Front Page News...Now available...

One more post about my press release guide and that's it.

Promise.

If you are interested in learning to write effective press releases, either as a professional freelancer or as an eager "do-it-yourselfer," I invite you to take a look at Front Page News.

I am selling it until May 25 at an introductory price of $14.95. In a month, it will go up to $29.95.

It covers the structure, tone and content of writing good press releases and should be a handy guide for anyone looking to develop that particular skill.

So, if you are a freelancer who wants to add a new service to your repertoire, or a webmaster who is willing to try and learn to issue your own press releases, it might be a perfect fit.

You can read more about it here. I've also place a link on the right sidebar.

More on press releases...I wrote a guide...

Several days ago, I mentioned that I had noticed several people struggling to write effective press releases.

That observation probably should have led me to more aggressive marketing of Content Done Better as a top-notch press release authorship service. That would be the best way to capitalize on the problem so many seem to be having with press releases.

I should probably do that!

In the meantime, I took some time to write up a guide to writing press releases. I titled the ebook "Front Page News" and sold it with resale writes to a handful of internet marketers who will use it to improve their own press release writing skills and who may also sell it to others with an interest.

They'll undoubtedly insert some advertising and will try to use the ebook to create back-end profits for them via the inclusion of affiliate links, etc. My "base version" of the ebook is completely free of advertising. It's just a handy, step by step look at the structure, organization, tone and content of successful press releases. It isn't decorated with graphics and doesn't have a fancy cover. It is twenty pages long using a fairly normal font and page size.

If you have experienced problems with press release authorship and acceptance or are simply looking to learn more about writing releases, I will be selling the ebook. I haven't decided whether to keep sales a low-key matter here at the blog, or to create a nice sales page and drive more traffic to the product.

I'll let you know. In the meantime, if you are really interested you can contact me via the form on the right sidebar or this blog or you can just email me!

Answering reservations about outsourcing content...Trust and control...

The discussion that led me to write this series of blog posts (you can see the previous entries in the "Answering reservations..." series here, here and here) contained two very similar opinions:

"But I think I'll always write the majority of my own content, because I don't trust anyone else to say what I want to say in the way I want to say it!"

--and--

"I too write my own. If you want to appeal directly to people, then only you can put your emotion, excitement into that article - you personalise it."

I can understand why people would have these reservations. The prospect of turning a the production of a message over to third party could certainly be unsettling.

However, that perspective fails to recognize the difference between giving responsibility for content creation to a randomly chosen person and a professional writer. People have a tendency to believe they are well-positioned to produce content because they are intimately connected to their project. That feeling may be instinctive, but it isn't sensible.

It's a feeling that usually seems strongest when an operation is small and new. Those who run bigger outfits understand where they need to spend their time and why. They recognize their skill sets and relative limitations and don't pretend that complete individual self-sufficiency is an optimal business model. Having learned those lessons, they have found writers, used them and liked the outcome.

Maybe those who have an "I'll do it all myself" attitude just aren't quite ready to hire a content writer. More likely, they just need those of us in the industry to present a strong case so that they can try that first project and learn just how well it all works out in the end.

Some people are more than capable of writing their own content. The two people quoted above may be perfect examples of that. However, the question isn't just one of capability. It is also a matter of opportunity cost and online business management. It is also a question of relative skill levels and their importance in terms of that context.

People in the do-it-yourself camp are often the hardest customers to nab. It requires an ability to understand their concerns while simultaneously presenting the strongest possible argument for third party content creation.

Part of that argument involves clearly demonstrating that a freelance provider can produce emotional, compelling and exciting content--and that he or she can do it more effectively than anyone else.

Answering reservations about outsourcing content...Lifelessness...

Here's another observation from someone who has purchased content in the past, but wasn't completely satisfied:

"One thing I observed, most articles that were written by ghostwriters are not the 'conversational' style of writing. They are more towards 'editorial' style, meaning they are written for newspapers or magazines. Conversational means you write as if you're talking to a person right in front of you. I believe this type of article would bring more imact to the readers. It's somethign like you're letting it all out from your chest. It's like you're giving the article a 'life.'"

This is a criticism of freelance content writers that probably contains a great deal of truth. Let's be honest, it is easy to slip into a very dry style when you are plugging away at an ever-growing stack of keyword rich articles on incredibly dull topics. I have no doubt that many buyers have received work from writers that were just plain boring and lifeless.

I don't, however, think that is an inevitability. In fact, I think it is quite avoidable. You see, most of the time writers receive assignments with specifications that do not mention the desired tone or voice at all. The buyer says "I need X articles on topic Y and they need to be Z long and I need them in three days." That's all the writer has for direction.

That can kick a freelance content writer into a "default" mode that will lead them to (hopefully) write factually accurate and readable articles meeting all expressed specifications. It may not, however, compel them to find and use an appropriate "voice."

That usually isn't a byproduct of a lack of skill on the part of the writer. Instead, it is an outgrowth of playing it safe. Most buyers are satisfied with a straightforward piece of reporting. If one strays too far from those norms, buyers may not be getting what they expected. Thus, content writers tend to keep a lot of their creativity under wraps due to concerns about efficiency and a desire not to defy customer expectation.

I think there is an easy way out of this problem for buyers--if they will tell writers that they want something that is more conversational and more lively, they will probably get just that.

By the same token, I think content writers should probably start asking more questions about voice and tone before starting on a project.

Lifelessness is not a necessary component of content writing.

Interesting discussion with a monster who isn't...

A few days ago I received an inquiry about writing some articles for a site owner. He told me what he would need and I responded with rates, etc. Today, he got back to me and told me he couldn't afford me. In fact, he told me he planned on buying cheap articles from "a writer overseas."

Most of us have heard that before, and some people are quite proud of their pointed responses to what they term "bottom feeders." That's not really my style. Instead, we had a nice dialog about his business, what I do and whether or not we could find a way to work together.

Here's what "Hank" (not his real name) told me:

"I have over 100 content sites and the number is growing every month. I have PLR articles for each of these sites obviously cannot submit these as is to directories. My plan is to be able to submit approx. 7 articles for each site. Now can you imagine my expenditure if I was to pay $XX per every 7 articles PER website? And I'm growing by 15 websites each and every month! I'm only sharing this with you so you can see how impractical this route is for me." [I opted not to reveal my price tag here, instead replacing it with "XX."]

From there, Hank told me that he felt his only way of making his strategy work would be to use cheaper producers, even though he recognized there may be "quality concerns."

He also noted, "I've had to painfully learn to adjust my expectations to be in line with the reality of what I'm paying and the QUANTITY of writing I require."

Why do I bring this up? Because I think it is a perfect illustration of how we writers can sometimes make the error of jumping on someone's case without fully understanding their business model and situation. It would be easy to lambast Hank for offering low rates, but when you start to look at the context from which he is working, it makes a degree of sense.

In essence, people like Hank are exploiting market opportunities (Adsense and current search engine patterns) to generate an income. You can hate his kind of content site, or you might be AOK with it, but it certainly isn't a prima facie evil and it is definitely a legal way to turn a dime. If those PLR articles are as good as some of the ones I have seen (and written), his sites could be pretty valuable to users, too. In any case, he isn't phishing or plugging Nigerian gold bar investment schemes (or even 12DP). He's just a webmaster working within the current marketplace to make some money.

And he makes that money off of volume. He has a ton of sites and those sites each probably turn a marginal profit on an individual basis. If you start to multiply that small profit by 100 or more, Hank can make a living.

But it doesn't make sense for him to spend a fortune with me on content in order to enact his current link development plan (utilizing article directories). My cost for the work in support of each site would completely crush the site's profitability for an extended period of time. In order to implement his strategy, he is going to have to look elsewhere for content.

Of course, there is an alternative, and being a fairly aggressive marketer, I pitched him on a different approach. I explained why I felt he could cut down on the total number of directory submissions slightly, use one or two quality pies for each site and then a few additional "cheapos." It's my belief (for various reasons I won't go into here) that this combination approach would probably yield a better overall result. He's thinking about it.

However, Hank is not the person responsible for the importance of backlinks with respect to SERPs. He is not the reason article distribution sites work as a means of increasing backlinks. He is not in charge of Adsense. He didn't invent private label rights articles. Hank's an entrepreneur who looked at the whole mess, did some research and decided there was a way to make a living with it.

He's not a "low-baller" or a "bottom feeder." He isn't out to screw writers, as some seem to think everyone unwilling to pay higher rates is. He's a business person. His content desires and what I produce just don't match up.

He seems to be a good guy, too. We had a really pleasant exchange and he was cool with me using any and all excerpts of his comments in a blog post. I enjoyed our "conversation."

So, the next time you might be tempted to fire off a smarmy email to someone who wants to pay less than a penny per word and knows s/he can find it oversears, exercise some restraint. The next time you think about calling someone a "bottom feeder," think twice. Some of those horrible monsters are actually decent people who just happen to be making a living without our brand of content.

That doesn't mean we can't try to sell them an upgrade, though! ;-)

Answering reservations about outsourcing content...Quality and value...

As I mentioned yesterday, I am going to answer some reservations I have seen others express about hiring a freelance content writer for their projects. Consider this observation from one disenchanted former content buyer:

"I've hired ghostwriters but they were way beyond my expectation. I felt my money was not well spent and I believe I can writer better."

The first car I ever purchased was a 1970 Buick Skylark. It was a prototypical muscle car and even though it was sixteen years old when I bought it, it ran like a charm. I kept it for three years until I decided I needed something that offered better fuel efficiency, etc. I bought what was then a late model Mercury Lynx (basically a Ford Escort with a different name). The car was a disaster. I then went back to a big muscle car, a 1964 Chevy Impala. It was a source of endless misery. Phantom oil leaks no one could repair, erratic starting that defied diagnosis and an eventual thrown rod while on the interstate in far western Kansas...That's a whole other story...

Something tells me the commenter bought a bad Lynx and a cursed Impala without ever having the chance to own a great Buick. Had my first two car purchases been problematic, I may have concluded that I could build a better car myself or that buying cars simply wasn't worth the headache.

If the first few writers you try produce miserable results, you might just assume you're better off writing everything yourself. Fortunately, there are some great Skylarks out in the writing world who won't disappoint you. The trick is finding the right writer. This is what I would tell the commenter:

There are a lot of hobbyists who aren't sufficiently knowledgeable about the process of content writing to do the kind of job necessary to create high-quality, high-value work. There are kids looking for a few stray bucks who figure they might as well put their typing skills to work. There are desperate people trying to find a way to earn some cash in a hurry. There are professional hucksters who'll take your money, hand back garbage and disappear. Not to force the analogy, but it is a lot like buying a car. There are lots you can trust and others you cannot.

A good content writer will save you a fortune in time alone. You may think you can write as effectively as a professional and you might be able to do so (odds are that you can't--at least not efficiently). However, if you thought that was where your time was best spent, you would be a professional writer instead of a site owner. If you find a good writer, you will make back the bulk of your expense by virtue of having that time freed up to work from your strengths.

Additionally, good content does produce revenue. That's obvious, otherwise you wouldn't have been in the market for writing in the first place.

So, how do you find a good writer? There's no foolproof formula, but there are some things you can do.

• Get a few samples. This is not a perfect screening tool, because someone unscrupulous could send you samples written by someone else, but it is a start.
• Get a few references. A quality professional content writer should be ready to give you the names and contact information for a few people with whom they have done business. Check the references.
• Take a test drive. Before you hand over a massive product to someone with whom you haven't worked, commission a single article and see what kind of work you receive.
• Ask questions. It isn't necessary to get hung up on academic credentials and work experience, but those things can be an indicator of likely skills. They are not dispositive of the matter, and some great writers may not have the kind of background you anticipate, but they are a potential clue from which to work.
• Deal with a pro. Your odds of getting the kind of content you need are increased when you are dealing with someone who writes for a living. There are hobbyists and those who "write on the side" who do some fine work, but dealing with someone dedicated to the field does increase your chances of being pleased with the results.

By doing some of these things you can dramatically improve your chances of receiving great content that will be a real value to you.

Answering reservations about outsourcing content...Originality

I recently found an eye-opening online discussion. Several online entrepreneurs were discussing the desirability of hiring a writer to create content for them. Many involved touted the value of outsourcing and heartily recommended hiring a freelance content writer. Others had reservations about hiring a writer. I took a few moments to collect some of those concerns and plan on addressing them here. The first one on my list, which is a worry many prospective content buyers have, is the issue of originality.

Here is what one of the discussion participants had to say:

"If someone else is writing for you how do you know they haven't just taken a previously written article and rehashed it for you? How do you check out the honesty, integrity or creativity of a ghostwriter?"

Those are good questions. Purchasing copied work from a content writer not only exposes a buyer to criticism, DMCA complaints and litigation--it also risks triggering duplicate content penalties in terms of SERPs. Google has indicated that their algorithm will be cracking down on sites lacking original content.

I think the best way to hire a content writer with whom you can feel safe is to run down a quick checklist and to then perform a bit of double-checking for the sake of insurance.

The checklist:

1. Does the writer guarantee unique and original content written exclusively to handle your order? If so, what is the guarantee policy? I personally offer a 300% money back guarantee that all purchased content is wholly original. Any freelance content writer should be more than willing to stand behind his or her work.
2. Will the writer provide references you can check? It can be reassuring to hear from others who have had successful transactions with the writer and who can personally vouch for the fact they received original work.
3. Does the writer focus on content production? Many people will try to be writers in an effort to scare up some quick cash. Those who make their living supplying content are far more likely to maintain higher standards than those who are just hobbyists or one-timers.

One should also check the materials provided by the writer against Copyscape and should "Google" randomly selected portions of the content to make sure it hasn't appeared on the web. This double-checking is not foolproof, but it can increase peace of mind and will usually reveal those who are acting inappropriately.

Originality is important and buyers should find writers who are dedicated to providing completely unique materials. With a little know-how, buyers can usually avoid plagiarism problems.

Like David Hasselhoff...

I'm big in Europe.

Well, according to the Mapstats device on the right sidebar, anyway.

Before I changed my template, it seemed as though my little traffic stream consisted mainly of North Americans with some attendance from folk in the UK, India and Australia. That made sense, considering I write in English.

Lately, though, I am getting visitors from a variety of nations that rarely put in an appearance before the change.

Why is that? Oh, it's because my Mapstats thing is broken. I have to go get the right code and use it. Not tonight. Tonight I will pretend like I really am big in Europe.

Thinking about press releases...

I occasionally write press releases for clients. Many freelance content writers do.

That hasn't always been the case. Recently, however, people have started to recognize that the marketing power of good press releases makes the writing just as effective for an online enterprise as it has been for the brick and mortar operations who have long relied upon them.

Lately, I have noticed a few people having problems with the press releases process. Most notably, some are having their releases rejected by various online release distribution services.

Obviously, a press release isn't worth much if it never makes it to the press.

My success rate in having press releases make it past those gatekeepers and into to the hands of media outlets has been good. Although most buyers would love to take their best ad copy and submit it as a press release, that strategy is never going to work. Yes, everyone knows that press releases are created as part of a marketing strategy. Nonetheless, one must maintain some level of newsworthiness and make a conscious effort to use language that does not create the impression of outright advertising.

Creating an effective press release is a balancing act. One wants to include all the best information in terms of marketing function but that must be carefully balanced with an ability to work within established conventions for that kind of piece.

After noticing so many people struggling to give their businesses a jolt with press releases, I am considering either (a) increasing my marketing efforts to secure more work in the field or (b) authoring a solid instructional manual on press release authorship.

Have any of you experienced problems with press release authorship or acceptance? If so, I would love your input, too.

Update on FreelanceWriters.com...

Yeah, I know... I said I was just putting up one little entry today. But...

Just wanted those of you who have expressed an interest in Freelancewriters.com (the writers' cooperative idea), that the project is progressing.

I should have a quote from a designer and an idea of how/if all of the desired features will be implemented by the end of the week.

Beating the clock...time and irony...

Time is my nemesis.

Some battle a lack of inspiration and "writers' block." Others wrestle with perfectionism. Every writer has a problem of some sort.

My problem is time.

Time and I are not getting along well. Twenty four hours per day is not enough and it is starting to get a little annoying.

I clearly need to improve my time management skills. However, that would require investing some time in finding and developing the right scheduling system, etc. I don't have enough time to save time!

And that is why I am not going to write a long blog post today. Just this little lament. Because it's already 12:07 p.m. and I have a lot of work to do!

Same blog...new look...

After trying about twenty different ways of fixing my dropping sidebar with the old layout for this blog, I surrendered and changed looks.

Hopefully everyone is now seeing the site as I am, because the sidebar is right where it supposed to be for me.

If it's still broken, please comment and let me know.

But break it to me gently, please.

Eventually I might add a graphic to the top, but my blog-tweaking patience has run it course for today. I do think this version is easier to read. I suppose that's a good thing.

Am I ugly?

Not me, the blog.

I have had one report that my sidebar is messed up and slides down to the bottom of the page. It looks fine to me and my repair attempts haven't fixed the problem for the reporting reader.

Anyone else noticing a problem here? Please let me know if you are.

And, if you have a fix, please feel free to share!

Thanks, Wendy, for being my "eyes!"

The declining value of freelance bid boards...

If you are a writer, consider conducting the following experiment.

Devise a small writing project. Create a buyer's account on Elance, Rent-a-Coder, Scriptlance, etc. Watch how many responses you get.

While you are running this little simulation, try to play the role of a regular content buyer. Remember, you want to outsource the project because it makes your life easier, not because you want to read through 8,000 sample articles provided as zipped attachments from within the job board's interface. Remember, your objective is to find someone who can produce quality content at a fair rate on time and without the risk of an originality or misappropriation problem.

After you let the auction run a few days, pick a writer. How long did it take you to decide? How big of a factor was price? How big of a factor was location? Were you forced to read too many samples in order to make an informed decision? Are you really convinced you found the best possible writer for the job? Do you think there is a reasonable risk that you accidentally passed over one or two writers that may have been able to do a better job? Did you get silly follow up questions that you either had to read and ignore (or even worse, answer)?

Hey, you just wanted to find someone to write some articles for you in a hurry. You didn't want to play make-believe international HR office, right? But you did.

These boards are overpopulated and it is becoming increasingly difficult to accurately distinguish between wheat and chaff within that environment. It's an inefficient means by which to purchase content because the quality of the writing pool and expectations of the buying pool are both so diverse that you cannot trust participant rankings to provide you with valuable information. Meanwhile, everyone who has ever considered writing as a means of generating money has a membership and isn't afraid to use it! There's no barrier to entry and we are learning that plagiarism and quality problems run rampant. Take a look some time at the number of content jobs that end up in arbitration or mediation!

It's an inefficient disaster. And that's just from a buyer's perspective.

Writers have reasons to dislike it, too. Fees, of course, are an issue for some. Trying to find a way to use a small bio space to distinguish yourself from 1,000,000 other would-be writers who may have created fictional bios touting their writing achievements. Knowing that even if you do supply a sample, there is no way in hell anyone has time to read it in all of that mess. Oh, and of course, there is always someone there willing to do the work cheaper than you will.

I believe that smart buyers are going directly to writers they can trust or to other means of content supply and are beginning to eschew the bid boards. I believe that most writers who can do so are abandoning the bid boards and leaving them to the newbies, incapables and con artists.

Can you get work from these places? Sure. Is it worth the effort compared to the utilization of more effective marketing strategies? Not in my opinion.

I think these sites have been a victim of their own success. Their rapid growth, popularity and a growing sense that anyone might be able to become a freelance writer by setting up a free Rent-a-Coder account (regardless of experience or talent) has left them smothering under their own weight. I don't know if these problems are endemic to other areas of the boards (although a job offer I recently posted for some basic site design netted over 100 bids in less than 48 hours), but they certainly are making it tough to buy or sell content there.

The advantages these sites offer are (1) the opportunity to put funds in escrow and (2) to have binding third-party mediation in the event of a dispute. One of these days, someone is going to come up with a popular way to recreate that effect without the hassle of a bid board. In the meantime, good decision making and well-honed instincts on the part of both the buyer and seller can usually make those potentially attractive add-ons seem superfluous.

So, if you were planning on leaving this blog and heading over to Elance, you might want to think about doing something else with your time.

Something different...

I usually focus this blog on the freelance content writing industry and some of my own projects within it. This post is something different.

My friend, Ben, has a blog called "Building a Better World." It's his take on "learning, growth, and development" and "understanding in matters of policy, psychology, education, economics, and other miscellaneous observations..." It's a truly fascinating read and I recommend it wholeheartedly.

Some background:

Ben and I shared a very seedy apartment while I was in graduate school. As is too often the case among know-it-all guys in their mid-20s, we parted on less than stellar terms. After more than a decade, we discovered we were living in the same general vicinity and have been able to reconnect.

Ben has a unique take on a variety of issues and his blog is something of an attempt to take concepts and observations usually bandied about only in academia and to personalize them, discuss them, and to deal with them honestly.

Most of us spend more time worrying about cash flow, outsourcing, pending deadlines and how to crank out 25 articles about "stainless steel silverware" with a keyword density of 1.8% than we do about many of the issues and perspectives that really shape our world and our role in building a better world.

Ben holds down a real-life job as a special education teacher, but somehow maintains his energy and passion for these bigger matters. The result is often illuminating and invariably interesting.

I am not completely off-topic with this post because writing is really at the core of what he's hoping to do. He wants to encourage dialogue and inspire thinking by using his blog space as a means of grappling with ideas in his own language. You can find academics talking about Foucault and you can find people venting frustrations or making keen observations about their daily life, but you rarely find anyone trying to do both. That's what he's sort of doing--demystifying academia and stripping it of its annoying airs and using it in a real way.

So, it is an experiment in writing and ideas. Maybe it's the kind of thing some of this blog's readers would enjoy. I invite you to check out his site, see what' s happening, and add your own remarks and commentary. It's a refreshing and intellectually challenging yet honest break from daily minutiae. Sometimes it's nice to dive into a messy pool of big ideas instead of trying to figure out a way to use "cookbook recipe collection" one more time in that 500 word SEO article.

We will now return to our regular programming.

Customer service and originality problems...

I have been keeping my eye on a developing thread at a forum with a substantial membership and outside audience. A problem developed with a content transaction and the two parties have sort of taken the matter "public." Here's a brief summary of the situation.

The customer bought original/exclusive content from the writer and received it. He paid.

The customer was checking around and found one of the articles posted elsewhere. He had not yet released the content, so he knew there were problems on the writer's end.

The writer first said someone must have stolen it from the customer's site. After learning he had not yet released the article, she did some digging and learned that one of the writers to whom she had subcontracted work was responsible. Buyer claims he didn't even know a third party was involved.

The writer apologized. The buyer demanded a refund. The writer promises a refund but wants to reclaim rights to the articles.

There is, of course, more to the story. There are questions being raised about the level of responsibility accepted by the writer and whether or not she tried to change her story throughout the debacle, etc. Standard forum argument.

And, in my opinion, a great object lesson for content writers about using subcontractors and customer service.

When using subcontractors one must (among other things):

1. Fully explain expectations.
2. Choose quality writers.
3. Carefully edit all materials.
4. Check all materials with Copyscape and other anti-plagiarism methods.
5. Underline importance of meeting expectations and specifications.
6. Not send anything out until they know they can fully trust the writer and are satisfied with the quality of the work.
7. Explicitly advise customers in advance that a subcontractor may or will be used. Make sure the client is comfortable with that and how you handle it.

Taking that kind of perspective will reduce the number of problems one experiences. However, we are dealing with human beings and people are imperfect. Someone may, eventually screw things up for you, though.

That's when it is time to be a stand-up person and make things right.

If one my customers came to me with this complaint, the solution would be immediate:

1. Buyer keeps all materials.
2. Buyer gets an immediate 300% refund.
3. Relations with subcontractor are immediately severed.
4. Buyer is offered additional compensation in terms of a future credit toward content purchases.

I'd also do my damnedest to get my money back from the subcontractor and would not hesitate to take complete and utter responsibility for their sleazy actions. Every piece of work that leaves CDB represents me and I have to stand behind it as if it were my own.

The author in question has been busy enough to hire out work. She has quite a few customers, from what I can gather. I imagine she does a fine job. This is probably an anomoly. She might be so surprised by the whole thing that she's not sure how to handle it and that might be a source of some defensiveness. I have no reason to think she's corrupt or that she is not an absolutely stellar provider and this is just a fluke.

I am willing to wager that if she had quickly taken full responsibility and immediately made every effort to take responsibility for the matter and to solve it to the client's satisfaction nothing would have ever come of it.

Instead, a significant portion of her client base is probably thinking about looking for another content provider.

Writing is a first business for some, but most among us come from different backgrounds in a diversity of fields. All of us who have had experience "out there in the world" know just how essential quality control and customer service is to the success of any enterprise. We cannot forget that just because we have traded cubicles for home offices or business casual for shorts and a t-shirt.

Tough love for new writers...

I spent part of my morning catching up with the other freelance writers' blogs I like to read. I came across a fairly recent entry at Deb Ng's blog, "Finding the Right Words," about new writers who solicit advice from established professionals--particularly those who go beyond seeking guidance and instead are looking for a handout. Here's an excerpt from Deb's post:

"Today I read a post from a woman who decided she wants to write e-books. Fabulous! The more the merrier. My issue is with this question: Does anyone know of any good subjects to write e-books on?'

Excuse me?

This is the second woman in a few weeks who wanted others to provide her with successful, profitable topics for her book."

Deb goes on to vent her frustrations with those who don't bother doing any of their own preliminary learning before entering the field. I share some of those frustrations.

Many would-be writers seem perfectly content to fire off question after question to those already in the industry. I can understand the need to fill in some knowledge gaps or to seek some guidance on something tricky. I am always happy to help folks who email me with those kind of questions. Like Deb, however, I am really put off by those who are expecting free mentoring and disclosure of hard-earned strategies or information who clearly haven't done any of their own homework.

Why does this happen so often?

Information sharing is common in many industries. Dr. Bob may call Dr. Joyce to ask her opinion about how to deal with a particular medical issue. The new insurance agent may call and established agent to ask a question. In these cases, however, the contact is always "professional to professional." Dr. Bob may have a question, but he is asking it to a peer. Both are trained professionals, one just happens to have some added expertise. That new insurance agent will never call the veteran to ask an incredibly open-ended question like "tell me the best way to sell policies" or a ridiculously simple one like "what is life insurance?" If s/he did, the old-timer would probably hang up in a split-second.

With freelance writers, though, the questions from "newbies" are often like those of the hypothetical new insurance agent. "What should I write about?" "How do you get business?" "Tell me the best way to make a living writing content."

I think this occurs in the writing field because people have been misled into believing a basic command of written language is the only prerequisite for a career as a writer. After seeing a few thousand ads telling you anyone can become a writer, it is easy to think you can be a successful freelancer tomorrow. Writing doesn't require particular certification or education. It's a low-overhead occupation. Thus, it often attracts the unprepared.

I never hesitate to ask questions of other writers, but I consider our exchanges a professional courtesy. I don't hesitate to provide opinions when asked by others in the field.

I am, however, less than excited about offering free mentoring and hand-holding services.

If you are new to the business and want to make it, here's my suggestion. Don't ask others to hold your hand from cradle to grave. Begin by doing extensive and serious research. Learn the trade's vocabulary, its structure and its personality before quizzing others. Bring something to the table other than a vague notion that you "want to be a writer."

If all of that research work and learning turns you off, your probably not looking into the right career field.

Remember that old saying "there's no such thing as a stupid question?" Well, it's not true. Or, even if it is, there is such a thing as an annoying or inappropriate question.

There is nothing wrong with being new and having questions. There is something a little creepy about being new, completely uninformed, and seeking a business plan from others.

Not all change is good...

That's what I am thinking. After yanking out the ads, I had a sudden urge to change the picture atop this blog. I am not liking my decision.

I will give it a few days to see if it grows on me, but expect something different (or a return to one of the previous offerings) soon.

Content Done Better Blog is going ad-free...

When I started this blog, I envisioned it as both a promotional/marketing tool for my content writing services and an opportunity to "sound off" about issues and news in the industry. I never really perceived it as a solo moneymaker.

However, that right sidebar beckoned... I knew I wouldn't run Adsense ads (I am not interested in being a billboard for my own competition). So, I decided to install a Chikita mini-mall, a few Amazon ads, a Google search box and a couple of Google referral ads. I have experimented with a few in-post Adgenta ads, too. Once I even snuck in a link for a Blogitive client.

The result? The blog makes a little bit of moolah. Oh, and it's a wee bit overstuffed with distracting stuff that doesn't really offer much benefit to the bulk of my regular readership. I also wonder if its overtly commercial element doesn't somehow cut against the credibility of the viewpoints expressed. Money is nice, but it's not like this blog is such a great producer that it warrants that kind of downside.

So, at some point today, the Content Done Better Blog will be stripped of all third party advertising.

Don't get me wrong. I am not turning into one of those "blog purists" who despise any introduction of a commercial element into a blog. After all, this blog will continue to serve, in a way, as a means of self-promotion and I am not abandoning any of my "for profit" blogs that operate primarily on an Adsense model. I just didn't think the ads were a good fit here.

Now, I have to decide what to do with all of that extra right sidebar space!

Content Done Better hiring...

In the past, when I needed to outsource writing projects, I relied upon a list of interested writers. As any of you who administer a list of any sort know, it can be somewhat time consuming if the process isn't fully automated (my process is not). You get people who change or abandon email addresses, who just aren't interested, etc. Plus, you have to add new addresses regularly.

I was looking for an easier way and considered opening up some sort of work distribution forum for content writers as an element of my site.

Recently, however, a forum has been started as part of Writer Wrangler, which I mentioned here a few times (here and here). The system seems to be working pretty well for the administrator there, and I like the fact that the Writer Wrangler forum has a "hand off" area that gives freelance content writers a chance to share projects when necessary. That's a nice safeguard.

They have a folder there for people to offer jobs, and I decided I would like to the forum as a method of distributing the content jobs I have for outsourcing. However, I didn't like the idea of having my projects "get lost" in the forum... I may have a lot of work coming up! This blog has produced some referrals to Writer Wrangler and I get along well with the admin. over there, so I pitched an idea and they agreed to it!

There is now a Content Done Better Jobs folder at the forum where I can offer jobs and people can accept them, etc. I think this will work a lot better than sending out a mass email.

So, if you are interested in working for CDB now or in the future, you should stop by the Writer Wrangler forum and sign up. It takes about 30 seconds and then you'll be able to accept any jobs I might have to offer. I am predicing many over the next few months.

If you also sign up at the Writer Wrangler site, you'll also have a shot at grabbing the work they offer. The CDB section of the forum is already up and running. It is password protected, so you will need to secure the password for entry. You can PM (private message) me from within the forum to get it.

I look forward to seeing you there.

You've been plagiarized! What to do...

The internet is a virtual home for a lot of great people. It's also a great platform for unscrupulous and criminal activity. I see alot of people in the first group trying to find ways to protect themselves from those in the second.

As a content writer, I know a lot of other writers who discover their words and hard work have been ripped off by plagiarizing thieves. As someone who makes a living from my words, there are few things I find more frustrating and potentially damaging for my industry than content theft.

So, you've been robbed. Now what?

That seems to be what people want to know. They've somehow discovered the act and they want a way to correct it. Unfortunately, most don't know how to really go about protecting their rights.

"I am not a lawyer nor anything close to it. I am just a legally-minded Webmaster who is taking a stand against the epidemic of plagiarism online." That's the disclaimer on the site Plagiarism Today. It's one of the few blogs I check every day. It's completely dedicated to online plagiarism issues and the writer/administrator, Jonathan Bailey, has shared some of his viewpoints on plagiarism and related issues here. He always has interesting insights and is an ally to all writers due to his commitment to eradicating plagiarism.

I've plugged Plagiarism Today before, so that isn't really what this post is all about. Instead, I wanted to point those who have questions about how to handle instances of content theft to a series of posts over at PT that address the matter in some detail.

From the main page of PT, you will find an "Around here" section on the right sidebar. Among the items listed are a series of articles under the heading "Stopping internet plagiarism." These entries basically comprise a handy six-part tutorial taking one from how to check for content theft in the first place all the way to the "long haul."

If you have been victimized and want to know what to do, I recommend heading over in that direction right away. If you haven't yet been hit by a content thief, you should still check it out so you'll be prepared when it does happen (and these days, the odds would suggest it probably will).

Giving direction to a content writing business...

When I decided to start writing for the internet, I had no idea my client base would quickly stretch over four continents and would involve juggling marketing efforts, outsourcing, and precision scheduling along with writing.  I just planned on doing some writing. 

I don't think my experience is unique.  There are a lot of content writers out there who entered the field because they wanted to write and soon found themselves staring down the long barrel of actually owning and operating a small business.  Some have been able to handle the situation, others are struggling with it, and some just can't do it. 

I live in Johnson County, Kansas, which covers quite a few of Kansas City's suburbs.  One local company, Garmin, makes GPS equipment, chart plotters, and other similar devices.   You may have heard of them, as they are a leading producer of these things.  I don't know if they advertise nationally, but occasionally I will hear one of their radio ads around here.  The general theme is usually sort of a "know where you are going" thing.  It's too bad Garmin's labs haven't introduced a tool with a nice soothing voice you can attach to your computer monitor that will tell you when you are headed in the wrong direction or that can guide you to your preferred destination.

I see many talented writers who cannot scrape out a living online because they don't have those other small business skills.  They, like me, just planned on doing some writing.  Either they don't find enough work to stick to it, or they quickly get more than they can possibly handle.  It's a tricky business.

If you happened to land here because you are just planning to do some writing, let me make a recommendation.  If you are serious about making a living at this, prepare to spend half of your time or more for awhile learning the other ropes in addition to writing content.  There's no Garmin plot charter available to navigate the seas of the content world, but there are some great resources that you should check out before deciding to hang up your virtual "writer for hire" shingle in too visible of a spot. 

Get good scheduling software.  Learn how long it really takes you to complete certain tasks so that you can manage your time.  Develop a marketing strategy with the help of great online resources and books.  Learn a little bit about running a small business.  Run through numbers and determine how much you want to make, how long it will take you, etc.  Plot a course before you really set sail. 

 

Powered By Qumana

Bullfighter, an interesting tool...

I stumbled across a free piece of software known as Bullfighter, which works in tandem with Microsoft word to isolate annoying jargon in your writing. Originally designed for internal use within a consulting firm, the software became popular with the company's clients and was made freely available. Although the originators, Deloitte, have turned the program over to the folks at fightthebull.com, it remains 100% free. You can download it here.

Bullfighter does two things. It provides a Flesch Reading Ease score for your work as well as a "Bull Index" that tells you just how full of overused jargon and undesirable buzzwords your content is.

I have played with the easy-to-use program and think it could be handy for those content writers who write business-related articles. I can't tell you that Bullfighter will excise all of the bull from your writing, but it does make you take a look at some of your word choices and can help you to produce more readable copy.

Thumbs up for this piece on lower paying markets...

It seems like I dedicate quite a few posts to arguing about the nature of the online content marketplace and often find myself defending those who can and will effectively work for "bargain rates." Sometimes, I state my position while recognizing the good intentions of the commentator (like here). Sometimes, I am really turned off by a comment, blog post or article (like here).

Today, I found a gem at Fundsforwriters.com that I really enjoyed. "The Online Sweatshops" was written by Thomas Bosch and, although I disagree with some aspects of his analysis, much of it was really insightful.

Bosch begins his article with a typical horror story. Someone offered him a buck and a quarter to write a 500 word article. He turned down the offer with a snide email. The buyer responded, called him ungrateful, and told him "thousands" had applied for the job.

Bosch goes on to talk about a valuable life lesson he learned in a past career. Skills have value and one should charge what those skills are worth.

I couldn't agree more and I, too, live by that rule. Regardless of the rate you charge, it has to be enough to keep you well-fed, housed, and able to avoid collection agencies.

That rate, however, is going to vary with the writer and the project. I wouldn't write 500 words for $1.25, either. However, depending on the project, you might be able to hook me for a ten-spot. I can already hear the gasps from those who think fifty bucks should be the floor for something of that size, but I digress...

Bosch reminds us not to accept work for rates that don't make sense. I think that is sage advice and that no writer should be bullied into working for peanuts. I just wish everyone would understand that a per word rate that is peanuts for one writer may be a gold mine (or at least a silver mine) for another writer.

So, what did I not like about the Bosch article? Nothing too significant. However, his "zero haggling" rule didn't resonate with me. I know he was arguing that one should not "over compromise" in terms of pricing (and, again, I agree with the sentiment), but I believe there are times when some flexibility is in order. I will work for some clients a bit cheaper than others because they provide consistent work, pay in a timely fashion, etc. I have used a slightly lower introductory rate to hook new clients or to bring former buyers back after an absence. I do believe there are situations that justify some rate compromise.

Oh, and this has nothing to do with the meat of the piece, but I disagree with Bosch on this observation:

"My colleague went on to say 'what about if someone needs a
lawyer? Do they dispute the lawyer’s bill? What about if you
need your washing machine fixed? Do you haggle with the
plumber? No? Then why is a teacher or a writer any different?'"

As a former law clerk and employee of multiple law firms I can tell you that people do, indeed, haggle with attorneys--often to their benefit. I have done it, too. I haven't had occasion to haggle with a plumber, but I have done it with auto mechanics, a cement contractor, cable companies, retailers and an electrician. It tends to work. Skills have value, but that value is determined in large measure by the nature of the market, not merely by one's desired rate. There is a reason price tags are usually printed on cheap little stickers instead of being carved in stone.

By the way, the site that hosts the article is an interesting resource for freelance writers looking for new and different revenue streams. Check it out if you have the chance.

Efficiency, principle and gender-neutrality in content writing...

I don't want to invite forty million posts from those who disagree with me about the significance of gender-biased language and discourse. If you are one who feels that our language choices have no impact on the nature of our social structure and believes that there is no compelling reason to monitor our linguistic choices in an effort to avoid bias, I would simply invite you to examine the compelling academic research on the subject carefully. Personally, I find that work far more persuasive than most of the "anti-PC" arguments that tend to mock the significance of individual language alterations rather than examining the way words create our world.

In any case, that's what I don't want--an argument. Instead, I want to talk about how even I, a staunch believer in gender-neutral language, can consider taking the more convenient, yet sexist, route when writing web content.

One key component to operating as a successful content writer is speed. You need to be a quick writer, a haul-ass typist, and perfectly willing to "kill your babies" without a second thought while you push forward. Generally, you don't have time to write, re-write, edit and re-write again. Instead, you have to make quick decisions in order to construct quality content on a deadline.

Despite a longstanding belief in gender-neutral language, it can still be a bit more time-consuming to compose a readable sentence that avoids common biased pitfalls. This is especially true when you are also working with a predetermined keyword and density requirements. Writing SEO copy already demands some compromise of the artistic process inherent to writing, and those limitations can make writing quickly difficult as it is.

As a writer, I will occasionally find myself in a difficult spot with respect to sexist language. Let's pretend my keyword is "insurance agent" and I am in the middle of a 20 article project. As I write, the following sentence comes out...

"If you ask the insurance agent for advice, he or she will gladly supply you with his or her opinion."

I have no idea why I would write that sentence, but this is just a hypothetical...

OK, let's be honest. It doesn't read well at all. Fortunately, we have options. We could use a "he/she" and "his/her" in order to shorten the sentence and remove the "or's." Unfortunately, that may actually make things harder to read and really doesn't do a great deal to improve the situation.

We could get rid of either or both of the doubled-up pronouns and use "their" as a replacement. This tends to mock the sound of colloquial spoken English, but tends to look amateurish in print and is grammatically unsound.

We could strike a blow for equality and remove the "he" and "his." That makes for a great sentence, but can also be confusing, particularly if no individual agent has been identified in the article. Whereas "he" and "his" may be at least partially understood as generic, "she" and "her" probably won't be.

We could wriggle away from principle for a moment and default to the old-school "he" and "his" approach. For those of us who dislike sexist language, this is problematic. However, it is efficient. Very efficient. A few taps of the left arrow and the backspace key instantly solves our problem.

We could also rewrite the sentence from scratch, finding a way to construct it without involving gendered pronouns of any sort. This is a decent workaround, but remember...Every second counts and you have twenty of these things to write by tomorrow morning and a full slate of household chores that still need to get done tonight. We don't do re-writes unless we must. We make our margin, in large measure, by being speedy.

Maybe as time passes and the avoidance of biased language becomes more common (wishful thinking, perhaps) our seemingly awkward options will become the norm and we won't have to worry about it. Perhaps, in the meantime, it is incumbent upon those who care to force that less-than-beautiful text at our readers' eyes until it does become second nature.

Personally, I detest the idea of compromising personal integrity for the sake of efficiency alone, but the matter of readability is also in the mix.

My solution: Most of the time, I do the rewrite and try to get back into a fast groove again.

Yours?

More on Article Distribution Services...

A few days ago, I wrote a post here ("The market has spoken...Again...") discussing Misti Sandefur's decision to close her Article Distribution Services site. 

 

Misti took the time to note my comments and to write a wonderful post further detailing her perspective on the closure and her motivations for starting ADS in the first place.  You can read her response here.

 

I wanted to take a moment to address her response.  If my original post seemed to be an attack on her motivations, that was completely unintended.  In fact, I wrote "Let me preface my views on what happened with ADS by noting that the project certainly seems to have been well-intended. Everything I have read about ADS echoes that sentiment. Its creator felt writers were underpaid and wanted to help them find a way to earn more."

 

I stand by that statement and now have even greater appreciation for Misti's altruism in launching the site.

 

The point I was trying to make is that the best of intentions cannot change the overall nature of the marketplace.  Simply because a contingency of writers believes they should be paid more will not translate into the rest of the world adopting a similar perspective regarding the value of their output.

 

"Fair pricing" is in the eye of the beholder, and as content producers we often behold the matter very differently than do buyers.  Some don't like current prevailing rates and feel they are worth more.  Their sentiments are duly noted, but do nothing to change the fact that writers are operating in a cut-throat international marketplace and are dealing with buyers who understand the kind of ROI necessary from content to justify increased expenditures.  They are also often dealing with buyers who simply cannot afford substantial increases in content costs and who will pursue other methods of search engine optimization and marketing in the face of higher writer rates.  Most sites are not artistic outlets designed to showcase a clever turn of phrase.  They are elements of business, dedicated to producing profits, after all.

 

To further complicate matters, it is very possible for buyers to find quality content at lower rates.  This further undercuts the potential for any amount of marketing or explanation to significantly alter prevailing rate structures.

 

In any case, I just want to make it very clear that I appreciate Misti's efforts and her dedication to helping others.  It is admirable.  My only point was that, for better or for worse, it seems to me as if the market is telling us that purchasers will not embrace significantly higher rates.

 

Misti maintains that part of the problem with Article Distribution Services may have been marketing related.  She wonders if she was targeting the right potential client base.  I have seen a few others speculate that part of the problem may have been related to site design.  These factors may have played a role.  However, it is my opinion that even an optimally-marketed and perfectly designed version of ADS would have met with a great deal of resistance on the issue of price point.

 

 

Powered By Qumana

Writers' Cooperative update and response to concerns...

Recently, I mentioned plans for the development of a "writers' cooperative" site at FreelanceContentWriters.com. 

 

If you missed the early explanation, here's a quick overview:  Any freelance writer can participate.  The site will serve as an umbrella under which writers can directly sell their articles and/or market their businesses.  Every participant will have a specified number of pages with which to work.  Membership will not have a pre-set expense, but donations will be accepted.  The site may be funded, in part, by contextual advertising, as well.

 

Since announcing this project, many writers have volunteered ideas and asked some great questions that will lead to refinements of the original plan.  Some others, have expressed a few concerns to which I'd like to respond.

 

Please note that I see this site as a cooperative, not as a personally operated endeavor.  Thus, my opinions may differ somewhat from others who are involved.  I have corresponded with Diane Penna, who is doing a great deal of the setup work, and although I don't want to pretend like I can speak for her, I do think we are on the same proverbial page.

 

Some have argued that the writers involved don't have a clear grasp of the importance of a "middle man" in terms of brokering content deals and that we will soon find out that the notion of direct sales is a dead-end. 

 

I wholeheartedly disagree.  First, I can tell you that I definitely understand when and why a content broker can be valuable.  In fact, I have often personally served as a "middle man," putting content buyers and writers together. 

Second, I think those raising such concerns believe that the cooperative is designed to serve as a replacement for sites like Articles & Content, Associated Content and Constant Content.  I don't see it that way.  I see it as a supplement--another way freelance writers can diversify their business and customer base.  I work with at least one writer on a regular basis who supports the direct sale model while simultaneously selling a great deal of material to Associated Content, for instance.  The two ideas are not mutually exclusive, nor is one a true substitute for the other.  The cooperate will provide a direct sales opportunity, as well as a marketing opportunity.

 

Others have maintained that a bunch of writers won't possibly be able to produce a successful site.  They maintain that novice webmasters simply cannot compete and that the site won't develop an audience.  Again, I disagree.

First, many of the people involved do have significant experience in addition to writing skills. 

 

Second, site design will be done by an experienced designer who is knowledgeable in terms of on-page SEO and optimal site construction.

Third, all participants will have motivation to promote the site as a means of drawing visitors to it.  This is one reason why I believe the cooperative model offers great potential.  This won't be one webmaster trying to develop a healthy backlink total or otherwise promoting the site--it will be a team effort motivated by the potential for greater individual profits.

 

Fourth, the cooperative will be structured in such a way that the proceeds generated from participant contributions and any revenue produced via contextual advertising can then be used for additional site promotion. 

 

As of now, Diane has secured the domain and I have been in contact with a few different folks who can work on the design end, feeling them out about the project.  We have been taking comments and ideas, logging them, and plan on coming up with a somewhat finalized vision of the project as soon as possible.  After that is ironed out, implementation will begin.

 

I invite any additional comments, ideas, concerns, etc.  I think this is an exciting project offering real potential for freelance content writers.

 

Powered By Qumana

Job Leads / Writers' Forum at Writer Wrangler

Happy Tuesday.

Just thought I would issue a reminder to those who happen to read this blog to check out Writer Wrangler.

For those who missed my earlier post on the site, Writer Wrangler serves two functions. First, the administrator hires out a lot of content. Thus, it is a nice way to secure work for freelance content writers. Second, the site is developing a forum for content writers allowing opportunities to discuss the business with others, find support and last-minute help with projects, and even to share insight re: those nefarious buyers who later refuse to pay. I think it has all the ingredients to become a great resource for any content writer.

I don't have any personal affiliation with the site, but I have worked for the administrator on numerous occasions and am convinced she is wholly committed to creating a great resource. Check out the site, and check out the forum, too.

And I thought "cheeseball bottom feeder" was obnoxious...

I discovered an amazing piece at blogcritic.com by William I. Lengeman III (hereafter Wm3). This missive, "Don't Piss in the Pool," is Wm3's rant against lower paying freelance content writing.

Let me preface all future remarks by noting that Wm3 states his argument is directed toward those "bottom feeders offering such princely sums as $1.00 per article..." It's hard to tell exactly what he means by that. A buck for a 50 word forum post, for instance, is a lot different than a buck for 1,000 words. Additionally, Wm3 is prone to a bit of hyperbole. That, and his general tone, leads me to believe that his venom is directed toward those who seek and write content for bargain prices. I have no idea what his cut-off point would be--perhaps two cents per word would satisfy him--but I sincerely doubt that based on a full reading of his commentary. Read it and you will know what I mean.

Did you read it? If not, go back to that link and check it out.

OK, for the moment I am going to pass on dissecting this one sentence at a time. Let's just say I think Wm3 is wrong on several fronts. Several. I do want to revisit the piece's conclusion, however. Wm3 writes:

"Let me put it in more blunt terms. You know that anyone who would write for such a pittance is the kind of person who's going to piss in the pool (figuratively and literally). Isn't it better to keep them over there in the acrid smelling kiddie pool with the rest of the incontinents and dullards?I sure think so and I'm sorry if that sounds hard, but you know what? Life's hard and the meek don't inherit anything but a heaping mouthful of shit."

It's insulting and inaccurate. Plus, it's a little weird. That last sentence... What in the hell does that mean? Who is supposed to be meek? Why does the forced pool urination metaphor suddenly take such a scatalogical turn? If he really finds writers working at lower rates "dandy," as stated earlier, why does he feel a need to be so disrespectful?

Alot of people can make a good living working for lower rates. Many can use those markets to fill gaps in their schedule. There is a sizeable contingency of very solid writers who utilize these markets. I don't think labeling them as weak-bladdered dullards is accurate or fair.

This kind of elitist self-importance is sad in its own right. When used to buttress an argument that falls short on so many levels and is based on so many incorrect assumptions, it is unbearable.

I suppose we could go through all of the reasons this line of thinking is incorrect, but I don't feel up to playing Sisyphus tonight. This particular boulder has been shoved to the top of the mountain many times before. I won't shove it up there again over this sort of demeaning garbage.

The market has spoken. Again...

Article Distribution Services, which was designed and operated in hopes of providing online content writers with a more lucrative means by which they could sell their work, has closed its virtual doors. Why? Simple. No customers.

The motivation that spurred the creation of ADS was that oft-repeated complaint that online content writers are woefully underpaid. Misti S., a freelance writer herself, decided to build ADS in hopes of matching writers with clients willing to pay more for quality content.

Let me preface my views on what happened with ADS by noting that the project certainly seems to have been well-intended. Everything I have read about ADS echoes that sentiment. Its creator felt writers were underpaid and wanted to help them find a way to earn more. There is nothing wrong with that, I suppose.

The end of ADS (noted both at the site itself and at this blog), doesn't surprise me one iota. Wanting more money is natural, but simply having a belief in how the market should operate isn't going to actually influence the way it actually does.

Misti writes:

"Yes, I did know this competition existed when I started the service, but I thought if I marketed my service, and explained to the buyers that they would get professional content it could work. I actually thought buyers would want to pay more for good writing, but I guess I failed somewhere."

To me, that paragraph says a lot. It encapsulates the views of many in this industry. It is based on two incorrect assumptions. First, that it is impossible for buyers to obtain quality content at discount rates. They can and do. Second, that buyers can afford to spend more than what they do for content. Many cannot.

I don't feel a need to start off another round of arguments with people who attack "cheeseball bottom feeders" and who seem to believe that writing for 2 cents per word is like offering your guest bedroom to Osama Bin Laden. I think that horse has been beaten enough already.

Some people wish writers made more. Some people, like Misti at ADS, have tried to cook up ways to make that happen. However, wishing for fatter paychecks doesn't change the market. Article Distribution Services had a lot of fans among those who don't appreciate the nature of the online content market. That support, combined with that desire to see writers make more added up to nothing but wishful thinking.

The market has spoken again. And it doesn't agree with statements like:

"And please, don't lower yourself to the level of selling all your rights for a measly $5.00 or less -- that's just insulting when the buyer won't pay what "all rights" are really worth. In my opinion, I think $200 is a fair price for all rights, depending on the word count and work involved."

Now, before everyone goes nuts on me for kicking Misti right on the heels of the ADS shut-down, let me again emphasize that I believe her intentions were good and I can appreciate her desire to see writers earn more. It was a nice try, but the market apparently didn't.