prokopetz:

Ethical considerations aside, the problem with “working for exposure” is that logistically it just doesn’t make sense. There are really only two possible scenarios in play here:

1. The client’s established audience isn’t lucrative enough for them to afford to pay you a decent rate. If this is the case, getting your name and face in front of that audience is of little value, since you know ahead of time that they’re not prepared to cough up what the product is worth.

2. The client’s established audience is lucrative enough for them to afford to pay you a decent rate, but they think they can save a buck by stiffing you. If this is the case, then you know the client is lying when they claim that they expect putting you in front of that audience to result in more business for you, because if they did expect that, they’d want to keep you as far away from their audience as possible – why would they voluntarily share a limited pool of disposable income with someone they didn’t want to pay in the first place?