A d*mn good case of the Technorati blues...CDB Blog ceases to exist in T-land..

According to the fine folk at Technorati, this blog has not been updated for ten days.

LIARS!

Anyway, for some reason, they aren't updating and/or aren't finding my posts.

Thus, I decided to fix it myself. I did some digging, and found that the most promising solution seemed to be the simplest--dropping the Technorati staff a line and telling them "hey, you lost me." This approach has produced successful results for others who have experienced similar issues.

I sent the message. I got the autoresponder telling me to read the Help and FAQ stuff. That might fix my problem, they posited, but in case it doesn't someone made of real human flesh will get back to you ASAP.

Three days and counting...

I think I will wait a few more days, advise them of my question again, and see what happens.

In the meantime, in tribute to the Grateful Dead and with all due deferrence to "Mexicali Blues," I am singing the "Technorati Blues."

Is there any hit a man don't stand to lose,
When the tag troll comes to take it all away?
Cherish well your thoughts, and keep a tight grip on your booze,
'Cause taggin' and pingin' ain't working much today.

She took me up into her room and whispered in my ear,
Go on, my friend, tag any post you choose.
Now Im payin' for that traffic I enjoyed for just two weeks,
With a lifetime's worth of the Technorati blues.

technorati tags: content done better technorati technorati indexing tagging and pinging tag pingsocial bookmarking

del.icio.us tags: content done better technorati technorati indexing tagging and pinging tag pingsocial bookmarking

icerocket tags: content done better technorati technorati indexing tagging and pinging tag pingsocial bookmarking

THURSDAY SPECIAL: One content "promo pack" for a measly sum...

Here's the weekly special...

You get:

A press release for your site.
Five brand new, completely unique distribution-ready articles for directory submission/backlink generation. 500 words each.

Maybe you have a new site that you are getting ready to push. Maybe you'd like to breathe a little life into an existing project. Either way, this is a cheap way to shove SERPs and get some visibility in one fell swoop.

The price? A measly $100.

All work is backed by the usual Content Done Better three-pronged guarantee. One person only. The first to get in touch about the week's special is the lucky winner. You can contact me at cdbrack@gmail.com or you can use the form on the right sidebar. You may also use the contact form at Content Done Better.

Not a bad deal!

technorati tags: content done better content writer content writer press release articlesfreelance ghostwriter

del.icio.us tags: content done better content writer content writer press release articlesfreelance ghostwriter

icerocket tags: content done better content writer content writer press release articles freelanceghostwriter

Writing to be found...Old words, new words, keywords and creating words...

I'll probably be the 289,087th blogger to reference Jakob Nielsen's August 28th recommendation to "Use Old Words when Writing for Findability," but Mr. Usability Guru brings up a few points worth pondering.

According to Nielsen, internet users are so search-oriented that writing in a way that will appease the Google gods is of primary importance. As he puts it, "use keywords that match users' search queries."

To Nielsen, this is an extension of the old writing maxim that one should always write for his or her audience. In an era where people rely on Page One of the SERP's to direct their cyber-travels, that means using the same words the target audience is using.

Among other recommendations, Nielsen advocates using recognized and common words instead of euphemisms, poetic reinterpretations, or insider jargon. One should write about a "bottle" instead of a "tubular glass storage device." It's "night," not "the hours of quiet and darkness," etc.

Additionally, he recommends resisting the urge to try to coin a new term. Although the upside of being a vocabulary-creator is tempting, he notes that people are unlikely to adopt your new invented word and that the space might be better used to echo their expectations.

Of course, Nielsen is right. He's really not positing a ground-breaking position here. Internet marketers have understood the importance of using keyword-rich content to massage good SERPs since the beginning of time, it seems.

However, the article is interesting because it isn't coming from some guy trying to peddle a product or to attract potential ad-clickers to an ostensibly "Google-friendly, content-rich site." It's coming from someone whose primary focus is on usability--not bottom line profit considerations.

It would seem as if we are entering an era where writing for the search engines and writing for the end-user is beginning to become one and the same thing. That could be a byproduct of search engine improvements. It might also be the outgrowth of search engine use having an impact on user habits. Either way, if you believe Nielsen, making it usable means making it Google-friendly.

My fear is that too many people will embrace the comments too tightly. The need for appropriate keyword use (especially in critical areas) does not have to trade off with quality writing. It is possible to use necessary keywords in adequate quantities while simultaneously offering a good (and non-redundant) reading experience. I worry that many webmasters will read the Nielsen piece and begin to worry about the use of synonyms, clever turns of phrase, etc. when that really isn't necessary.

What is necessary is to use a writer who has the skill to lace text with appropriate keywords at optimal intervals while still creating a readable, attractive, entertaining, and informative piece of writing.

I'm sure I've made that kind of statement before. I'm sure countless others have said the same thing while bemoaning horrible examples of "SEO writing" or while promoting their own talents.

Now I'm saying it all again, but for a different reason. Now that usability and SEO are going to merge in the eyes of some webmasters as a result of Nielsen's argument, it's important to remind everyone that usability, search engine optimization and quality writing can peacefully co-exist.

p.s. I also have to wonder about Nielsen's failure to mention the increasing reliance on social bookmarking networks as a means of discovering information. I think this growing trend will continue to displace search engine use in some quarters and that those who rely on a "folksonomic" alternative to search engine algorithms will continue to find themselves tickled by good writing regardless of keyword density. But that's another story altogether...



Technorati Tags:
content done better, content, writing, freelance, web writer, content writer, usability, useabiltiy, SEO, seo content, search engines, google, nielsen, jakob, jakob nielsen

Del.icio.us Tags:
content done better, content, writing, freelance, web writer, content writer, usability, useabiltiy, SEO, seo content, search engines, google, nielsen, jakob, jakob nielsen

Thank you, Florida, for making Kansas seem less idiotic...Rant re: teaching history "as fact"...Florida takes the thinking out of learning...

I was going to save rants and ramblings for Saturdays, but I couldn't sit on this one...

I live in Kansas. I love my home state in many ways. In other ways, however, it can be sort of humiliating to come from the Sunflower State. No, I am not bothered by "Wizard of Oz" cracks or questions about whether I have wheat and cattle in my backyard. That's fine. The embarassing part is when people bring up our state's crazy position on evolution and "intelligent design" in the classroom. (It also isn't very cool being the home state of Rev. Fred Phelps, but he is a lone whack job with a hostage family of church members, so I let that one sort of roll off me--though it would make my day if he moved to Missouri).

Anyway, in political terms (especially with regard to education issues), Kansas isn't always the coolest place. However, I have learned of a state that makes our officials look as wise as Solomon himself by comparison. Thank you, Florida, for making my home state seem a little less stupid.

The other day, I was driving along and flipping through radio stations when I heard the very end of a comment about a news story regarding a new Florida law about teaching history in the state's schools. What I heard was so mesmerizingly stupid that I was sure I must have missed something, or mis-heard the announcer.

I didn't.

The History News Network summarizes:

"Florida Governor Jeb Bush has signed into law a new comprehensive K-12th grade education bill – the Florida Education Omnibus Bill (H.B. 7087e3). Buried in the 160-page bill are new provisions designed to “meet the highest standards for professionalism and historic accuracy.” Some Florida history teachers, though, question the philosophical underpinnings of the law."

That doesn't sound so bad, right... Well, just saying words like "professionalism and historic accuracy" doesn't mean that's what the law is about...

HNN continues:
"While the goal of the bill’s designers is “to raise historical literacy” concerning the documents, people, and events that shaped the nation, some history educators question the emphasis on teaching only “facts.” State Representative Shelley Vana, who also serves as the West Palm Beach teachers union president wonders “whose facts would they be, Christopher Columbus’s or the Indians?”

Theron Trimble, executive director of the Florida Council for the Social Studies, also questions the bill’s provisions that declares that teachers are not to “construct” history. Trimble asserts, “American history tends to get reinterpreted and re-reviewed in cycles...It’s a natural evolution, history is as changeable as the law.” Perhaps Jennifer Morely, an American history and government teacher, best summarized the concerns of her colleagues: 'If you just require students to memorize information, that’s not the best way to create active citizens...we’re just creating little robots.'"

Yeah, it's true. In Florida, history is now a matter of pure fact. It's black and white. No room for interpretation. In fact, interpretation is now a "no-no." If you stray from the legislature's conception of what constitutes American history (and the 160 page statute spells it out for you), you are in trouble, Mr. History Teacher!

This is perhaps the most ridiculous thing I have heard all year, and there is a lot of stupid to go around.

Here's why Floridians should feel even more humiliated than Kansans about their state's education...

It's absolutely the wrong way to teach history. History is comprised of events that occur within contexts. Those events, those contexts, and the ways in which they are viewed are all shaped by prevailing and individual and societal values and mores. To divorce history from "construction" is to rob it of its very meaning. Additionally, forcing history into a legislatively-mandated grid of "proper values and perspectives" is disingenuous. It whitewashes our national history, robbing it of meaning and destroying the natural narrative of history that makes it meaningful in the first place. Florida has reduced history to the equivalent of a spelling test, with the legislature playing the role of Noah Webster.

Robert Jensen summarizes nicely:

"Florida's lawmakers are not only prescribing a specific view of U.S. history that must be taught (my favorite among the specific commands in the law is the one about instructing students on “the nature and importance of free enterprise to the United States economy”), but are trying to legislate out of existence any ideas to the contrary. They are not just saying that their history is the best history, but that it is beyond interpretation. In fact, the law attempts to suppress discussion of the very idea that history is interpretation."

Mombian concurs:

"As any true historian will tell you, however, “constructed’ history is the only kind there is. (I have a postgraduate degree in history from Oxford University, so I claim some expertise in this matter.) Yes, most people will agree that certain people existed and certain events occurred, but it is the interpretation of these events that forms the heart of what history is. Otherwise, it’s just a memorized string of events and dates—and even the “facts” of events happening on particular dates get fuzzy as we move further back in time."

It's dangerous. Here's one of those cliches that are so obvious you can't usually imagine ever having to say them... "If you don't learn from history, it will repeat itself." At the point when the interpretation of history is lost, there is no way to truly learn from it. When you divorce the study of prior events to a litany of proscribed facts, you are able to excise marginalized voices and perspectives that run contrary to prevailing viewpoints. If you "erase" certain ugly parts of the past or decide to interpret all happenings through one big legilsatively-created lens, you set the stage for the worst parts of history repeating themselves again and again.

It's a potential headache for Florida. The Organization of American Historians explains:

"What made the revised language so problematic is that by losing the relativism and postmodern phrasing and instead adopting “factual, not constructed,” it leaves the reader with the impression that history is “just facts” and of course is unchanging and not interpretive in nature. This, of course, is what the lawmakers envision as history; however, the Florida Department of Education, the National Center for Education Statistics, and the National Assessment of Education Progress all demand that history be taught as analytical and interpretive, and that it measure critical thinking. So now the “A-Plus-Plus Plan” directly contradicts the standards and expectations of the federal and state departments of education. These agencies on the federal level assess how effectively states are complying with No Child Left Behind and could open the door for the U.S. Department of Education to rebuke the state over these reductive measures."

Yep. It's stupid AND it probably won't even pass muster under current rules. Nice job, Florida!

It's hopelessly outdated. We are swamped by information. We are not even treading water in the information ocean anymore, we are drowning. It's hard to separate quality information from crap. It's hard to know who is right, the presuppositions they carry as they present their cases, and how all of the information and opinion out there overlap, fit together and connect. Yes, by imposing a rigorous prism through which to view events, Florida has sought to control that problem a little bit. However, what it really does is rob students of the opportunity to develop good information-processing skills.

Teaching lists and facts is meaningless, generally. In today's information-driven society, it is suicidal. You can either teach without intellectual honesty (the Florida approach), or you can actually try to give students the tools necessary to sort through information and to determine its strengths and weaknesses. Those critical thinking skills are derived from exposing students to different perspectives and constructions. Like other skills, they strengthen when they are exercised. If you want better critical thinking skills, you have to let kids think. Think, not memorize or learn how to apply one outlook. Florida is contributing to a society of ignorance by failing to encourage examination of differing viewpoints.

It's fundamentally at odds with our conception of rights. If you have a love for country, you have to hate this law. We embrace free speech as an inalienable right. No, this law doesn't represent a massive restriction on free speech (although some educators might have an argument to the contrary). What it does do, however, is espouse a particular viewpoint as the sole means of examining history. The reason we value free speech is the belief that a free marketplace of ideas will allow the cream to rise to the top. We appreciate dissent and a multiplicity of viewpoints as a means of allowing the best arguments to win out in society at large. We believe in allowing contary perspectives to be aired because those tests should strengthen or replace dominant arguments. History, the founders themselves might argue, is a work in progress and that work is best improved by considering all perspectives and attacking their faults or embracing their truths. You don't get that kind of marketplace when state education decides to shut the door on anything that a bunch of middle-aged Floridian dudes don't think is true.

We've long argued that education is necessary for a functioning democracy... I have to echo a question from a Florida high school teacher that appeared in Tampa Bay Online, "In a Democratic society, don't we want to teach kids how to question?" I think so.

It's impractical. Let me ask you a question... What caused the Great Depression? Now, try to answer that question honestly and completely without engaging in construction or interpretation and relying exclusively on facts. Remember, the fact set you use needs to be consistent with the criteria established by the state legislature, so go easy on any critiques of market economies. Good luck.

We now return to our regular programming...

Technorati Tags:
Florida, education, history, florida education, florida law, teaching, education, eductors, teacher

Del.icio.us Tags:
Florida, education, history, florida education, florida law, teaching, education, eductors, teacher

Different strokes...Online copywriting informed by offline experience...

I didn't start writing for a living right away. Before I received my first dollar as a writer, I did a series of other things. I was a corporate guy. I was a radio guy. I was a teacher and coach. I was a student (on several occasions). I was an industrial laundry dryer room operator. I pulled third shifts at convenience stores. I did focus group recruitment. And, for a block of about three or four years, I sold.

I sold reasonably expensive, non-essential items to a tremendous cross-section of a fairly major metropolitan center. I can't say that I loved it, but I was pretty good at it. I learned something while selling that has served me well with respect to copywriting and I thought it would be a potentially interesting point to ponder...

My boss was an old-school, hard sell kind of guy. Unlike many business owners, he was on-site every day and was still selling. He was one of those in-your-face, high-hype, arm-twisting, overexcited salesmen that you probably thought disappeared from the face of the planet after the two-millionth time they were parodied on television. At first, I thought it was a joke. I couldn't believe anyone still pushed product like that. It seemed outdated and transparent to me.

He sold like crazy.

Moral to the story: Just because it won't sell you doesn't mean it won't sell someone else.
Additional moral to the story: The hard sell can get results.

Now, those who know me wouldn't be able to imagine me getting jumpy and exited about much of anything. I could never hope to do the old school salesman thing with a straight face. It just wasn't in me. So, I took my own approach. Where the boss yelled, I was quiet. Where he might have claimed our product was life-changing, I would say it was a nice little addition. He was over the top and I was understated. He was emotional and I was analytical. He was bombastic and I was friendly.

I sold like crazy. I didn't outdo the boss (but, in my defense, he had about thirty years of experience on me), but I pulled down very good numbers.

Moral to the story: Different sales approaches work for different salespeople and customers.
Additional moral to the story: A soft sell can get results.

As a copywriter, I take that to heart. I'm often called upon to write long sales letters that have a certain "hard sell" direction. I know how to do it and can turn out material that converts. I draw from my experience in copywriting, my research, education and my time on the sales floor with the boss, whose hard sell pitch was just about flawless.

I also know that there are other ways to get the job done. In some instances, a more analytical style, a certain calmly confident tone and other "softenings" can perform a lot better than the "YOU WON'T BELIEVE THIS MIRACLE--IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE COMPLETELY" sort of thing.

The trick is knowing when to switch gears. That has a lot to do with the product's probable audience, the product itself, other branding and marketing efforts on the part of the seller, and a host of other factors.

I read a post at Bob Bly's blog that raised some of these same issues. For those of you who aren't familiar with Bly, he is well-known copywriter and author of some great books on how to produce high-quality copy. If you have an interest in developing your copywriting skills, you should keep an eye on his blog.

Anyway, he discussed an email he received that chastised him for using a hard sell approach. Bly observed:

"Given the hundreds of hard-sell, long-copy Web and email promos that are making money hand over fist, how can this Web designer or anyone else possibly state as if it were a law of online marketing that 'the hard sell won’t work on the Internet'?"

Bly then opened the topic for comment from some copywriters. The series of replies, when aggregated, tends to reach the same conclusion I have...

It isn't about a hard sell or a soft sell. It's about making a sale.

Different strategies work under different circumstances and when utlized by different people. Different strokes, and all of that...

I don't believe in limiting my copywriting work to a singular style. I believe the best copy is written by those who choose the right combination of tools for the individual job. I like to keep the Content Done Better toolbox full.



Technorati Tags:
Content done better, content, writing, freelance, web writer, copywriter, copywriting, hard sell, soft sell, sales page, online copy, web copy

Del.icio.us Tags:
Content done better, content, writing, freelance, web writer, copywriter, copywriting, hard sell, soft sell, sales page, online copy, web copy

Rate negotiation for freelance web writers...How Content Done Better prices...

It seems like I read a forum post or something else about how to negotiate rates effectively as a freelance writer every other day. It's obviously a topic in which many are interested, so I thought I'd share my $.02.

I write primarily for the web, so I can't really provide a great deal of insight about how duking it out in the print world works, but I can shed some light on my strategy for online rate negotiation. Maybe some writers will find it helpful. Those of you who are prospective customers might also be interested in how I handle the matter.

This is what I have been doing. It works well for me. My clients don't seem to mind, either. Take it for what it is worth.

When someone contacts me about doing some writing for them, I always reply with an expression of my interest (assuming there is some), and a general rate range for the kind of project in which they seem interested. I always explain that this is a range and that a variety of variables can influence pricing. I then ask any follow-up questions that need answers before I can give a rock-solid price quotation.

If the buyer is interested after hearing my usual range of prices, he or she will get back in touch with more information. Sometimes they will include an offer, other times they will ask for a quotation.

If I like the offer, I'll take it and we move along to the project. If the offer doesn't match up, I will then tell the client what I'd like.

That price is based upon my estimate for the total number of hours it will take me to complete the project and my own personal earning goals. Although it is informed by the overall market, it is neither scaled back or overstuffed to "fit in." My price is based upon my needs and expectations.

If the buyer comes back and accepts the deal, that's great. If they come back with a lower figure, I usually decline the job. There are exceptions. If the project is extremely interesting, if I have good reason to believe that the job is a true gateway to additional projects of interest (and just saying "if you do this one, there will be more work for you" won't get the job done, by the way), if the buyer is willing to offer a great deal of flexibility in terms of deadline, or if the buyer is willing to increase the volume of his or her order in order to secure a slightly lower price, I might consider coming off of my mark a little bit. I'm also willing to work with previous clients a little bit if they are in a real pinch.

Those circumstances are rare. Usually, a buyer asks for a price, I provide a price, and we either do business or part ways. If the buyer expresses a need to keep the price below my mark, I will often respond to a "no thanks" email with a little extra sales pitch, but the price break thing isn't common.

When I contact someone else about working for them, I basically work under the same system after intial contact occurs.

There are those who will say you should "pump up" your first offer. Hey, they might actually take it and if they don't, you will have more wiggle room for negotiation. I can understand the logic behind that approach, but it feels a bit disengenuous to me. I am offering writing services, not trying to move used cars off of the lot.

If I say I need $X to do a job, I want the person on the other side of the discussion to know that our magic number is X, not Y. I don't want to waste a great deal of time haggling with one another. People generally know what they can afford to spend. I generally know what I need to make. That should be enough information to determine whether a deal can be made without doing an extended negotiation dance.

There are some who will say you should start by getting a number from the buyer. Agagin, I can understand why that makes sense. However, I don't want to get a reflexive $X response from someone hoping to get off cheap when they are really willing to pay $Y. I don't want to "pull them up." I'd much rather come right out and say "this is what I want." It's honest, straightforward and incredibly efficient.

The trick, from the writer's standpoint, is knowing what they want to make from a job. Although the overall market is going to peg high and low points on the price spectrum, the writer needs to know at what point a job needs to fall to make it workable for them. That requires some good predictive skills (which are probably honed by experience more than anything) and a willingness to risk occasionally losing a job to someone who'll work cheaper.

I've seen web writers handle pricing issues in many different ways. It seems to me that the most straightforward and direct strategy is probably the most productive.


Technorati Tags:
content done better, content, writing, freelance, web writer, web writing, seo content, freelance rates, writer rates, writing rates, ghostwriter, ghostwriting, bargaining, haggling

Del.icio.us Tags:
content done better, content, writing, freelance, web writer, web writing, seo content, freelance rates, writer rates, writing rates, ghostwriter, ghostwriting, bargaining, haggling

Saturday Profiles forthcoming...Collegiality vs. competition...Thoughts on the risks and benefits of sharing good information from others...

The bottom line here is that I've decided to start a Saturday Profile as a regular part of this blog. I will be isolating and highlighting a site that other writers and potential clients of freelance writers might find of interest. I plan on doing the first one next Saturday.

This is not a new idea, but it's a good idea. I've thought about it before and have always back-burnered it, trying to decide whether or not it was in my best interests. I've decided that it is.

If you just want the "news," it can be boiled down to "I'll be doing a weekly profile, but I still reserve the right to use Saturdays for occasional seemingly random ramblings."

If you want the long backstory about why I think doing this sort of thing is a good idea, you can keep on reading.

*****

Last week, this blog was the subject of a "featured site" piece at Writing Spark (see: "No Sunday guest"...). I enjoyed the write-up and it made me think about what a great idea that really is.

Highlighting others' sites is a win-win. It provides value to the readers of the site doing the feature story, alerting them to something of interest or importance. Simultaneously, it gives the "featuree" a nod of approval (who doesn't like an occasional vote of confidence?), some direct traffic and a handy backlink.

Now, most bloggers do a little bit of that on a regular basis, even if they aren't spotlighting individual sites. The most obvious example are link lists. It's a less concentrated way of saying "check this out, it's cool." We also do it as a matter of course in posts. For instance, if I write a post about Technorati's apparent decision to ignore my pings over the course of the last five days, I might reference Kristen King's rough flight on Technorati Airways.

That last sentence shared the "link love" and pointed out a nifty blog from a freelance writer. That kind of thing is really at the heart of blogging. However, I think that a more detailed profile or highlighting of another blog must be even more powerful. You might not have clicked on those links in my example sentence, but if I wrote a full profile of that blog, I'd wager that the click-through rate to it would be in excess of 50%.

I like sharing interesting things with people who have a relationship to the freelance writing and online content industry. That includes buyers/clients and writers. I like to think of this blog as a potentially interesting resource for both groups. One of my goals with the Content Done Better Blog is to provide a truly valuable and enjoyable resource.

So, integrating an occasional full-blown "you gotta see this" piece on outstanding sites/blogs makes perfect sense.

Unfortunately, I do have another goal with respect to this blog. It's a marketing tool for Content Done Better. With the exception of the Thursday Specials, I try to keep the stuff I write here relatively plug-free (well, at least I try to limit the obvious self-promotion), but if the blog didn't help the business it wouldn't be here for anyone to read.

I've kept the blog free of advertising. I did recently toy with the idea of selling some select text links via Adbrite, but I gave up on that after offers seemed to be less than ideally-suited for my audience. Originally, there was a Chikita mini-mall and the ubiquitous Adsense blocks. I killed those. I didn't do that out of some desire to keep the blogosphere "pure." I removed them because I didn't like the idea of getting paid a nickel to have someone leave my site to check out the competition. I didn't want to serve as a billboard for other writers.

So, I'm hellbent on keeping potential customers here because I want them to hire me to handle their writing projects. That makes sense from a business standpoint, at least at face value. Simultaneously, though, I think there is a substantive non-business value to pointing out other blogs/sites that offer something unique, even though they may be my competition...

Sticky situation.

I could just highlight sites that I felt offered value to the reader but that didn't directly compete with me. For instance, I could write a glowing review of J. Bailey's Plagiarism Today, which is a great resource for anyone with an interest in online copyright and plagiarism issues. In fact, I did write a little blurb for it once...

Really, though, this blog is for writers with an interest in writing for the net and for webmasters and others who have online content and copywriting needs. If I want to maximize the value of their experience, I am going to have to spill the beans and concede that I have some smart, entertaining and talented competitors out there. Not only do I have to admit that, I have to start sending my readers and potential customers to see them.

I just noticed how long this post is getting. I know Saturdays are my "rambling" day, but I will try to get to the point...

After some consideration, I've decided to value collegiality over competition. I've decided to provide value at the risk of letting people escape my clutches. I think the pros of occasional feature pieces like the ones found at Writing Spark and elsewhere outweigh the cons of sending my potential clients off to look at someone else's material.

However, that is not a purely altruistic decision. Not even close. It's my hope that providing that information will actually be a net marketing benefit to this blog.

It should communicate my own sense of security in the quality of my work and abilities. If I am not afraid to tell a prospective client that the competition has something to offer, that should let that reader know that I'm willing to bet he or she will still (eventually) come back here.

I'm also gambling that most people who receive the "feature treatment" will probably mention it in their own blogs both as a bit of friendly quid quo pro and as a means of maximizing the value of the write-up for themselves. Thus, the traffic and linking will be flowing in both directions.

It should also make this blog a little more interesting, inspiring repeat visitors, etc.

I also like the idea of contributing to developing a sense of community among writers even when/if we are competitors in the marketplace.

Oh, I also have this whole notion that information exchange of this sort is an inherent good, but this has gone on long enough...

Okay, that's my long explanation of the reason for the planned addition of Saturday Profiles to the Content Done Better Blog.


Technorati Tags:
content done better, content writer, writer, web content, web writer, links, blogs, competition, community, freelance, freelance writers

Del.icio.us Tags:
content done better, content writer, writer, web content, web writer, links, blogs, competition, community, freelance, freelance writers

Thumbs up...Recognizing your limitations...Facelift for Content Done Better...

The Content Done Better website was a do-it-yourself project. I found a seemingly tolerable (and free) template. I acquired a few graphics. I struggled through coding a contact form.

The result? Well, in a word, disappointing.

It works, but it certainly could be much, much better.

The gap between the reality of my site and my aspirations for it has grated on me for awhile. So has my hypocrisy.

I've written about how designers shouldn't assume they can serve as great content writers (see: Designers and writers...). I've lambasted those who claim writing great copy is easy and that anyone can do it (see: "Am I better than you?"and "Good 'timings' is everything"). Yet, at the very same time, I have been using a self-created site that would make a design guru wince.

Time to take some of my own medicine! I enjoyed putting the site together. Every time I build a webpage, I learn more about HTML, design, etc. It's fun. However, it's not my area of expertise and it certainly isn't something I should entrust to an amateur--even if that amateur is me!

How many times have you seen a content writer telling people about how smart it is to hire an expert to put words on the page because it will produce better results and allow one to focus on their own strengths instead of becoming mired in a process for which they are ill-suited? In one way or another, every web content writer out there has made those arguments. I know I have! And guess what--they are true.

They also cut both ways.

I see writer after writer making their "use an expert" arguments from self-constructed sites that don't measure up to today's visitor expectations and standards. If I want a customer to abandon the "do it yourself" mentality when it makes good business sense to turn matters over to a pro, I should do likewise. I don't know how many visitors to my site have connected those dots, but any who did probably clicked away.

I'm a professional writer, not a professional designer. I've recognized my limitations and have hired a design pro to do a re-work on my main site. I am excited about the improved quality, functionality and appearance that will result. It should be good for business, and it is definitely good in terms of consistency with my message.

My thumbs up today goes for practicing what we preach. As a content writer, that means I should be showing customers that I believe in the written word. That's why I update this blog regularly. That's why I am kicking off a large article marketing campaign as of September 1. It's also why I have decided to shed some hypocrisy and hire a pro to build my new site.

This might be a rather self-congratulatory "thumbs up." Sorry if that's the case. However, I do feel good about the decision and I think that it's something all writers should consider.


Technorati Tags:
content done better, content, content writer, freelance, freelance writer, professional, business, design, expertise, specialization, web design, site design

Del.icio.us Tags:
content done better, content, content writer, freelance, freelance writer, professional, business, design, expertise, specialization, web design, site design

Thumbs Down...Friday morning irony...At least I get a backlink...

Last month, I wrote a post in response to having another content writer stop by the Content Done Better Blog in order to leave a little comment spam (see: "Content supplier resorts to lousy marketing ploy...").

I argued that comment spamming was lazy and unprofessional. I maintained that littering my blog with comment spam advertising the competition also cut against developing a supportive and collegial environment between web content writers.

My comments were primarily directed toward comment spam. It didn't directly address other considerations. For instance, it didn't mention splogs, another form of spamming within the blogosphere. Obviously, scraping others' content and using it to generate a moneymaking blog is just as bad, if not worse, than C-spamming.

Anyway... Although the post was really about comment spamming, the title was a little more general:

"Content supplier resorts to lousy marketing ploy...Blog spam escapes word verification.

Today, I saw this headline at a splog:

"Content supplier resorts to lousy marketing ploy...Blog spam...By Excercise Center"

Yep. They scraped and used an anti-blog spam article in a splog. And, they ended up being accidentally honest about it with that headline.

Now that is ugly irony.

You can view the offending site here. The picture for this post is a screenshot of their handywork.

On the bright side, I did get a backlink out of the deal.


Technorati Tags:
content done better, content, content writer, freelance, freelance writer, splog, blog, blogging, comment spam, spam, scraper, scraping

Del.icio.us Tags:
content done better, content, content writer, freelance, freelance writer, splog, blog, blogging, comment spam, spam, scraper, scraping

Is web content the new pulp fiction? Content debate sounds familiar...

If you're a writer willing to produce content for the web at reasonable per word rates, you're likely to have a few other wordsmiths look down upon you from time to time. Occasionally, you even read a participant's lament.

One cheap fiction writer said:

"I have wrenched from my victims their last agonized cries, watched expressions of incredulity spread across their tortured faces. I have killed all these men in all these places -- for a penny a word... This diabolical career was entered upon willingly ten years ago, yet it is difficult to decide at whose door the blame should be placed."

Probably sounds like a familiar bit of self-pity to those of us who write for online markets. We hear it from our cronies who feel like they are "settling for less" or "selling out" all the time. Like the author of the quote above, many feel as if their foray into web content has decreased their ability to write true "masterpieces."

But for every writer who feels that way, there is someone willing to churn out 25,000 words per day. There is someone out there working on his or her non-commercial poetry in the mornings and spending the rest of the day banging the keyboard to pay the bills.

It was that way in 1936, too. That's when that quotation was written by an anonymous pulp fiction writer. While he (at least one student of the era believes Anthony M. Rud wrote the piece) seemed more than a little disgruntled with his lot in the literary world, a guy named H. Bedford Jones was creating 25,000 word novelettes from top to bottom in the course of a day and saying things like:

"Some writers have plenty of money and do not need pay for their work. But most of us must earn our living, and what better way for an author than by writing? Let the young writers write to sell; get themselves firmly established in 'hack writing,' or whatever you chose to call it. Then, if they feel the urge to turn out masterpieces they at least will not starve."

Meanwhile Frederick Faust, who wrote under around twenty different pseudonyms was becoming America's most prolific writer and selling ninety-nine percent of his work. Poetry was his passion, but his prose paid the bills--and then some. Some readers might recognize Faust as "Max Brand," the name he used for hundreds of western novels. Over the course of his 500+ published novels and stories, Faust created characters remembered today, including Dr. Kildare and Destry of Destry Rides Again fame.

As Duane Spurlock says:

"He supported his family by publishing the bulk of his work printed on rough pulp paper in popular fiction magazines disdained by the literati; yet he peopled his stories with the same sort of heroic figures and conflicts that filled myths, legends, and romances of the Western canon. (That's Western as in Western Civilization.)"

The arguments seem familiar and there is a strong connection between the era of cheap pulps and today's web economy. That commonality is a seemingly insatiable appetite for content. Back then it was for tales of romance, monsters, detectives and cowboys. Today, that appetite seems to be for accurate and effectively-delivered information.

Anthony Rud may have been ashamed to work on the cheap. H.L. Mencken, whose American Mercury published Rud's ruminations, had a known disdain for the workhorse writers and their output. Frederick Faust seemed to see it as a matter of economic reality and means to use his unique skills to fund his less successful efforts to become a recognized poet.

Today, you'll hear web content writers saying they hate the fact that they don't earn a dollar per word like those who spend their days querying the slicks who are ashamed to take in their nickel per word. You'll see others turn up their noses at the idea of putting a finger on a keyboard for less than a buck. Others will take the jobs, do the work, keep the buyers happy, interest the public, and will cash their checks without complaint--whether they love the business or not. Then, you have folks like me who agree with the aforementioned H. Bedford-Jones, who once said:

"That old admonition to write and keep on writing still holds true. Write at every opportunity. And don't mind the taunts against 'commercialism.' Remember, we may be too proud to fight -- but we can't be too proud to write!"



Technorati Tags:
content done better, content, content writer, web content, seo conent, freelance writer, ghostwriter, pulp fiction, frederick faust, max brand, h. bedford-jones, Anthony Rud, writer rates, freelancing rates

Del.icio.us Tags:
content done better, content, content writer, web content, seo conent, freelance writer, ghostwriter, pulp fiction, frederick faust, max brand, h. bedford-jones, Anthony Rud, writer rates, freelancing rates

THURSDAY SPECIAL: Return of the bargain article bundle... One package available...

Last week, I ran a special on article bundles. I provided openings for two buyers. One package was a reduced rate bundle of ten articles. That one sold. The other was for twenty articles. There were no takers.

I've decided to offer that second bundle again as this week's Content Done Better special.

Here's the "product description":

BARGAIN ARTICLES--20 for a measly $200!

You get 20 articles (500 words each) on the topic of your choice. If you have keyword denisty requirements, that's AOK. I'd prefer it if the articles centered on the same general topic, but if you have to be insanely diverse, I suppose I can live with that. Delivery on/before September 10.

Here's your chance to get well-written, 100% original content for the absolutely fantastic price of only two cents per word (payment via PayPal only for the specials). Get in while you still can!

You can reserve the bundle by emailing me at cdbrack@gmail.com, by using the contact form on the right sidebar of this blog, or by using the contact form at the Content Done Better.

Available to one, and only one person.


Technorati Tags:
content done better, content, content writer, cheap content, content special, freelance writing, ghostwriter, copywriter, seo content, special price, bargain content, original content

Del.icio.us Tags:
content done better, content, content writer, cheap content, content special, freelance writing, ghostwriter, copywriter, seo content, special price, bargain content, original content

This post was better before I deleted it... A shorter version of a masterpiece... Quality writing and affiliate marketing sites...

I just finished writing a wonderful blog post for today. It started with an article I encountered on a blog explaining just how easy it was to be a successful web content writer. After satirizing and belittling the poorly written freebie article, I discussed the blog that was using it.

My original post lambasted the article and discussed how the "anyone can do it" idea denigrates professionals and encourages people who can't handle the work to enter the field. Of course, that often ends in trouble, which gives the whole web writing community a black eye.

My original post was also critical of the blogger who used the article. Free articles from repository sites can be used effectively and legitimately, even though they can never compare to having custom-written, unique content. However, the value of free articles is undermined by a lack of sufficient vetting. If you are going to use a freebie, read it first and make sure you are giving readers something of value. That is, of course, if you care about the readers.

You see, the site that ran the offending article is one of about ten blogs that all exist in order to help promote a website whose sole function is to get people to buy info products like "The Rich Jerk" via the site operator's Clickbank ID. The blogs, which are part of the same domain as the site itself, serve as mini content warehouses, designed to boost SERPs. The reader experience isn't at the forefront of the operator's mind. It's all about getting people to the "product reviews" via Google which results in them visiting the sales pages, which then leads to sales (when things work out).

I am not going to go overboard criticizing that business model. If it works, so be it. I will say this...

If you want to use a blog to boost SERPs and to drive traffic toward bigger sales, there is a different approach. You can build a blog with a great deal of user value through unique content that will naturally attract its own audience while carrying a healthy cache of credibility (and that can only help your sales).

That system will cost more than filling ten feeder blogs with free articles, tossing up a fistful of glowing "reviews" and sending folks to sales pages via your affiliate link. It will, however, produce results if done correctly.

I know that because I have been writing two such blogs for internet marketers with an orientation toward superior site quality and higher conversion rates via well-written unique content that is specifically targeted to the right demographic. Oh, and that content is actually pushing SERPs up like crazy.

Which brings us back to the beginning, where we were talking about the fact that not everyone can write the right content.

If you get the writer you need and are willing to make an investment in quality, however, you can do alot of business. And you won't have to crutch on cruddy reprints, cookie cutter blogs and other shallow strategies that encounter much more consumer resistance to produce sales.

Well, this re-write of the first post communicates most of the same ideas. I swear, though, the first version was better than this one!

Technorati Tags:
content done better, content, content writer, seo content, freelance writer, IM, internet marketing, blog, blogging

Del.icio.us Tags:
content done better, content, content writer, seo content, freelance writer, IM, internet marketing, blog, blogging

Evaluating your work...Customer feedback, results, and what it means...

If I write a sales page for a client and he pulls a conversion rate twice as high as he might have otherwise expected, I'd love to take credit for that. The client might be more than willing to give me that credit, too.

Of course, that doubled conversion rate could be the result of a superior product compared to past efforts. It could be related to a marketing campaign that supplied a more precisely targeted collection of prospects. It might be because the sales page went live the day after most people received their tax refund checks. Who really knows? Sure, with the right split testing of multiple sales pages, etc., we might be able to get a more precise measurement. But even then, there are ghosts in the machine that might be whispering wrong answers.

If I write a press release and the client gets absolutely no play from it, s/he might think I did a poor job. I might question the quality of the work, too. However, the shortfall in results could have been the result of a lousy distribution plan with which I had nothing to do.

The client gets a record number of signups on his/her squeeze page. I'm a hero! No one signs up. It's my fault. Maybe, maybe not. No way to tell. You get the idea.

I started thinking about this a little bit after reading an article by another freelance content writer about the kinds of things buyers should ask prospective writers about before hiring them. One of the questions advocated was whether their articles ever achieved a top position on one or more of the major search engines.

Personally, I think that's a ridiculous answer for a prospective client to ask. Why?

First, because most writers won't have any idea. We write tons and tons of material and don't track the use of every work-for-hire piece, if we inquired about where/when it was going to be used in the first place. The idea that a good writer has the time to check in on how all of those articles are working out for all of those buyers is sort of silly.

Second, because the question itself rests upon the inaccurate assumption that the content itself has some magical power to drift to the top of the SERPs, which it doesn't. Look, I love content. I live and breathe text content. I think it is better than sliced bread, that it is a SERP booster, a backlink generator, a long tail stretcher, a stickiness machine and a whole bunch of other great things. However, I recognize that my article, my sales page, my press release, my whatever won't necessarily work in the wrong hands.

An article that might go straight to #1 with a bullet might languish elsewhere if the owner did a poor job or submitting it to directories, if his/her bio box contained something weird enough to turn people off from using it, if they just decided to use it on one of their own internal pages or a new site that hasn't been indexed. Suppose they put it up, but tinker with the HTML tags to the point of reducing effectiveness? What if other things they have done with their site force them to sustain some invisible Google penalties?

Again, you get the idea. It'd be nice to say that content is only as good as the writer. However, the truth of the matter is that the content is only as good as the writer and the subsequent owner.

I just can't wrap my way around a method of assessing the quality of my work based exclusively, or even primarily, on the outcomes achieved by my clients. When they tell me my work landed them $XXXXX in 24 hours and offer a compliment, I accept it. However, I do so with a full knowledge of the fact it might not have been me.

So, if we want to know how we are doing, how should we proceed.

We could just rely upon client opinion. "I like it." "It looks good." "Great work. Whatever. i have a problem doing this, too. Many of the clients for whom I work hire me because they are seeking improvements over their own work. I have a hard time accepting the observations of a an admittedly bad writer as an accurate grading of my work. There are also those who are simply incapable of telling the difference between junk and good stuff.

Plus, many of the comments one receives back after sending material are of the one-two sentence variety or don't really get to the heart of the matter.

That leaves self-assessment, which is what I do when I read over my work before zipping it up and sending it out. Sometimes I am brilliant. Sometimes I think I fell short. Of course, in the bigger scheme of things, I have no idea whatsoever.

So, I guess I will just keep plugging away, doing things the right way, hoping for good results but knowing I'm only responsible for part of them. I'll keep saving all of those "Hey, great job. I love your writing" emails even though I question what they really prove. I'll keep grinding away to satisfy myself, I suppose and will try to never let my standards slip.

Technorati Tags:
content done better, content, content writer, freelance writer, ghostwriting, freelance content, seo content, sales page, squeeze page, press release, quality writing, writing quality, writing content, writing customer, web writer Del.icio.us Tags:
content done better, content, content writer, freelance writer, ghostwriting, freelance content, seo content, sales page, squeeze page, press release, quality writing, writing quality, writing content, writing customer, web writer