Writer's Digest Questions and Quandaries

Q: When working out a contract with a magazine, what are first serial rights?—Anonymous

A: When you sell first serial rights to a newspaper, magazine or periodical for a piece of work you’ve written, that media outlet has the right to be the first place to publish the article/story/ poem. After the piece runs, you’re free to resell it to another medium or to package a collection of your work into a book.

Rights can be sold geographic-ally, as well. It’s not uncommon to see article submissions with “offering first North American serial rights (FNASR)” written in the top, right corner of the first page. This limits the buyer’s rights and gives you the opportunity to sell the article in other locations outside the U.S. and Canada—such as England, Russia or Madagascar.

Reprints of your work that previously appeared in another publication are considered second serial rights. These rights are nonexclusive, meaning the author can sell the piece to many publications at the same time.

In the online world, you can sell the electronic rights to your piece. These rights aren’t as clear.
While they cover most of the same rules as first serial rights, the ever-evolving technology can cause some discrepancies between yourself and the publisher—like whether it can archive your work, place it in a database and let young punks download it to their PCs. This process is the least defined, and you may want to specify each right you license to the buyer.

Other rights to consider are simultaneous rights (giving you the ability to sell work to publications that don’t have overlapping circulations) and all rights (which means you sell all the rights to your work to the buyer, and you never get another dime for the piece, no matter how many times they publish it).

And remember, it never hurts to have someone familiar with freelancer contracts glance over your contract before you sign.

Brian A. Klems is the online managing editor of Writer’s Digest magazine.

Have a question for me? Feel free to post it in the comments section below or e-mail me at WritersDig@fwpubs.com with “Q&Q” in the subject line. Come back each Tuesday as I try to give you more insight into the writing life.

Business | Copyrights | Dealing with Editors | Legal Questions

6/24/2008 3:20:28 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)

Comments [0]

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Conflict of Interest

Q: I volunteer for several organizations that have newsworthy projects. I’d like to write news articles (not press releases) about them for our town’s independent newspaper. Can I sell an article that has to do with a group I’m involved in, even if the organization isn’t paying me?—Lisa Angle

A: Conflict of interest is scary to any media outlet. It can ruin credibility—the key element to the media’s survival. If people can’t trust you to present the news without bias, they won’t read your work. And newspapers and magazines won’t buy it.

You can try to sell an article that has to do with your organization, but you’re obligated to disclose all your ties with the publisher and, more important, the reader. What happens if you don’t? You lose your credibility and, ultimately, harm the news-paper or magazine that printed your work.

A couple of years ago, popular political columnist Armstrong Williams got himself into a big mess (to say it politely) when it was revealed that he’d accepted money from the “No Child Left Behind” pundits to push their agenda in his columns. He never mentioned it to his publisher or readers and, as the news leaked, his credibility disappeared faster than Hanna Montana concert tickets.

So be upfront with your readers and let them decide how much of your information they can trust.

Brian A. Klems is the online managing editor of Writer’s Digest magazine.

Have a question for me? Feel free to post it in the comments section below or e-mail me at WritersDig@fwpubs.com with “Q&Q” in the subject line. Come back each Tuesday as I try to give you more insight into the writing life.

Dealing with Editors | Ethics

3/25/2008 10:20:09 AM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)

Comments [3]

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Dealing with Late (or Missing) Payments

Q: If a writer has jumped through all the hoops (finished the assignment, submitted a proper invoice, etc.) and is not being paid, what steps should he take before resorting to having a lawyer write a letter or taking their case to small claims court, etc. —Anonymous

A: Always contact the editor first (second and third) and try to work through the issue. Editors typically aren't out to stiff you. Many of them have been on the freelance side of things, too, so they know how important it is to get you your money. Sometimes it's as simple as the editor nudging the accounting department.

Also, don't forget to carefully read your contract. Accounting departments differ with each publisher—some pay 30 days from the day the invoice is submitted, some pay 60 days from the publication date of your piece. Be sure that the proper time period (plus an additional two weeks) has passed before raising the red flag. And remain calm, cool and collected when you send your "checking in" e-mail.

If e-mails or phone calls go unreturned, or the editor can't offer a resolution or an acceptable explanation as to why it's taking so long, then it's time to contact a lawyer—and the Better Business Bureau. Keep in mind, once you do that you've burned that bridge with that editor/publisher once and for all, and you may not want to do that. But if they weren't paying you to begin with, what did you really lose?

Brian A. Klems is the online managing editor of Writer’s Digest magazine.

Have a question for me? Feel free to post it in the comments section below or e-mail me at WritersDig@fwpubs.com with “Q&Q” in the subject line. Come back each Tuesday as I try to give you more insight into the writing life.

Business | Dealing with Editors

2/19/2008 11:15:45 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)

Comments [3]

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Is Wikipedia an Accurate Source? (And Can Editors Alter Sourced Material?)

Q: I'm a magazine feature writer and one of my editors changed a statistic in my story that I had attributed to Wikipedia. She maintains Wikipedia is an inaccurate source. However, if I attribute my facts properly, does she have a right to alter my statistic?— Lynn M.

A: If editors feel uncomfortable with an article's contents, they most certainly can (and should) make changes and alterations. They're supposed to vet and fact-check the information. It's part of the job.

It's important to remember that attribution isn't meant as a safety net for reporting false facts. The point of attributing information to a source is two-fold: 1) to give credit where credit is due and 2) to give validity to the information, showing it's coming from reputable person (or organization). If your source isn't reputable, your article isn't.

This brings me to Wikipedia. As journalists, we love the site because it offers an excellent starting point to our research (underline, bold, highlight and draw squiggles around the words "starting point"). With a few clicks, you can find leads on nearly anything, along with links to better articles on each subject. But you can't trust Wikipedia. It can be updated and edited by anyone; that's right, anyone—you, me, that neighbor down the street who everyone describes as "sketchy." There's no real due diligence involved to guarantee accuracy and, as a journalist, you can't accept inaccuracy.

Again, that doesn't mean that the site isn't useful. Hell, I probably check it several times a day (one can never know enough about the Back to the Future trilogy). Just use it as a starting point to find more reliable sources. Your editors (and audience) will thank you for it.

Brian A. Klems is the online managing editor of Writer’s Digest magazine.

Have a question for me? Feel free to post it in the comments section below or e-mail me at WritersDig@fwpubs.com with “Q&Q” in the subject line. Come back each Tuesday as I try to give you more insight into the writing life.

Business | Dealing with Editors | Ethics | Research

2/12/2008 1:06:38 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)

Comments [4]