Sorry for the length of this article, but it’s a subject that burns our behinds. We have written numerous articles concerning the giving away of intellectual property without receiving monetary compensation a/k/a “free of charge”. The theme of each prior post is that large media conglomerates are grabbing your intellectual property because all too many artists are giving it to them on the proverbial silver platter.
Yesterday’s article mentioned the sale of the Huffington Post. Ms. Huffington was receiving some 315 Million Dollars from AOL. Not a dime was going to the experienced yet naive, journalists and photographers who built her empire for her and didn’t bother getting paid. Now AOL/Huffington Post has entered the land of, “You Just Can’t Make this Stuff Up”. Go to Forbes.com and read the great piece, “Huffpo and Patch Recruiting Bloggers as Young as 13”.
In Pakistan, India and dozens of 4th World countries in both hemispheres, children work as indentured servants or outright slaves making everything from soccer balls, to electronic equipment and mattress covers. Still other kids tend to miss most school days being occupied as sex workers having been sold into the life by their parents. Decent Americans of all political persuasions express disgust and are shocked when such incidents come to light here in America.
We see stories of illegal aliens promised entry into the U.S. and becoming involved in farming or factory work. Some die on the job while others survive working in inhumane conditions. Tales of girls from Asia or Eastern Europe induced by traffickers with promises of good jobs in America only to be exploited in a multitude of ways always makes for good ratings on TV. In a strange way such stories help us feel better about ourselves as Americans. We know that our children can’t be exploited, held captive nor work without pay because we have child labor laws – we are better than that and of course, slavery was abolished here almost 150 years ago.
In America, the tableau of children working in sweatshops is largely a thing of a long ago past. American children don’t go into coalmines nor handle toxic chemicals. But that hardly means that even our “All American Squeaky Clean” kids can’t be exploited. The same media companies and publishers who willingly take what adults give them – free content – are now doing the same to children. The Huff Po is going to be running a vertical HuffPost High School which will be using “free” content. Super! The launch has been covered not only by Forbes but also by Simon Dumenco at Advertising Age who has done some nice work as well.
“Now wait a minute guys” you are probably saying right about now. “You are not equating Ms. Huffington’s use of free child labor to create ‘content’ with the exploitation of an 11 year old sex worker in Thailand are you”? Well “yes, sort of”. The exploitation of children via their free labor is morally wrong and violative of just about every child labor law (family farms excepted) in this country. In most respects it is disgusting to compare say a teenager in San Diego who owns an iPad 2, 40 inch flat screen and cools off in an in ground pool in the back yard with a boy in a slum of Sao Paolo who sews soccer balls 15 hours a day 7 days a week.
In one key respect their services are indeed comparable – they have “no pay” jobs. Their free labor benefits adults who know exactly what they are doing. Arianna’s newest asset is like the last one, being built with a healthy supply of free photos, illustrations or copy supplied by always eager and naive contributors except this time rather than willing adults, children are doing the work. Are they not being paid because Arianna went to Las Vegas and blew the 315 million dollars she received just 6 months ago? Methinks not.
If children were found to be doing the landscaping at the home of Lady Gaga for the sheer thrill of it, we would be aghast and Gaga in deep kahkah. If teen girls were found to be on scaffolds four flights up painting the Bieber’s mansion just to be near him, Justin would be in juvenile hall. Why the difference here? Why hardly a peep from the media of which Arianna is now ironically, a part?
Some will say because what these contributors are doing is not dangerous. Still others will assert that the kids are willing participants. Neither of those factors exempt such activities from child labor laws because for among other reasons, children can not legally consent. (See our prior column on Sexualizing Tweens). The single biggest reason there is no real up roar is that most Americans just do not consider writing, taking pictures and drawing to be work.
Ingrained in the American psyche is that work means physical labor, dangerous activities or complicated things you must study hard to learn how to do. Needing a diploma and especially a license from the state, promotes the endeavor from work to a profession. Creativity is as we all know is something you are “just born with” or is a “gift from God” or an inexplicable fluke not unlike being able to raise your eyebrows John Belushi style. One needs to be trained to be an auto mechanic, engineer, architect or doctor. No such formal training is needed to “take a picture”. Deal with it. Accept it. That is the way many people think.
Which brings us back to Child Labor, American Style. Many parents will think it cool that their kid’s pix of election eve at the firehouse are in such a big publication. Still others will frame their son’s article on the new interest among his peers in pro soccer. Child labor pure and simple. Fewer jobs for adults? Maybe. Exploitation of children who are working for nothing? Definitely. Now in fairness to the men and women at the AOL/HuffPo, they maintain that (in effect) “unpaid blogging is not labor” and thus no laws are being violated. That kind of reasoning makes Ed proud that he has found himself on the other side of the table from the folks at the HuffPo. Get the subtle use of language? Say “blogging” not “writing” and that which is both work and intellectual property transforms into “fun” with no economic value. Wow why didn’t we see that?
What can we say about all this? Just : “$315 Million Dollars” from just “fun”.
#1 by georgetheatheist on September 29, 2011 - 1:19 pm
Ed, playing the devil’s advocate, couldn’t you say that what the kids are doing for Huffington is a form of “internship”, paying one’s dues for perhaps a paying writing gig in the future?
#2 by georgetheatheist on September 29, 2011 - 1:20 pm
BTW, Will you pay me for the above comment?
#3 by Jack and Ed on October 3, 2011 - 3:19 pm
First you might want to take a look at our article in Photo Shop Magazine entitled “We’ll Gladly Credit You Tuesday For a Hamburger Today” in the April/May 2010 issue, and our numerous references to the “promise of future work”. At a casino such promises do not even rise to the level of a “sucker bet” where the chance of hitting it big although astronomically long, at least exists. Such offers of future work in the publishing business if not in writing and guaranteed are typically, surprise, surprise, a lie or misrepresentation made to induce someone to work with little or no compensation.
The term “unpaid intern” has come under some examination by various government agencies including the IRS. Given the current economy employers have felt the desire to stretch its meaning. And the government is coming down hard on those employers stretching “internships” into “free-labor-ships”. Check out this labor law blog article which starts – “A common, but frequently unreported labor violation is the use of unpaid interns in violation of minimum wage and possibly overtime laws.”
Any way you cut it, Ms. Huffington is soliciting and accepting free work product from children who are legally incapable of making a mature decision. If I let kids mow my lawn and, wash my car for the thrill of it, few would complain. But if I had children come to my basement and write articles and/or design things on computers till their nails were broken and little finger numb and then sold their work product, methinks I am liable for criminal and/or civil penalties. We think that there is no difference between children working without pay on a 21st century computer and say a 20th century loom turning out blankets for sale at retail in 1930. The song’s the same today, but without the warm blanket.
#4 by Matt Timmons on October 4, 2011 - 9:27 pm
Had to post this link to a good quick story I found here. At least photographers are starting to get the message you guys are preaching. Preach on reverend!
http://groozi.com/2010/03/12/score-this-photog-1-cheapskate-0/
#5 by Jack and Ed on October 4, 2011 - 10:10 pm
Great story! Thanks Matt
Jack
#6 by Dennis D. McDonald on October 25, 2011 - 12:36 pm
“Interning” is also known here in the DC area as “genteel slavery.”
#7 by Larry Chilton on April 23, 2012 - 6:02 am
l have read your book ”Photographer’s Survival Manuel” and l found it to be excellent, but l need further advice about using photos without releases. l have heard photographer’s from our major Toronto newspaper talk about how they don’t need releases to publish their photos. And so l want to find information about creating a media outlet and how to find a lawyer in my city to advise me on this…Larry
#8 by Jack and Ed on April 23, 2012 - 9:17 am
Larry- You’ll really need to talk with a Canadian IP lawyer. Canadian copyright laws differ from US copyright laws in several fundamental ways.
Let’s see if Ed has any more info later.
Jack