People who have done crossword puzzle construction in the hopes of making even a little money off of it might find Ben Tausig's recent article, "Solving The Broken Crossword Puzzle Economy," to be of interest.
It's true that puzzle constructors just aren't paid very well, and crossword puzzles appear to be something of a cash cow for The New York Times and similar media outlets. The New York Times has brand recognition, like a Starbucks or McDonald's - you know what to expect when you go there. And crossword solvers have the time to solve, perhaps, at most one puzzle per day. I don't think it's unreasonable that they'd prefer to devote this time to solving a puzzle that's a "known quantity."
Some constructors - Brendan Emmett Quigley comes to mind - have done a great job at developing a reputation, and apparently no longer need to work under an aegis to attract an audience. But less well-known constructors still need an imprimatur to gain the trust of solvers. For them, an increase in the base rate and the addition of royalty payments, as urged by Tausig, would make a huge difference. Let's hope this becomes the norm.
No comments:
Post a Comment