About
InternetChicks is a publication for women building things on the internet, and it exists because the writing aimed at this audience is mostly the wrong kind of writing.
Why it exists
Search for how to price freelance work and you get encouragement. Search for what a contract should include and you get a listicle with no clauses in it. The gap is not motivation — the people doing this work are not short of drive. The gap is operational detail: what a thing costs, what a clause does, what happens when a client is sixty days late and stops answering email.
That detail exists, but it circulates privately — in group chats, in DMs, between people who already know each other. Publishing it is the entire point of this site.
Who it’s for
People running the commercial side of their own work on the internet. Freelancers and consultants. Indie founders shipping products. Creators with newsletters, channels or courses. Developers and marketers negotiating roles and building portfolios.
The assumption throughout is that you are competent and short of time. You will not find anything here explaining what a browser is, and you will not find anything framed as “as a woman, you…” — the audience is assumed to know its own situation better than a website does.
About the name
“Chicks” is here the way this audience uses it about itself: casual, warm, in on the joke. It is never used about someone as an object. The test applied to every sentence is whether it would still read well with a real name in place of the word. If it wouldn’t, it gets rewritten.
What this site will not do
Stated as commitments, because a standard nobody can check is decoration.
- No affiliate-driven tool recommendations. If affiliate links are ever used, they will be disclosed and they will not determine which tool gets recommended. Where the honest answer is the free tier, that is what it will say.
- No fabricated income reports or screenshots. No invented revenue figures, ever, including the kind dressed up as “a client of mine”.
- No invented averages. A rate range is either attributed to a named public source or labelled as the author’s own experience. There is no third option.
- No fake author personas. Bylines belong to real people with real backgrounds, or the piece does not carry one.
- No paid coverage. Nobody buys a mention, a review or a placement.
- Nothing adult, and nothing about anyone’s personal life. This is a business publication and stays one.
What you can expect to be wrong
Prices change, tax rules change, and platform terms change constantly. Anything with a figure in it carries the date it was checked. Where something turns out to be wrong, it gets corrected and the correction is recorded rather than quietly edited — the process is in the editorial policy.
Money content is general information, not tax, legal or financial advice, and the specifics vary by jurisdiction. That caveat is not a legal reflex: the difference between a sole trader in the UK and an LLC in the US is large enough that generic advice is actively unhelpful.
Contact
Corrections, questions, or a figure that no longer matches reality: see the editorial policy for how corrections are handled and how to reach us. If you have run the numbers on something and want to write it up, that is also the route.
How it’s funded
Independently, and deliberately without a model that would bend the writing. No paid coverage, no sponsored rankings, no tool vendor deciding which tool wins. If affiliate links are used later they’ll be disclosed and they won’t determine a recommendation — the commitment is in the editorial policy and it’s the one worth holding us to.
The reason to say this on an About page rather than bury it: in this category, the business model usually is the editorial policy. A site paid per signup recommends whatever pays per signup, and reads exactly like a site that doesn’t. Knowing how something is funded is the fastest way to judge what it tells you.
What we’d like to publish more of
Numbers people are willing to put their name to. What you actually charged for a five-page site, what a retainer really covered before scope moved, what a brand deal paid against what was promised. That data barely exists publicly, which is why so much pricing advice is circular — everyone quoting an average nobody measured.
If you’ve run those numbers and are willing to have them published, with or without your name attached, that’s the most useful thing you could send.