I couldn’t help but respond to an article on the wonderful and useful UK site Creative Choices about when creatives and freelancers should work for ‘free’. Many of you already know what I’m going to say, but the broken record still plays. Feel free to weigh in on the discussion on the Creative Choices site. My comment follows:
Here is the comeback for those who believe we need more ‘exposure’ – “People also DIE of exposure”. I never work for free, but I often do ‘pro bono’ work. That means I value my time and skills, enter into a contract with the ones who need my work at the same level as if cash were involved, a contract which describes the relationship, expectations and exchange parameters.
Then I invoice them, documenting my time at its value per hour or the value of the piece of work, and indicate how much is pro bono (all my invoices have a line for that: 0% to 100% is deducted from the fee). If lawyers can do this, why not other professionals – like us? Pro bono work negotiations can often help enlighten the asker as to the value of what they are asking for, allows them in turn to show funders the real cost of such work if they had to pay for it, and allows YOU to remain professional and a little more objective instead of reacting with resentment at the ‘ignorance’ of the “asker” about what goes into producing your work.
It is a great opportunity to educate people without feeling exploited and without putting them down, either. It’s hard being a freelance/self-employed creative, because of this part of the working equation. Who we are and what we do are so closely linked, the personal can unduly and negatively affect the professional response.
There is no reason to let this part of the exchange lapse just because no cash is exchanging hands. VALUE is being exchanged. In a sense you are another ‘sponsor’ for an event or a cause, and as businesses are interested in how their logo is going to be exposed and to whom (what is the payoff for investing part of their marketing budget in your play if only ten people are going to come?), exposure for an artist is just another word for marketing your work/name. If that ‘exposure’ is not going to pay off for you, doesn’t fit your marketing strategy (you do have one, right?), weighs too far on the ‘cost’ side of the cost-benefit analysis, don’t be guilted into it. Graciously leave the opportunity for those artists who may really benefit from that bit of ‘exposure’.