Freelancer’s Survival Guide: Networking Part One

Freelancer's Survival Guide On Writing


Artwork donated by Pati Nagle.

The Freelancer’s Survival Guide: Networking Part One

Kristine Kathryn Rusch

Sometimes the topics that I’ve overlooked in my single-minded attempt at finishing this Guide astound me.  If I had written a proposal for the Guide before I actually completed the manuscript, I would have estimated the Guide’s length at 70,000 words, and I would have covered a few of the topics herein.  At the moment I’m at 130,000 words and counting, with six more topics of my own to cover.

As you can tell from that opening paragraph, this week’s topic is one I hadn’t thought of.  I should have thought of it; I discuss networking with my writing students all the time.  In fact, I network each and every day.  But I hadn’t considered it a stand-alone topic for the Guide, even though I mention networking in many of the posts.

Writer Carolyn Nicita e-mailed me with the idea, only she labeled the topic “Support Groups and Professional Organizations.”  She also gave me a list of such organizations and groups, as well as subjects to discuss—which I greatly appreciate.  Her list is comprehensive and helpful, and made it clear to me that I wouldn’t be able to cover this in one single Guide post.

Why did I chose “Networking” as my topic instead of “Support Groups”?  Because networking has become extremely important to modern business in a variety of ways, from the support groups and professional organizations that Carolyn mentioned to seminars and continuing education to becoming active on social media and the web.

If you’ve found a particular type of networking to be helpful or harmful to your freelance business, please e-mail me this week.  I’ll work your comments into the next few installments of the Guide.  (And if it’s okay to quote you, please tell me, along with any website address that I can link to.)

“Networking,” by the way, is a very modern term.  As I started this post, I grabbed the dictionaries around my desk and looked through them for the word “networking.”  I didn’t expect to find that word in the Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (Fifth Edition) that my grandparents bought my father the year he entered college (1936)—and of course, I didn’t find it in there.  I did find “network,” however, which had three definitions: a fabric or structure of cords or threads that cross each other at certain intervals and are secured in their crossing with knots, etc; Any system of lines that interlace like a net; and—the dictionary is very specific here—in radio terminology, a chain of stations.

Meaning that network used to define broadcast media was very new in 1936.  Of course it would be.  I hadn’t thought about that much.  Then I picked up my college dictionary, the Macmillan Contemporary Dictionary from 1979.  I expected to find “networking” in there, but it wasn’t there at all.  Instead, I found the first reference to people:  “interconnected organization or system—‘a network of spies.’”  I also found that they’d added to the radio definition (of course), by including television and by defining how those networks interlinked—through coaxial cables.

By the mid-1980s—Webster’s New World Dictionary, for those of you keeping track—nothing had changed.  I expected networking by then as well, but I was early.  After all, the desktop computer had just arrived into American homes.  I got my first in those years.

If I hefted my butt out of my chair and high-tailed it upstairs to the computer with my internet connection—on a DSL line, thank you, which these old dictionaries had never heard of—I could tell you to the year when “networking” became a noun.  Probably in the mid-1990s.  It appears in the dictionary built into the rather ancient computer that I write on—a 2005 iMac.  The Encarta World English Dictionary has six definitions of network—and the second is all about people.  (“A large and widely distributed group of people or things such as shops, colleges, or churches, that communicate with one another and work together as a unit or system.”)  The 2005 definition also includes computers—of course—and “telecommunications” systems designed to exchange information.

So the definition of network has grown in the past 75 years.  As that definition grew, we added the new term “networking.”  Encarta’s definitions clearly show that the word came from computing.  The first definition—“the linking of computers so that uses can exchange information…”—shows the word’s history and most important usage (at least to the people who wrote the dictionary).

The second definition is the one that applies to us:  “The building up or maintaining of informal relationships, especially with people whose friendship could bring advantages such as job or business opportunities.”  (Emphasis mine.)

Why do I always start these long, interconnected (networked?) posts with dictionary definitions? Because words tell us a great deal about ourselves.  Words that exist in English but don’t exist in, say, Russian show us the difference between the cultures.

And words that have come into use or whose usage has changed within a single generation tell us about our culture.

I’m sure people networked in 1936.  I’m sure they called it something else.  (And, by the way, none of my dictionaries use “network” as a verb.  When did that happen?  Since 2005?)  I’m equally sure that the networking that occurred in 1936 was not on the same scale that people network on today.    The opportunities simply weren’t there.  People had relationships within their communities, but the chance to network with people from all over the country, let alone all over the world, belonged only to a few.

If you read about the early history of broadcasting—one of my favorite topics, actually—you learn that the live radio broadcasts that our grandparents remember from World War II came about because of a change in technology, and a small group of reporters who all knew each other.  They got thrown onto the air because there was no one else, not because they were particularly good at it.

Early networks often work that way.  Only a handful of people might have the skills to do a particular job, but those people might not be known to each other.  So friends hire friends and then offer on-the-job training.  It’s human nature.

Last night, on The Late, Late Show With Craig Ferguson, Ferguson held a fascinating hour-long Tom Snyderish interview with British actor Stephen Fry.  In the middle of that wide-ranging discussion, they talked about Twitter.  Ferguson just joined Twitter; Fry was an early adopter who talked about the early days of Twitter.

In the beginning, Twitter grew by word of mouth—friends verbally told friends about it.  Broadcasters started discussing it when celebrities started having “races” to increase the number of people following them, but the culture didn’t take Twitter seriously until the Iranian elections last summer.  Iran closed its borders to outside journalists and censored broadcasts that left the country, but didn’t shut down its cell phone networks—at least not right away.  Real live news, from regular people, filtered through Twitter onto the net, and then out into the world.

A network that most people had initially seen as frivolous and a joke had suddenly gained international importance—and for many people, particularly those in Iran, life-or-death importance.

The world has become very small and the networks very large.  My Facebook friends include people from Russia, Germany, France, Spain, South Korea, and Colombia, as well as Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States.  Have I met all of these people face-to-face? No.  But I have met most of them either through my website or their website or Twitter.  I’ve done business with quite a few of them, even though we’ve never spoken on the telephone and we’re on different parts of the globe.  I’ve read their work; they’ve read mine.  We actually communicate in ways unthinkable as recently as fifteen years ago.

And I’m benefiting a great deal from the networks that have come about via the internet.  I’ve sold short stories because of Twitter, novels because of Facebook.  I’ve worked with movie production companies through e-mail and done broadcast interviews via Skype.  I’ve been in touch with bookstores in Australia that carry my work and done online interviews for their websites.  I’ve gone to conventions overseas because the organizers can reach me via my website, and I’ve been paid for overseas publications through PayPal, so I don’t have to go through the rigmarole that banks require on any check received in another currency.

Networks are important, not just in established businesses like mine, but also in growing businesses.  The woman we sold our collectibles store to in 2008 had a bumpy first winter, not just because it was the middle of the Great Recession, but also because she relied on the old-fashioned way to do business—word-of-mouth in our small tourist town.

She had repeat business from tourists who had come through the year before, and she had business from some local ads, but not enough to sustain her through our slow times.  She was good at money management, and she had low expenses, so she made it through, but she learned quickly that she needed to do more.

Dean had taught her how to put collectibles on eBay, but she hadn’t wanted to do the work.  Not because she was work-averse—she isn’t; she’s a very hard worker—but because she wasn’t that comfortable with computers.

Still, a hard winter will convince anyone to make a few changes.  So she put a few items on eBay, and then a few more, and then even more.  Slowly, she has formed an online network of people all over the world who are interested in the items she puts up for sale, from toy trains to cookie jars.  She’s known for quick service and quality products, and she’s making it through this winter just fine.

The network of local shop owners helped her as well, answering her online questions, and forming a group that shared the cost of local advertising.  She has a network of suppliers that she’s established, people who comb junk shops and garage sales for that one special item.  Her networks are helping her grow her business.

But there’s a downside to networks as well. They can be time-consuming, and they can be destructive.  Carolyn’s points, from her e-mail, concern support groups and professional organizations, but they can apply to all networks in one way or another.

She mentions these:

•How to know when you need a group

•How to know when you need to get out of a group you’re already in

•How to cope with infighting and sabotage in your group

•Legal and financial ramifications



•How to know if you’re a groupaholic

•Goal and dream sharing

I’m also going to deal with two personality types:

•The master networker who has no work to stand on

•The excellent craftsperson who can’t network to save her life

There are a lot of other topics as well, which I know I will touch on as I get deeper into this subject.

I’m going to structure networking into a variety of components.

First, I’ll deal with in-person networks:  support groups, professional organizations, seminars, conferences, and continuing education.  I’ll deal with the upsides—the interaction, the contacts—and the downsides.

Then, I’ll deal with social media networks.  I’d like help with this one from readers if I can get it.  I’m active on Facebook and Twitter, as well as here on my own blog.  I also belong to some listserves, many of which have existed for a decade or more.  I have a Linked-In account, but I don’t make the best use of it. And as someone reminded me on my Facebook page just the other day, I need to tend to my page on (a page I didn’t start; someone else did).  I’m sure that there are other social media networks I know nothing about and which might be helpful to freelancers reading the Guide. So use the contact button here on the site and send me an e-mail.

(She writes, hoping that her network of readers will come through.)

Finally, I’ll deal with peripheral networks—networks that get built without you even realizing you’re doing so.  The store owner above had no idea she was building a network of train collectors when she started selling toy trains on eBay.  Now she’s linked to several of those collectors all over the world.

I know many of you have found this blog not because you’re fans of my fiction but because of all the business networks out there.  I’m familiar with the online writing community, although not with all of the branches of that community—and there are countless branches, in every single city in this country (and in other countries as well).  But I’m not as familiar with the networks for realtors, even though I know a number of realtors follow this Guide, or the networks for musicians, or the networks for computer consultants.  I’m sure those networks are as vast as the networks for writers.

Because of the Guide, I have built some peripheral networks—inadvertently.  And if I need help with real estate questions or computer difficulties, I actually have some people I can turn to outside of my friends and acquaintances.  I’m also building some non-fiction business relationships due to the Guide, and gaining contacts throughout the non-fiction online community.

That’s an unexpected bonus of this Guide, certainly not one I planned on.  I’ll be discussing those peripheral networks last.  Again, if you have any insights, do let me know.

Interestingly, I’m going from this writing session into a weekend’s worth of networking.  Dean and I are holding a workshop this weekend with the help of Denise Little of Tekno Books.  More than 30 professional writers from all over the world will be at this workshop.  I’m involved in a minor way—a session on Thursday night, and then I’ll join the group for several meals.  Most of the writers will be together from Thursday evening through Sunday afternoon—a great way to make contacts, help each other, and to get to know each other.

These opportunities can be difficult and tiring, particularly for writers, who are an introverted bunch. But they can also be invigorating and uplifting, a chance to move forward in unexpected ways.

I’m sure the weekend will provide more insights for the Guide. Weekends like this one often do.

Yet even with the workshop, I wouldn’t have thought of this topic without Carolyn.  So there is something else you think I need to discuss, please e-mail that as well.

“Freelancer Writer’s Survival Guide: Networking Part One” copyright 2010 by Kristine Kathryn Rusch.

7 thoughts on “Freelancer’s Survival Guide: Networking Part One

  1. Kris, I really wanted to thank you for the last several posts because they’ve really helped me a lot.

    Recently, I haven’t enjoyed writing as much as usual. Usually, I write and plan stories before work and have a good ol’ time, then go to work and can’t wait to get home and write some more. ( Insert obvious joke about me having no life here) Lately, that hasn’t been so. And I couldn’t figure out why.

    Then I read through the last several posts and had a minor revelation. When I write speculative fiction, I tend to lean more towards fantasy and space opera and have a really hard time writing hard sf stories. On a whim I wrote a hard sf story. And thought it was terrible. It didn’t work at all. But I mailed it and went to work on another one out of stubbornness.

    And another. And another. Rinse. Lather. Repeat. Well, here’s the problem: I don’t like hard sf very much (which is probably why I have such a hard time wiritng it. Duh.) I just wrote the original story because I had a random hard sf idea BUT because of my innate Irish stubborness and bit of a perfectionist streak (I’m a firstborn) I kept writing the dang stories.

    Thank goodness for these posts because when I came up with my informal business plan and thought about my Goals and Dreams and Impossible Dream, I realized that nowhere in there was anything about being a hard sf writer. I had allowed my stubbornness to lead me off track. So thanks Kris for helping me get back on track and realizing an area I need to be mindful of.

    Also, you mentioned that you tend to write out of order. I know that this is off topic, but would you be willing to comment on this? This is something that I’ve playing with while I work on a comedic sf novel and would be interested in seeing how you approach it.



    1. You’re welcome, Steve. I’m glad the Guide has helped. (You did the hard work, though. Good job.)

      As for writing out of order: I get scenes, stories, character arcs–and I’ve learned to write them down. Often they’re short stories, sometimes they’re unusable snippets. Then I write something else and figure out that the unusable snippet from a month ago fits into that story or is the center of a novel with this other character. Sometimes at this point, I can write chronologically. Sometimes I get more snippets, until finally, I realize I have to shape the entire thing. Then I stop, figure out the order and write the linking chapters/scenes. And voila! I have a novel. Or a short story. Or a novella. Or, it seems, the Freelancer’s Guide. 🙂

  2. Hi,

    I’m new to the Freelancer’s Guide following hearing about it from your husband at RadCon. To be honest I haven’t caught up on all the chapters. I am slowly working through them and spending time thinking about your advice. I am not a freelancer yet. I want to learn oh so much more before I take that step.

    I have been on Facebook and connected with a lot of family and old friends. This has helped with sharing my personal successes. On Twitter I have connected primarily with others in the writing profession and I find the information and insights they share helpful. I have a personal blog that has few visitors to it as of yet but I am finding it useful for setting myself deadlines that I have to meet and for getting over the fear of putting myself out there for others to read.

    Thank you for the information you are sharing in this guide. I am sure when I catch up on all of the chapters I will have a lot more questions.

    1. Really good post, Angie. Thank you. Lots of marvelous insights in there, which I’ll probably refer to in future posts on networking. I appreciate the time you put into that.

      CL, glad you found us here and are finding your way through the Guide. I like Facebook & Twitter as well, but as I mentioned in my post, my internet computer is two floors away from my writing computer, so when I’m tempted to look at anything online, I have to climb stairs. A good disincentive, which keeps my social networking time at a minimum.

      Thanks, y’all.

  3. One thing I’ve found about online social networks is that you have to actively participate to get the full benefit out of them. That’s what makes them timesinks, and is why it’s important to figure out where you can get the most bang for your time.

    For example, if you just pop into a random blog or forum which discusses your genre and post a comment promoing your upcoming book, that comment will be seen as spam and deleted, and the owner/mod will quite possibly block your IP address so you can never post there again. If you’re a regular participant there, though, you can post, “Hey, remember that book I submitted back when? It’s coming out in May, woohoo!” Now you’re a regular sharing good news and your comment will get a much more positive response. It takes time and effort to earn the status of “regular,” though, and if you don’t consider how much time it will take to be one of the regular gang, and compare it with the benefit of being able to post your news there, you can end up being a regular in fifty or a hundred different places and never having any news because you don’t have time to write.

    LJ and the other journal services which use its base software have a peculiarity in that following someone else’s journal is called “friending.” Friending someone’s journal is really just setting a bookmark on something you want to read regularly, but because of the terminology friending — and unfriending, the horrors — can be fraught with drama and flaming and flouncing. When one is new, it’s tempting to friend back everyone who friends you, and there are social circles where this is expected. That’s fine when twenty people friend you, but when two hundred people do it, you have a pretty huge timesink if you friend them all back, especially if any significant number of them post every day, or multiple times per day. Some people create filters which let them friend everyone and their dog, but only read a subset. That can cause drama too, though, if a sensitive soul suspects that not everyone on their Flist is really reading them. The terminology is extremely unfortunate, but the network(s) within LJ can be very useful so it’s worth it, IMO, although I recommend caution. 🙂

    If you’re collecting data, I’m on Livejournal (twice — my real-person journal and my writer pseud journal), I have a Blogger blog and a WordPress blog, I hang out on my publisher’s Yahoo lists (one locked for writers, one open for everybody), I have an author page on Goodreads and occasionally post there (that’s fairly new), I have a set of pages on the GLBT Bookshelf, I’m a regular on The Phade’s Manhole (forum focused on my genre), and I’m a member of a few other Yahoo groups but I only participate there when my publisher has a featured chat day because they’re just too busy to read regularly. I joined Critique Circle, an online workshop, mainly because I find I learn more, faster, by critiquing other people than by any other method. It was interesting and I met some cool people, but I went on hiatus to finish my novel (the one coming out in May) and haven’t been back in quite a while. :/ Timesinks again.

    I hang out at a collection of blogs because they’re interesting or useful, read other journals on LJ for the same reason, and avoid a number of interesting blogs and journals because their owners post too darned often.

    I don’t do MySpace or FaceBook because I’ve heard enough negatives about both that it doesn’t seem worth it to take on the timesink. Twitter seems like a huge timesink, and I’m frankly not a 140-character kind of person anyway. I’ve heard Second Life is good for writers to promo in, but I’ve done that sort of immersive online world before (in online RPGs) and they’re horribly addicting. Timesink cubed.

    What it comes down to, really, is time spent networking versus time spent writing. Networking and promo time can easily consume all one’s writing time, and because social networks are social, it can be hard to cut back without hurt feelings once you’re caught up with a group of people.


  4. Kris, FYI, the Oxford English Dictionary gives the first in-print use of the word “networking” defined as “The action or process of making use of a network of people for the exchange of information, etc., or for professional or other advantage” from 1976. Here are their first two citations:

    1976 C. L. ATTNEAVE in P. J. Guerin Family Therapy xii. 227 ‘Network’ is a noun referring to entire social or family network as the unit of intervention… The techniques..described by Speck and Attneave..are those of assembling the social network, which they prefer to call a process of retribalization rather than ‘networking’.

    1979 Working Woman Oct. 4/2 The way networking works in real life for both men and women goes something like this: when you need help, someone you have known over a period of time, for whom you have done services and favors of friendship, takes your need as the opportunity to return them.

    I find it interesting that the 1976 reference actually talks about researchers who wish to use a different term than “networking.”

    The OED also notes the first use of the word “networking” at all as dating from 1940, and referring to radio or television broadcasting.

    As for the word “network” being used as a verb, well, they give a reference from all the way back in 1845, but the definition is “to cover something with a network” and is a transitive verb. “To network” meaning “to engage in social or professional networking” is cited as first appearing in print in 1980, in of all places, a book called “Networking” by M.S. Welch.

    And why am I here to share all this? Because of my desire to network with you, so many years ago… 🙂

    1. LOL, Michael, thanks! I knew someone would come through. As I wrote this, I really didn’t want to get lost in the web–I didn’t have time. I’m pleased to know that my sense of the word’s usage was essentially correct: I had heard it in the 80s. Fascinating stuff, words. And networks–even more fascinating. Nice.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *