The life of a student journalist or photojournalist is not a particularly easy one. There’s the difficulty in obtaining credentials to events, the ever-present down-the-nose looks from those whom you’re photographing or interviewing that seems to say, “you’re only a student, what I tell you doesn’t matter.” Then there’s the lesser issue of working as hard as a professional and getting paid virtually nothing. Hell, I get paid very little and I count my blessings every time I get a paycheck from Gannett. [But come on — we really don't do it for the money. We love it.]
But something that I will not stand for is when my media organization, or an individual therein, demands that I forfeit the copyrights to my photos and articles when I work for virtually nothing. And that’s exactly what I, along with the rest of the staff photographers and journalists who work alongside me, have been asked to do.
Don’t get me wrong: this isn’t some spoiled-brat rant about wanting money. If I wanted lots of money, I wouldn’t work as a student journalist. I get paid for shit, and that’s a miracle at a student publication. I do what I do because I love my job, and the people I work with, and the people I work for. The fact that I get paid anything is amazing and a fact to which I am eternally grateful, but it’s not the reason I work at a college paper: I do it because I love it.
No. This isn’t about that. This is about taking the very rights to my images and writings, the sole thing that keeps food on the table for professional photographers and journalists, and demanding that I give them up for one-tenth of the pay that a staff photographer at a local paper gets paid. I refuse to do it.
Who the hell thought of something like this? Really? Not only thought of it, but thought that it was acceptable and morally justified, let alone not twisted and not degrading? It’s shit.
Here’s my point: to insist that a bunch of students give up the rights to their work for so little pay is a bit like how Wal-Mart tells manufacturers what they are going to buy a product for, and if the manufacturer disagrees then he loses virtually all of his business. It’s not right.
I’m not demanding higher pay, not by far. Actually, the idea of being a starving journalist is rather romantic to me. On the contrary, I’m just demanding that I keep the rights to my work, unless you feel like paying me more. Since the budget for that isn’t there, then I wish simply to retain my own copyrights.
There is hope in our case, however. A glimmering ray of sunshine through this cloud. Because of the work of a few amazing colleagues who have ties to the legal world, the contract that we are being told to sign is in the process of being revised to allow us the right to sell and distribute our work freely on our websites and social media pages. This, to me, is a fair compromise.
But I’m not sitting here writing about a fair compromise: I’m writing about the fact that someone actually thought that it was okay to force us to virtually give up our rights to our work for so little. It’s shameful. And if the contract does not get revised and I cannot retain my rights, it will be time for a very tough decision: to give up my dignity as a working photojournalist, or to give up my job.
I’m okay with having a contract that outlines some basic rules and guidelines of working for a news association. In fact, I think it would be foolish to dive into such a situation without one, and in that respect I am glad that it’s there. But unless you’re able to give me pay that can actually put a real dent in my rent or my tuition, I don’t ever want to hear an individual demoralize me and ask me to give you the rights to my work. It’s not fair, it’s not right, and it’s not something that I’m going to give up on without a fight.
