The Internet burgeons with jobs boards where almost any service can be bought cheaply. Writing is no exception. Regardless what kind of words you need--ad copy, ghostwriting, Web content, press releases, blog posts, articles, term papers--chances are you could find someone willing to do the job for peanuts.
Of course, the adage "you get what you pay for" holds true. It doesn't take much Web surfing to see that slapshod writing is prolific.
But look beyond the obvious. Sometimes, peanut pay can buy good writing. There are writers who so desperately want to land contracts that they'll accept next to nothing. For example, a third-world writer who has a flawless grasp of English can do the job for a fraction of the cost of his first-world counterpart. Why not seek out these cheap-but-adequate writers?
On the surface, it sounds like good business sense to get the highest quality for the lowest cost possible. There's even the argument that when prosperous nations purchase from poor ones, it's an act of charity that keeps otherwise destitute people employed.
I would counter that both of those arguments are short-sighted and unethical. When service--even good quality service--is too cheap, there are often hidden costs.
First, the writer who discovers his charge was less than adequate for the time and effort involved may find himself resenting the work or client. He may cut corners to get the job done in budget time. He may abandon the job before it's finished. Or he may break his back to complete it but silently vow never to work under the same conditions, for the same client, again. Neither writer nor client benefits. A cordial long-term business relationship cannot be built on the shaky foundation of low perceived value.
Second, a first-world company needs to think in first-world numbers. It's only sensible that if profits are high, expenses can be expected to be proportionately high. Failure to recognize the need for a balance of debits and credits is what got the US into its current financial mess. We need to stop taking shortcuts that land us in ditches, and cut-rate services may well be one of those failed detours.
Third, calling cheap offshoring "charitable" is little more than justifying theft. In the long run, third-world economies cannot thrive if their most skilled workers have been siphoned off by competing countries.
What about those first-world writers who come cheap because they are new in the field? It's true that seasoned writers have the experience, breadth of knowledge, and confidence to charge more. But even for a brand-new writer, a living is a living; offering services for less than that is counterproductive. Writers who habitually charge too little in hopes of outcompeting others won't make enough to stay independent for long.
Going the cheap route may seem like a no-brainer. But beyond the bottom line, the long-term losses in relationships, dignity, and ethics can add up to far more than dollars and cents.
© 2009 by AnnaLisa Michalski