VOLUME 25, ISSUE 4 – APRIL 2026
THIS MONTH’S MENU:
I. Not Every Well-Paid Project is Complicated
II. The Rebrand that… Wasn’t (from Peter Bowerman)
III. Why I Reject Some Thought Leadership Projects
I. Not Every Well-Paid Project is Complicated
Last week I wrapped up a short piece for a longtime client. I know their voice, goals, and expectations, and I’ve done enough of this work that there were no surprises. It was a quick project.
Then I looked at what it paid. The hourly rate came to more than double my “get out of bed rate.”
That isn’t unusual. But it still feels that way when it comes to easy work.
Easy Doesn’t = Cheap
Feeling guilty about projects that come easy is a trap. Clients don’t care how easy or hard something is for us. They care that it’s complete, on-schedule, and what they asked for.
None of those depend on how long a project takes us, or how difficult (or not) it might be.
Experience Pays its Own Rate
Not every project needs to be challenging to be worth taking on.
Some of the most profitable work we do can be the projects we move through quickly because we’ve done similar work so many times we’ve already eliminated learning curves and inefficiencies.
The hourly rate on last week’s project wasn’t a fluke. It’s what you get when your experience meets a well-scoped project. Learn to recognize that combination when you come across it, and don’t second-guess it just because it seems “easy.”
II. The Rebrand that… Wasn’t
In this guest segment, Well-Fed Writer founder, Peter Bowerman, reassures freelancers facing imposter syndrome by pointing out even in-house marketers aren’t above making mistakes.
—
Had an interesting conversation with a friend recently—a reminder to NOT put big organizations with supposedly intelligent marketing people, on a pedestal, as being so much wiser and marketing–savvier than us little ‘ol writers.
My friend works for a large organization (I’m obscuring all identifying details to protect my friend and the manifestly clueless firm in question), and, recently all the employees got wind of a new company rebranding.
It started out as lights that suddenly appeared on the outside of the main company HQ. The lights matched the color of dots—yes, dots— that would soon appear around the logo of the company wherever that logo appeared.
Now, understand, this rebrand wouldn’t entail any major change in fonts. No change in the “look-and-feel” of the logo. Just these colored dots around it.
Yeah, I agree, already, this thing feels off, right?
The bizarrely underwhelming light show was quickly followed up by a mass mailing via FedEx to every employee; we’re talking thousands.
Each of these packages provided the oh-so-lucky recipients with a reusable shopping bag, a pen and two stickers, along with points redeemable for branded swag from their website.
But here’s the kicker: each item sported the old, unadorned, un-zhuzhed-up logo, not the much heralded new, improved and wildly, utterly fantastic logo.
Three decades in this business showed me, firsthand, what goes into a rebranding—all the steps, the boxes that need to be checked and the requisite layers of approval. How this mutant creation ever got off the ground is utterly beyond me.
So, just remember this tale of marketing idiocy the next time you doubt you’re smart enough to work in this field.
III. Why I Reject Some Thought Leadership Projects
These days, thought leadership is a big focus of my freelance writing. That might include ghostwriting trade features, op-eds, reports, or even blog posts.
As much as I love this work, it’s not uncommon for me to reject thought leadership projects, and usually for the same reason.
A prospect reaches out. They have a budget, a topic list, and a target publication (or several) in mind.
What they don’t have is anything to say.
Thought Leadership Requires Actual Thought (& Risk)
Thought leadership is not simply content with some high-profile person’s name or face attached. That’s still just basic content.
Content only becomes thought leadership when it provides real (and ideally unique) insight, challenges the status quo, presents new data or positions based on original research, or gets ahead of an issue (like new regulations impacting the client’s industry).
You can’t “lead” through your content if your thoughts echo everyone else. Safe content is not thought leadership. (Though neither is contrarianism for the sake of contrarianism.)
What I Ask Before I Agree to Thought Leadership Work
Before I take on a thought leadership project, I want to know what the client believes. Not what they’re comfortable publishing. What they personally, and honestly, believe.
If they can’t answer that, or if each strong potential angle gets nixed in early conversations, I pass. The work will never provide the thought leadership benefits the client is after if they don’t have anything impactful to say.
And look… there’s nothing wrong with taking on safer industry content writing. Just make sure you’re comfortable with that work, and make sure your client understands the difference so they don’t come back later wondering why your “thought leadership” pieces aren’t landing.