Guest - Jennifer Fink

We have a guest today, Mamas!

So Tiff go put on yer bra, Kai get yer hair in a pony and let's welcome her! And someone tell Linda to git a wiggle on it because she's always off doin' somethin' or other.

Jennifer L.W. Fink is lives and homeschools her boys in Mayville, WI. She is a freelance writer who has been published in Parents, American Baby, Ladies’ Home Journal and more. Suddenly Homeschooling (HEM books) will be out in late 2008.

With four sons ranging in age from two to ten, my house is a whirlwind of light saber battles, pillow fights and Yu-Gi-Oh cards. Getting any writing done in such a testosterone-heavy environment is, uh, a challenge, to say the least. But it can be done. On a recent day last week, I conducted three phone interviews, nursed my toddler, made some last-minute edits to my Journal Sentinel op-ed, cooked three meals, considered teaching a writing class, hiked with the boys and wrote for three hours.

Freelancing with a family isn’t easy. It requires patience, devotion and time management skills. These tips, from my chapter, Living with Kids 24/7 in the soon-to-be-published book Suddenly Homeschooling, can help you get some work done:

• Develop simple household routines. Don’t be afraid to involve your children. Your kids can help pick up their rooms, prepare meals and clean up the yard.



• Use a master calendar to avoid scheduling conflicts. Be sure to transcribe your professional obligations onto the family calendar as well.



• Take advantage of empty moments. Try transcribing for 15 minutes on your laptop while the kids play video games. Or take your notebook along and outline an article while you wait for soccer practice to end.



• Get up before the kids or stay up after they go to bed. Many mom-writers find these quiet hours to be the most productive of the day.



• Offer to trade childcare with another parent, join a babysitting co-op, or hire a teenage babysitter or pre-teen “mother’s helper.” Even just a couple hours a week of kid-free time go a long way toward meeting your professional goals.



• Have realistic expectations. As one Mom told me, “Life with kids is very different. Be willing to accept the limitations that come with the territory.”

THANK YOU Jennifer, we kiss your feet, FOUR BOYS, PEOPLE!

(I have one, that's about enough!)

All in the Family

The other day, my 9-year-old son told his dad he wanted to be a writer when he grew up. My husband relayed this to me in the terms of "oh great, another kid who is not going to make any money when he grows up."

Just prior to my son's disclosure, my 13-year-old had mentioned she wants to train horses for a living. And the thing is, (and maybe Heather can correct me), my understanding is that the pay for training horses is not something that makes a living. It is something you do to supplement a living.

While I agree my daughter would be better served in pursuing another career and raising horses on the side, I am not so disillusioned with my son's aspiration to be a writer. He loves to read, and he has a creative mind. He is constantly looking at things in a new way, and he has always found words fascinating.

I remember one time, at a very young age, he asked me what "wife" meant. He was so young he was in a car seat. I was driving, and I went into this long explanation of the roles of husband and wife and marriage. When I finished, he said, "Hmmm. I wonder what they mean by "run for your wife." That's right. He was also young enough that he couldn't pronounce the l in life.

So, after my husband telling me this, I took the very next opportunity to explore this career alternative with my son.

Me: "I heard you want to be a writer."

Him (excitement in his voice and a glimmer in his eyes): "I want to be an author. When I grow up, I am going to be an author."

Me (missing the all-important word change from writer to author): You know, you don't have to wait until you grow up to be a writer. You can start writing now.

Justin: I don't want to be that kind of writer.

Me: What kind of writer do you want to be?

Justin: I want to be an author. I want to sit in libraries and autograph books.

Me: (laughter, lots of uncontrollable laughter).....

Trolling for Sources could Lead to Far Stickier Issues

A frequent question I hear from those new to writing is what amounts to a "fair use" question, but it can quickly develop into so much more.

Shortly after Christmas, a writer on a writing list I belong to asked the list in general if it would be OK to quote a passage from a book if the writer gives the author credit. Despite my convoluted summary, the questioned posed seems like a simple question, but I see it as a much more complicated issue that I think those new to writing for publication need to be aware of.

While on the surface, it may seem OK to quote someone from a book while giving credit to the original author, I would argue that this is almost never OK. I have several reasons for my answer, and I want to share my thoughts with you.

The first consideration as the author of the article, you have to ask, what is your ultimate purpose? If your ultimate purpose is to develop an ongoing relationship with an editor by providing an article that indicates you are a well-qualified, professional writer, you want to provide a high-quality article with original reporting. This indicates to the editor more than just your ability to write; it also indicates your ability to identify the need for and the ability to utilize legitimate sources. In other words, you are also promoting your reporting skills to an editor as well as your writing skills. Proven, dependable reporting skills can get you a second assignment over another writer that just offers solid writing skills.

If you rely on published material in your article rather than directly interviewing the author and/or another expert, you may unwittingly use outdated and/or inaccurate information in your own article, which isn't something editors want to buy. For that reason alone, I would always recommend interviewing the author and/or expert directly. You never want to put yourself in the position where you are repeating another writer's mistake.

There are also the more complicated issues that arise when you quote from published material such as copyright, fair use and plagiarism.

In response to the writer's query on the listserv, one person mentioned learning from a teacher that it was considered "fair use" as long as you quoted less than 30 lines from a book. The problem with this understanding is that fair use operates differently in a classroom and/or academic setting than it does when you are writing for publication. Guidelines provided by an instructor may have been intended to apply only to a specific class or assignment. In that class, the instructor and students may have understood all books used for that class are large tomes, but some books (like children's books) may be less than 30 lines total and weren't considered in the guideline offered by the teacher because shorter books were not an option.

Copyright, fair use and plagiarism are all differing terms in the U.S. You can find a lot of information at copyright.gov including this bit about fair use, "The distinction between "fair use" and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission. Acknowledging the source of the
copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission." http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

For any questions any writer may have about copyright and/or fair use in the United States, http:/www.copyright.gov is the best reference source.

Copyright infringement and fair use is determined, ultimately, in a court of law. It can depend on what you quote as much as how much you quote. For instance, if the book takes 250,000 words to get to a key concept, and you write an article revealing just that key concept, you may be overstepping your bounds in terms of fair use. I don't think anyone can say "more than 30 lines" needs permission because books can vary in length, and how do you consider articles? The content in determining fair use is just as important as the length as well as how the new author uses that information. That's why it is ultimately a legal decision. I would say that a good guideline for writers would be to consider how pertinent the original material is to your work. If your work can't survive without the quoted material, you are using enough that you should seek permission from the original author.

(I feel as if I have to add the caveat that my thoughts regarding this particular discussion applies to articles written for the general, commercial-oriented audience and does not consider any exceptions/conventions that apply to academic writing.)

Fair use and plagiarism are two different things. Copyright and fair use are legal matters while plagiarism is an ethical/moral/professional issue. I make that distinction with the complete understanding that all three are serious concepts that any writer must be well versed in. Plagiarism should not be tolerated. Proper credit must always be given to avoid plagiarism. The specific requirements for what constitutes "credit" can vary depending on what genre you are writing.

Regardless of the genre, you must give credit when you do any of the following: 1) direct quotation from a source, 2) indirect quotation from a source and 3) the use of an idea from a source. It doesn't matter if you use just one word, you should still give credit. Often that one word would be a catch phrase; for instance, Rebecca Moore Howard of Syracuse University coined the term "patchwriting" when referring to students who replace key words in a sentence without really changing the sentence, like replacing "good" for "great."

I particularly like to use Howard's phrase as an illustration for number three because it is both on the topic of plagiarism as well as being a great example of how a single word can convey an idea that is directly tied to the original author, which is why citation is required for an idea. Not to mention it gives students a heads up about what is expected when it comes time to paraphrase a source.

Genre and Citation considerations:

How to cite and credit a source is often just as important as providing credit. In academic writing, the way sources are cited varies depending on the profession's standards. For academic writing, citation is very formal and follows a complicated set of guidelines that varies from field to field. Humanities uses MLA while nursing uses APA. There are other citation standards for other fields too.

The genre you are writing in often sets the standards for the type of citations you need to use.

In journalism, sources need to be cited, and the information provided can vary. Most often you will find a name, position and residence, but it can include age or other identifying information relevant to the article. The position used in the article will be selected in relation to the article's topic. If you were to interview Dan Smith, a professor, about his son's accomplishment in wrestling, it would be more relevant to the article being written to identify Dan Smith as a parent not as a professor.

In academic writing, citations are much more detailed and can include source name, how the information was obtained (personal interview, e-mail, book, article, etc.) as well as the date the material was written and often for online sources when the information was accessed as well.

In fiction, citations may be much more informal and may be found in a number of places such as the acknowledgments, in an author's note or thank you, buried in the small print at the beginning of the book or in an entire section at the end. Although it is fiction, authors do a good deal of research, and it is the research that is cited. I'm not a fiction writer, so I can't offer any more suggestions about how this could happen beyond what I have noticed as a reader. Two of my favorite authors, Jodi Picoult and Patricia Cornwell, often have a long list of acknowledgments in each book indicating the sources of their research most often with a caveat that notes any errors should not be attributed to the source but rather to the creative license of the author. (Even as I write this, I have the urge to check books I have by both authors to see if my memory is correct. I am going to resist the urge. I am pretty sure I'm right. Let me know if I'm wrong.)

A couple of interesting cases regarding plagiarism:

Just this week, two accusations of plagiarism have made the news.

An online web site noted a striking similarity between the work of a fiction writer and several nonfiction sources. The allegations ended up making Yahoo News. Since the original article breaking the story, other articles have followed like this one: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080110/ap_en_ce/books_romance_writer_2
I encourage every writer to read this particular article since it illustrates how plagiarism can seriously injure a writer's reputation even when the writer in question won't face any formal/legal ramifications. In this instance, the author's publisher is supporting the author.

Jerry Seinfeld's wife is also being accused of plagiarizing her newly-published cook book. The author of the book Seinfeld allegedly plagiarized is suing for copyright and trademark infringement. This case is important to note because it is often being referred to in the media as the Seinfelds' being sued for plagiarism and defamation. Even CNN's headline, "Seinfeld, wife sued for plagiarism, defamation," but plagiarism is not a legal issue. You can't sue for plagiarism. It is an ethical/professional/moral issue, remember?

While it is true the Seinfelds' are being sued, Jessica Seinfeld is being sued for copyright and trademark infringement NOT plagiarism despite numerous headlines saying otherwise. The confusion seems to be arising from wording in the legal complaint filed in court in the section where the defendant sets out their allegations. The fifth allegation mentions "brazen plagiarism" that is so often being quoted, but the complete wording makes it clear the legal basis for the suit is more than plagiarism. TheSmokingGun.com has the entire legal document available, and the source of the misunderstanding seems to be this line: "Jessica Seinfeld's brazen plagiarism of Lapine's book constitutes copyright and trademark infringement under Federal and New York law."

As writers, it is important we report accurately especially when reporting on plagiarism and copyright issues. Other related terms you may want to investigate include ghostwriting and boilerplating. I would say what these two terms describe is NOT plagiarism, and I encourage you to do some research to find out why.

To me, another interesting recent case of plagiarism happened in November 2007 when a well-respected journalism professor wrote an opinion column that used quotes obtained by a student journalist without properly crediting where he obtained the quotes. He cited the person who was quoted, but he didn't get those quotes on his own but instead copied them from a news article in another paper. The professor and author, John Merrill, later called it "unintentional plagiarism," but other professors at the University of Missouri (a top journalism school) said it was plagiarism without any hesitation. You can read the entire opinion here: http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=101&aid=133994

For other plagiarism stories in the news, I refer you to one web site that publishes an end-of-the-year round-up of plagiarism/fabrication events, primarily in the press. You can find the latest round-up here: http://www.regrettheerror.com/regret-articles/2007-plagiarism-round-up

WAHM's and Low Pay

Being a mom is probably the lowest paying job of all, which puts an odd sort of perspective on the following... Recently, one of the major freelance writing job blogs sounded off about WAHM's taking low paying writing gigs. You can read her rant at Freelance Writing Jobs about how the tendency of WAHM's to take $3 writing jobs make people think of them as a source of cheap labor--and take advantage of them in the process. Her solution is the WAHM's should stop taking low paying writing jobs; that this will force article buyers to pay more.

Well, color me as respectfully disagreeing. WAHM's didn't start the race to the bottom and they aren't going to stop it even if they do quit taking low paying scut work. No, they won't be seen as a source of "cheap labor," but they will not turn back the tide any more than King Canute. The problem is twofold--and it's a problems lots of industries have, not just writing:

1. The Internet has created a frictionless marketplace. When sellers cannot find buyers and buyers cannot find sellers, a market has "friction." But when sellers and buyers can come together almost effortlessly, then a market is said to be frictionless.
   With the advent of the Internet, the market for writers has become increasingly frictionless. Snailmail is slow. Email is almost instantaneous. Sending payment cross country used to be slow and iffy. Paypal is fast and safe. And so on. With the advent of Elance and Craigslist, and the increasing acceptance of telecommuting, the market for writers is nearly frictionless. And it's only going to get more so. Not less.


2. The combination of the Internet and Elance (and the like) has made a small buyer's market into a BIG buyer's market by including millions of English-speaking/writing people from all over, most notably second and third world countries with much, MUCH lower wages and prices than in the US/Canada/Australia/UK. The willingness of thousands--if not millions--of people to work for what would be a starvation wage in the west is what has driven prices into the floor--not what a few hundred thousand WAHM's will or will not write for. This is happening all over. Work that my brother contract programmer used to get paid $75/hr for now only pays $35/hr... because international competition has driven the price down. Things are tough all over, but there are opportunities everywhere.

Now, before you accuse me of being racist or xenophobic, I think people from where ever--second and third world countries included--have a right to make a living regardless of their color, nationality or shoe size. But I won't pretend that a huge influx of people willing to write for peanuts didn't drive prices down from the already low $10 each to $2 and $3 each. Economics isn't politically correct. Low paying work isn't going away. There will always be someone desperate enough to do it.

So whether WAHM's take low paying work is not going to affect the market significantly. There are just too many people whose hours are worth $5.25--or worse, $0.50/day--who figure that they can write four an hour with their PJ's on and that's a heck of alot more than they can make on their feet cashiering at Wal-mart. There's nothing shameful about doing honest work when it suits your purpose.

Back in the dark ages, when I considered $50 a good fee, $250 seemed like the moon, and we were going bankrupt supporting a house we couldn't sell, I wrote a handful of articles for Write for Cash (aka WFC). At the time, there was a big stink on the writer's list I frequented because of the low fees: $10-$20 per article. But I was desperate and the couple hundred dollars I wrote for WFC (which are still on the web today) bought two weeks worth of groceries and put something in my kid's Christmas stocking. It suited my purpose. I never spent more than a half hour on the article. I never wrote more than the minimum number of words. As long as my hourly wage came through to $15 or $20/hr, I counted myself lucky... That was as much as I made per hour as a programmer and I didn't have to dress up and commute 70 miles one way to do it. And I used those clips to move on, move up, and get better gigs.

So, having been there, I'll share a few rules of thumb:

1. Figure if something is worth your time based on a target hourly rate, not based on what a particular piece pays. Set your hourly rate, at the very least, as twice what you could make at a part time job. In the beginning (or unless you have special skills), that means anywhere from $10-$16/hr. If you can do three small pieces and hour for $4 each and make $12, and that's better than you could do at the part time jobs you qualify for, it's worth your time. After ten clips (or a couple of months), raise your target rate by $10/hr. Keep raising it at least $10/hr every six months until you get to $50-$75/hr. That's a veteran wage and a decent living.



2. Spend the least time possible while doing a workmanlike job. Don't spend four days researching an article that's only going to pay $15. If your target hourly rate is $15/hr, then you have exactly one hour to research and write that article. Go over and you're reducing your take. This is not to say you should do shoddy work and cut corners. Do good work, but keep in mind that time is money.



3. Never, never, never, never, NEVER write an article for low pay that you could pitch and sell elsewhere for more money. Always start at the top with an article idea and work your way down. You won't know if you can sell an article for $25 (or $250 or wow, $2500) unless you first pitch it to one of those better paying markets. If you come down all rejections and you still want to write it, then go ahead and write it for peanuts (or GASP for free). But start at the top.



4. Do NOT fall into the trap of thinking that because you are busting your arse for peanuts that peanuts is all you deserve. Every freelance writer starts out at the bottom: querying new markets, taking spec assignments, forging relationships with editors. Low paying work is a stepping stone. You don't need more than 10 low-paying clips to move into the next tier ($25-$50/article)--not to say it will be easy, but you should definitely begin your move around your 10th clip. And here's the secret... the editors you're querying don't know how much you were paid. They don't know you got paid peanuts. They see a clip: "Hmm, well written. Got published. Probably met her deadline. Yeah, lets give her a try." A clip, even a low paying one, is a sample of your writing and a demonstration of your professionalism. Not a pro? Fake it 'til you make it, girl!

And so, that is my answer... spent far too much time on this for far too little money. Broke rule #1 and #2. But at least I wrote something.

Happy New Year!

My Goals for 2008

I usually don't wait till the new year to begin my goals, but I do plan ahead. It is common to see me work on my future goals daily. People call me an "overachiever" or "ambitious", something like that. I believe in hard work and spirituality.

I figure if you don't help yourself, who will or why should they?

I do have lots of goals, but I will share just four in random order:

1. Continue to balance motherhood with being a writer. I think that is a rewarding challenge because I love the titles of both.

2. Officially graduate with my master's degree in August 2008. I will have a degree in Foundations of Education. Unofficially, I am already a graduate--I just need to hand in my thesis and walk in the ceremony. Pray and think positive thoughts for me to succeed.

3. Prepare my son for kindergarten when he goes to "big kids school." I plan on being involved in his school, but not to the extent of being like those annoying parents. Being a college instructor allows me to feel with other school educators, so I let them do their job within legal standards.

4. I want to continue to remain an open-minded person with what's best for humanity. I don't discriminate with ethnicity, race, or religion. I believe that this world needs some humanitarian touch. Many still have prejudices that prevent them from being friends with each other. I plan on doing random acts of kindness.

You can call me ideal or dreamer, but hey that is what I strongly believe in. We all can make a difference. People do listen when we speak. People do watch when we move. People do talk when something is done.

Linda's ONE wish for 2008

In 2008, my wish would be that I am THERE for my family without distractions.

In 2006,I went back to grad school. For most of 2006, I worked full-time as a reporter, part-time teaching at a college, and I was a grad student with very demanding courses with a high work load. It meant that everything I did infringed on everything else. My free time was in short supply, and I rarely spent time with my extended family, and my time with my immediate family was often shared.

I finished grad school in 2007, I am still teaching at a college, and I have almost totally eliminated my work at the newspaper. My free time is much more abundant than it was, but I have developed a horrible habit during the last two years. I talk to my children while writing and/or typing. I grade papers when I should be spending time with family.

In 2008, I want my family to have my full attention. I will continue to work, but I will work during work hours/times. When I am with my family, I want to be WITH my family. I don't want to be grading papers (or homework) while camping (something I did quite a bit during 2006/2007).

In other words, I want to quit answering my children's questions when I am only half-way attentive because I am also staring at my computer, which leads to me agreeing to things that I didn't realize I agreed to.

I think in order to do this, I will have to also be more attentive to work. I want my schedule to be more decisive. When I am working, I am working. When I am with my family, I am with my family. It is so easy for work to intrude into your personal life, and I want to make sure I don't let it. I feel like I've been very selfish for the last two years doing what I need to do for me (and I don't regret it). I feel blessed because my family supported me and let me be selfish. But I find myself coming back to my real life and realizing my children have grown up. They have more responsibilities and are more opinionated.

There was even a moment last month when I went to pick up my son from his school. A teacher I knew through his older sisters saw me and asked, "You have a child in this building?" She hadn't seen me although this was my son's second year. Granted, it is easier to miss seeing her in the larger school than it was in the past, but I also realized I hadn't been there for many things I had done in the past.

I don't need to do it all, but when I make time for my family, I need to make sure my family is my top priority. My new schedule will allow me to do this, but I also need to make sure I change my own ways. I don't need to multi-task every moment of the day.

Christmas Challenge 2007

I did it. I really did it. I didn't think I could, but I did, and I survived. I am not even twitching very much. I barely even thought about it yesterday. It was at least 4 p.m. before I considered it seriously but that had more to do with the fact I was busy opening presents, napping and cooking Christmas dinner.

That's right, I managed to not log onto my computer for a full 24 hours without suffering (much) withdrawal.

This is a major achievement. No computer for a day? A real holiday without any work or e-mail? It can be done. I'm living proof, and today? I logged in within minutes of waking up. I never promised I'd do 48 hours.

When tech betrays you...

I'm one of the list techies (in just about every place I go) cause I've got a no nonsense outlook on working with computers, and for some reason, they LIKE me.
So imagine my surprise this week when I met a Windows system that didn't LIKE me!

My parter and I decided, that to operate effectively, as a student, that a desktop that played possum every time we tried something daring (like, I don't know, loading up a new piece of software) and introduced us to its freinds 'blue screen of death", "more blue screen of death", Cousin IT (a blue screen that gave IT details) and Bob (where the cursor just bobbed there), that we really needed to upgrade. Swapping the downstairs computer for the attic server was out of the question cause my PC (in the attic) is a frankenstein of precariously balanced parts, a power supply that hangs out round and sits on top and six drives that I swap based on what I'm booting up and is older than HIS desktop.
SO I went onto ebay.
Aha, I thought - new PC, we'll get a bargian. And we did, too. The University is giving me a grant for my laptop, so we got a really cheap (top of the range) desktop that we went halfers on.
All good so far, right?
Well, sort of. Parcelforce weren't going to deliver it till Monday, when I should have been out at University, so we wheedled and pled with the local depot, and I gave several winning smiles to get it early, only to discover that its not got enough ram to comfortably run Vista AND everything else I wanted to install.
The Ram is on the way, but I've learned a couple of tricks about Windows Vista. Mainly cause its still doing the best impression of a possum I've ever seen, WITHOUT the Blue Screen of death, and we're doing what's called a 'haha rebuild'.
As in 'haha, you forgot to save the install files, didn't you?'.
So I thought over the coming weeks, I'd do some techie posts. A couple on Vista, a couple on Xp - a smattering on Office (2003, and 2007) and the final couple on some its and pieces I personally believe no writing Mama should be without.
Let me know if you've got any questions, won't you?
Now, I have to go back and beat my eight year old at Guitar Hero 3 - honest, its for an article.