Google recently introduced an insidious program to “publish” artwork online without paying for it by convincing some artists that the “exposure” they’d get on Google would be sufficient recompense. Some artists declined the so-called privilege, earning a soupcon of scorn from a few self-righteous entrepreneurial observers. The Google scheme sounds like a great idea, but I haven’t heard anywhere that this “opportunity,” which is offered by numerous others, has worked for any notable number of the populace. Huffington Post thrives on a similar machination: it “publishes” hundreds of articles, mostly opinion pieces, by an array of writers, some well-known, others not, but doesn’t pay anyone anything. I don’t know that any of the Huffington Post writers have been catapulted into either notoriety or wealth by reason of their “exposure” on Huffington’s blab site; the only writers that are famous were famous before they began contributing. Huffington herself is doubtless the only one who pockets any reasonable income from the site, and that, presumably, is from the advertising run on the site.
Google, however, makes lots of money. So when it announced its ploy to justify using artwork without paying for it, Ted Rall, the current president of the Association of American Editorial Cartoonists, was enraged — as were many of his cohorts — and he fired off a missile to the New York Times, which published it on June 18; to wit (in italics):
And
Now a Word From the Artists: Pay for Our Work
To the Editor: Re "Use Their Work Free? Some Artists Say No to Google" (Business Day, June 15): If every creator of intellectual property had the moxie of the illustrators who refused Google's request to use their artwork for free in exchange for "exposure," today's Internet vampires wouldn't be able to exploit them. It's offensive that a company that reports annual profits in the billions refuses to pay independent artists for their labor. Sadly, the Web revolution has turned "information wants to be free" into a mantra. Whether it's illustrators, cartoonists or musicians, working for free ought to have gone out with slavery. Congress ought to act to make it illegal for a profitable corporation to solicit work without paying for it.
Postscript: Rumor is, by the way, that the Philadelphia papers, Daily News and Enquirer, will begin charging for online content by the end of the year.
Comments