor movement. He implies that other progressives are essentially crossing a picket line by writing for free at Huffpo and should be ashamed of themselves.
That's a crock. One or two folks declaring they are on strike does not suddenly obligate hundreds of others who like the relationship they have with the Huffpo to stop writing. The author is essentially demanding a heckler's veto.
Wing and a Whim:
From the linked article: "Class consciousness and solidarity among young educated people is almost dead in this country. A whole lot of people see an information society as a workplace they can succeed in on merit..."
I fail to see anything wrong with this at all. Thanks for the good news!
June 14, 2011, 12:18 pmGoneWithTheWind:
A minor correction. The left doesn't point out that people are overly obsessed with money. They love money and are obsessed with it. What they object to is that people with money are overly obsessed with THEIR own money and try to keep it when they left tries to take it. THAT is called "greed"!! Of course when the left wants to take their money THAT is called "investing".
June 14, 2011, 1:28 pmcaseyboy:
Hypocrisy on the Left, REALLY? YOU DON'T SAY? GOLLY GOSH? Hypocrisy is the common denominator of the left. Carbon credit miser Al Gore and his big energy eating home and jet. Or how about Ms Obama and her healthy eating admonition, then eating a stack of ribs or some exquisite French delicacy. And don't get me started on our wonder boy's "transparent" government. Hypocrisy on the left is certainly not a news flash. I won't give the right a clear score on this account, but the examples on the left are just way too outrageous to ignore.
June 14, 2011, 2:37 pmJudge Fredd:
From the linked article: “Class consciousness and solidarity among young educated people is almost dead in this country. A whole lot of people see an information society as a workplace they can succeed in on merit…”
And that's wrong... how???
June 15, 2011, 7:09 amTrapper_John:
That article and subsequent comment thread makes me happy. The arrogance of the progressive elite shines through in their attitude: "You're being exploited through this voluntary relationship you've entered into, you just don't know it." This has always applied to the working class, where the elites feel they know best (see Stuff White People Like's entry entitled, "Knowing what's best for poor people). More and more it manifests in the Nanny State (you, common person, are incapable of making good choices in terms of diet, etc.), but here it applies to the ostensibly educated bloggers of the HuffPo.
I'll one-up them: what right does the HuffPo have to decide who gets to blog on its pages at all? Since the blogosphere is "ossified" shouldn't such a valuable platform as the HuffPo be allocated more democratically than simply defaulting to it's editors and owners? If they're erring in making a distinction between paid and non-paid (and clearly NOT paying some VERY good writers, natch), perhaps they're making a mistake in overlooking some other good writers completely. The sad thing is, WE JUST DON'T KNOW because they are obfuscating the situation by not publishing some people's work. The only solution is for Arianna to allow anyone to blog there and pay all her bloggers a living wage. She's making millions--she can afford it.
June 15, 2011, 7:26 amMatt:
Even the labor movement isn't generally _that_ stupid. Nobody in a real union would think twice about doing business with somebody who's experiencing a "strike" that's not backed by an actual, organized union. They might, or might not, sympathize with those who are calling the "strike", but they're not going to consider it any kind of moral obligation of solidarity.
June 17, 2011, 11:15 amNot Sure:
"Nobody in a real union would think twice about doing business with somebody who’s experiencing a “strike” that’s not backed by an actual, organized union."
"Nobody in a real union would think twice about doing business with somebody who’s experiencing a strike that’s backed by an actual, organized union if it's inconvenient for them to do so."
There- fixed it for you. :)
June 18, 2011, 5:38 pmDoc Merlin:
"The author is essentially demanding a heckler’s veto."
Not essentially, thats exactly what they want.
June 28, 2011, 8:16 am