I wanted to explain why I have decided to start charging for job posts in the American Radiologists group, especially because some people have told me they disagree with this decision.

For the past 8 years, I have spent thousands of hours building and moderating this community. That includes verifying radiologists, reviewing posts, managing discussions, removing spam, trying to keep the group physician-focused, and advocating for radiologist empowerment and transparency in our profession. Many of you have told me over the years that this group has become a valuable resource and community for you, and I appreciate that. It is exactly why I have continued to put so much time into it.

But maintaining a community like this does not happen by accident. It requires ongoing attention, judgment, time, and energy. There is also a real opportunity cost. Time spent on this group is time away from reading cases, spending time with my family, and building my main practice at Radiology One. I have continued doing it because I believe in giving back to the radiology community, but I think 8 years of providing this service for free is enough.

The group will remain free for radiologists to discuss issues, ask questions, share experiences, and support each other. That is not changing. What is changing is that organizations that want to use this community primarily to recruit radiologists will now be asked to support it financially. That includes independent practices, employed groups, large health systems, national teleradiology companies, locums companies, private equity-backed groups, and others.

This is not unusual. The ACR charges for job postings. RadWorking charges for job postings. Ben White charges for job postings. Many others do as well. The difference is that American Radiologists is a highly engaged, physician-focused community that has been built organically over many years. I have also tried to create pricing that allows independent practices, which I strongly believe in, to compete with national entities and large health systems. I do not want this to become a system where only the biggest organizations can afford visibility.

I also created the American Radiologists website because the Facebook group format has limitations. It is not always easy to search older posts, organize information, separate topics, or keep content available in a way that is useful over time. Not every post is relevant to every radiologist, and important discussions can quickly get buried. The website gives us a better structure, including discussion forums, a jobs board, resources, and a place to organize content in a more durable and searchable way.

If your group has found radiologists through this community, benefited from discussions here, learned something valuable, or received value from the network that has been built, I ask that you support this effort. If you disagree with this decision, that is your right. I respect that. But I also ask that you respect the fact that there is a significant cost to maintaining this group and building the website, even if that cost has not been visible to everyone.

I want American Radiologists to continue being a valuable, physician-centered community. To do that sustainably, the terms have to change a bit. Radiologists will still have a free place to discuss the issues affecting our specialty, both in the Facebook group and through the website forums. But if an organization wants to use the community to recruit radiologists, there will now be a fee to support the platform that makes that possible.

I hope you understand and support this next step.