From Malcolm Brown’s shocking image of a self-immolating monk in Saigon, Vietnam, to Kevin Carter’s harrowing photograph of a vulture approaching a little girl in Ayod, Sudan — photojournalists have been documenting the harshest reality of society with utmost devotion and seriousness. But despite them being beacons of hope to awaken the populace, freelance photojournalists find it impossible to sustain themselves on daily wages. If you don’t believe us, this recent survey will help you better understand freelance photojournalists’ dire circumstances.
Rob Haggart, the former Director of Photography for Men’s Journal and Outside magazine and currently the head of A Photo Editor, surveyed 48 freelance photojournalists anonymously on how sustainable their role is for them. Only four said they could maintain a living at the current earnings. As for the remaining numbers, they indicated that “rights-grabbing contracts” and “low assignment rates” prevent them from accessing health care, saving for retirement, and even supporting their families. The survey participants include individuals from varied racial backgrounds, social statuses, and genders.
Much of the problem originates from the earnings set for freelancers at national publications. For instance, the survey reports that The Washington Post, The New York Times, and The Wall Street Journal rates for the day range between $400 and $500. Interestingly, the remuneration does not include pre- and post-production work such as meetings, editing, or sending captions. Moreover, these stipends haven’t allegedly changed in years.
“Freelancers are told that we are doing important, impactful work that tells the truth and makes the lives of others better. We may be contributing to this pursuit for others, but we are being left out,” a respondent with 15 years of experience wrote.
To paint a better portrait, the survey demonstrated the breakdown of the daily wage. For instance, The New York Times pays $450 for a day’s rate. However, 25% ($113) is deducted for tax purposes from that, and another 30% ($135) goes for business operation costs. Other expenses, such as the basic equipment from the assignments, cost about $16,000. If one compares this to what a staff photographer earns at NYT, you will be stunned: roughly $120,000, along with perks such as retirement benefits, health insurance, a company car, and camera equipment, which comes up to $200,000.
Another important note is that while diversity helps build meaningful stories for these publications, the daily wage is so insufficient that only those with privilege, such as generational wealth or partners with better careers, can sustain themselves as freelancers. People from marginalized communities, such as people of color, women, disabled, or trans photographers, can’t sustain themselves long-term. They must find different alternatives, such as wedding assignments or venturing as freelance writers.
However, if they wish to continue down this path, then with a $450 rate, they will have to work 445 days a year to achieve close to $200,000.
“When you are working consistently for a publication but still can’t make a living wage in that ‘permalance,’ who will then be able to persist in this craft?” a respondent with 20 years of experience asked. “Can you be a parent? Can you get sick? These are all life events and choices that can and do derail careers in this industry these days.”
To make matters worse, photojournalists can’t unionize like other creatives, and speaking against those in power can cost them assignments. Since the report was released, photographers have shared their experiences in the comment section. “This is exactly why I started doing work where I set the price and still do photojournalism years ago,” said one reader. “What I was making in a month as a Staff Photojournalist, one of our freelancers made in half a day at a wedding!”
Another reader highlighted the significance of mental health care for photojournalists. “Add in things like therapy ($150 an hour out of pocket minimum) for taking care of yourself after assignments like watching towns burn down, civil unrest, etc., and it’s likely costing oneself money to subsidize creating images for these publications,” they commented.
Our newsrooms now witness a vicious cycle that can only conclude if distinguished photographers push back against such hideous, harmful, and exploitative labor practices. If we do not stand up for each other, how will we see a change?