Outspoken regular James Chartrand AKA one of the Men with Pens often talks about "The Great Divide" between web writers and print writers. According to James many of us web writers (him included) experience snobbery from those who have their name in print.
Let’s explore this a bit shall we?
I do believe there are many who feel it’s more prestigious to have one’s name on the spine of a novel or the byline of a newspaper or magazine article, but is one better than the other? Personally, I’m of the opinion that if you enjoy what you write (and I do) and you’re making good coin writing it (and I do) it doesn’t matter whether you work for print or the web.
I also believe that we’ve had many discussions here over the past three years regarding the type of writing we like to do, but I don’t believe we’ve had a lot of heated print vs. web arguments. I honestly don’t see this great divide James speaks of. What we do debate about mostly is wages. Do I look down on a job paying a low wage, yes. I admit it. I definitely think a $1 gig is beneath me.
If print markets paid $1 per word, or ebooks paid $35,000 upon publication, we probably wouldn’t be having this discussion.
I think there are people who are more comfortable writing for print and appreciate the higher wages most print markets offer. I also believe many of us web writers love the instant gratification of seeing our work published almost immediately and quick payments. I don’t believe one is better than the other and I don’t believe many of the FWJ regulars believe this either.
What do you think?
Is there a great divide? Do you look down on another form of writing as beneath you? Do you feel others look down on you?
Discuss…
March 29th, 2008 at 3:22 am
Oh, good on you for posting this. I’m looking forward to hearing the comments.
I will clarify one thing: The Great Divide.
I feel that one side is the group of writers who consider writing an art, who feel preserving writing is more important than the business of selling writing, who prefer classic literature over other types, who write for magazines or print publishing, who are published authors (and by published author, I mean a literal book in paperback print), who are sometimes lofty, artsy and snobby. I tend to call this group the arTEESTEs. These people look down on the web content writers - from high paid to low paid.
One disclaimer. Because you have a preference for one or the other that I’ve set forth here does not mean I hate your guts. I’m saying that this ensemble of qualities is my definition of a person on one side of the fence.
I feel that on the other side is the group of writers who consider writing a craft/trade, who feel writing is a business, who consider web content or blogging a valid form of writing, who would love to have their name in paperback print but may or may not, who envy higher paid writers and feel they are somehow lesser (they’re not), who tend to prefer money over fame, who are generally open to technology and changing writing.
Alright. *braces* I’m ready.
March 29th, 2008 at 4:15 am
Well, I will just line up next to James and we can dodge tomatoes together.
Deb, first thank you for opening up this discussion. I would agree with James that the divide is art versus business. The ability to self-publish content has contributed to the widening gap. There is a fair amount of garbage being served up online via article sites, websites and e-books so the criticism is not entirely without merit but does not apply to everyone working in this medium.
March 29th, 2008 at 4:35 am
I don’t have a paperback in print (wouldn’t know how to get past the first paragraph if I had to), but I do have print bylines. I have been published in print magazines… Consequently, these same print publications also have websites (of course) and the same articles that appeared in print, now appear in their archives on the web. I don’t look up or down at any writer regardless of venue. I see the ups and downs to both, which is why I like to dabble in both, regardless of which I do more of. Some of my web writing is far more credible than some of my printed work and vice versa, so I don’t feel looked down upon, but I do feel diverse.
I do see James’ point though.
The way I see it, all sorts of material needs written; whether to entertain, market, inform, instruct, whatever. As long as the producer of that material is happy with how it turns out and happy with what they got out of it - be it a paycheck, a byline, credibility, fame and fortune, self-accomplishment, etc. - then more power to them.
I know many writers whose bread and butter is the web, but that doesn’t mean they are less respectable than those who only write feature articles for TIME or have an agent or editor on speed dial. They’re different writers, yes. Less respectable because they write for the web, not so much. They’ve just taken a different path in their writing career.
March 29th, 2008 at 4:49 am
I did experience some snobbish writers (scholars and journalists) who think they are better than the rest of us. Not merely because I also write for the Web, in addition to writing print magazines, but also because I write for foreign print and Web-based publications.
It is very rare to find down-to-earth writers who have published in TIME, Newsweek, etc. It’s probably just a hard pill to swallow for the rest of us. Of course, until the print media have converge entirely online. And that time is already here, be they like it or not.
In the end, most writers, if not all, will be Web writers. The difference, of course, would be individual quality.
March 29th, 2008 at 5:07 am
I think there are people who wouldn’t want the others’ job but I’m still not sure if it’s a “great divide.”
I have to run - it’s family movie night and we’re watching “Mary Poppins.”
I look forward to reading your comments tomorrow and ask that you be respectful of each others’ views.
Thank you for your willingness to discuss this topic, it’s been on my mind for a while.
Have a good evening.
March 29th, 2008 at 5:09 am
I think that in any industry there are going to be folks who look down on others. This is due to income, reputation, skill or talent level, and many other factors. I would argue then, that this is not really a writers’ issue. It’s just an issue in the world where some people think they’re better than others. It’s the human condition.
Why worry about about what the novelists or print writers think of us web writers? They’ll all be online soon enough trying to carve out their own corners on the Web.
March 29th, 2008 at 6:42 am
I agree with everybody so far. There is a great divide, between the literary types and everyone else. I also agree that no matter what field a person is in, there is always a pecking order or some sort of self-determined hierarchy.
In the past, I worked as a long term care nurse for many years. Hospital nurses thought for sure that we who worked in nursing homes were the pits. I just chose to see it as a difference in interests and skills, with one being no better or less than the other. That’s how I feel about literary vs. craft writing, print vs. web writing.
March 29th, 2008 at 9:56 am
I do both so my view may be off - but I’ve never noticed a divide. The only difference I see is between the audience or lay person. When folks ask about my work and I say a web site they either look kind of blank or dismissive, when I say a print publication they are familiar with then the light bulb goes off and they seem impressed.
Maybe that’s what lends to the divide - the audience. Most non-writers still believe that writing for the web is like a hobby that everyone or anyone can do, but print has a long tradition of being competitive…
I can’t say I prefer one over the other, however. Each gives me a thrill to see my byline & when the both are tough to get in to it’s just as satisfying. One thing print offers me over the web is my granny gets to have a copy and is proud to see as opposed to that “nonsense on the computer.”
The divide I encounter is writing articles for magazines and newspapers vs corporate writing.
March 29th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
We live in a world where there is always going to be the one side and the other. Doesn’t matter what it is.
I’ve been printed in magazines and books. I have a manuscript that I wrote for NanoWrimo and some day may pull it out, tweak it and send it to a publisher. I also have a ton of work on the web. I’m happy with what I do and that’s all that matters.
March 29th, 2008 at 4:37 pm
I think everyone here has touched on all the right points. And yes, I do think there is something of a divide and snobbery. I think there always has been between various segments of the writing world, even before the web–something similar, as James says, to the arTEESTes and the rest. I don’t feel inferior to those types, I’m comfortable with what I do and that’s why I do it; and since I primarily ghostwrite content, I don’t even have a byline half the time. I still know my own value & worth.
Re: “I don’t believe one is better than the other and I don’t believe many of the FWJ regulars believe this either.”
-I think we here would agree. I also think that the people who gravitate here are not the people who believe it, and those who do are not visiting your blog by and large; it’s a testament to the community you built and a reflection of our interests. But just because those of us here don’t believe it to be an accurate perception does not mean there are those who don’t fancy themselves better than the rest of us.
March 29th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
I can now say that I have done both, and I would have to say that the difference is in the perspective of the audience. When I told my family that I was going to be published in print, they seemed more impressed than when I talk about my web stuff.
I think that writing is writing. The form or the place it is published may change, but every bit of written material was composed by someone, and it’s all valid. I admire people who can produce a good product, no matter where it is published (or even if it is published).
For some reason, some people seem to need to have someone they can look down on. Just about any profession you can think of has people who work in many different environments. We have lawyers who work in large firms, for the government,for corporations, in small firms, in legal aid clinics, and as sole practitioners. They all practise law; the difference is where they do it and how much they are paid.
I can’t say anyone has ever looked down on me because the vast majority of my work has been for the web. If someone wants to have that opinion, what can I do about it anyway? I think that attitude has more to do with someone’s insecurity than facts. If you feel comfortable with yourself and what you do, then what difference does it make what anyone else thinks? That’s just sandbox stuff, and I really don’t have time for it.
Just my opinion.
March 29th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
I freelance for print pubs as well as online. But my online work is ultimately what pays the bills and keeps me the happy freelancer that I am.
I am new to online writing and am still surprised at the reactions and attitudes some have toward it.
March 29th, 2008 at 5:44 pm
I don’t experience the great divide among print and online writers, but that is likely because I write across for online and print mags.
But I was surprised by how impressed most journalists are when they find out I’m a book author. One journalist explained his bias to me: “anyone can write a journalistic article. All you need is four good sources telling you something interesting and unique, and you slap it together to make an article,”he said.
I don’t agree with him (there’s more to journalism), but I’ve seen the same bias trickle down from some mainstream journalists against trade journos, and from some web content writers against bloggers.
As for the art vs business divide, I find I am more comfortable with people who see writing as a business. Do I harbour some biases against the artistes? Probably, but that’s because I don’t understand their perspective.
March 29th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
Yeah, I would definitely say that there is some snobbery involved–because I’m seeing a lot of it right now from web content writers towards people who write literary fiction or nonfiction. Really, why all the hate towards literature? What’s it to you if somebody prefers writing novels?
For the record, right now I’m dabbling a bit in everything. I’m working on a novel (my second, the first one went unpublished) which I consider my “real” work. I’m writing web content right now to help pay the bills and to quickly gather up some published clips to send out for magazine writing, and because it’s a better gig than retail, which is my day job. I’ve also published in print in a few local papers, and I just got my first accepted query for a national magazine. In the past, I’ve also worked in PR, writing press releases and bios and whatnot.
And, yes, I do think literary writing is better than web content writing or journalism or PR or business writing. It takes more skill, time, and energy, and it has a sense of permanence. Which is not to say that other kinds of writing are without merit. Writing for the web has taught me to use an economy of words–a subject that could fill a whole book, or that would warrant a 2000 word print magazine article, might only get 500 words online. And my stint in PR taught me the importance of considering your audience. (I was working for a college, and an article written for the newsletter sent out to prospective students would be completely different than one for the glossy magazine for friends and alumni, which would also be different than a press release sent to the local newspaper, even if all three articles were on the same subject.) These are just a few of the lessons I’ve learned, and I believe that writing for PR and for the web has definitely made me a better fiction writer, and a better writer overall.
In the end, I want to write what I like to read, which is literary fiction and nonfiction books and well-written print magazine articles. I don’t get excited about reading web content, although I do enjoy some blogs (mostly personal, journal-type blogs, though). Web content writing, for me, is just a way to earn a living and help get me out of retail. I didn’t become a writer so that I could make money or get famous–I’m a writer because I want to string pretty words together, because I want to make something beautiful. So I would appreciate it if YOU wouldn’t look down on ME just because I have different aspirations than you and don’t love writing for the web.
March 29th, 2008 at 6:56 pm
Another divide I’ve experienced is among journalists — those who write for consumer publications supported by advertising, and those who write for business-to-business publications supported only or primarily by subscription revenues and membership fees. This divide galls me no end — I have made my living mostly in B2B media, and to have newspaper and broadcast journalists look down on my chosen profession is offensive.
I am learning about the differences between web vs. print, particularly in the pay department. But in my experience, more often it’s the business model that determines the pay — B2B publishers tend to value the content more and are willing to pay for it.
That doesn’t stop the consumer media journalists from looking down on us, though.
March 29th, 2008 at 7:20 pm
@ Sonya
I don’t think anyone is looking down at what literary writers DO, it’s at the negetive atttitude of SOME literary writers towards other writers. So if you are not personally degrading another for what he or she does for a living, I see no reason why you should take offense.
I write web content exlusively because it fits my life and I do like seeing something completed (and paid for)in short order. I also love to read every night, and am very grateful for the people that can devote their time and lives to writing high-quality books and novels. Just as I am grateful for a well-written, informative website that is truly helpful and tells me what I need to know.
March 29th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
@ Sonia -
While you do mention afterwards that you see the merit and value of web content, journalism or PR or business writing, your first statements only perpetuate the sense of snobbery.
ALL writing has value. NO type of writing is better than another. This is a prejudice I face *daily* in my job and I can’t stand it (sorry.)
I agree with many people here who say that there is snobbery in all society and it seems to be a battle we can’t win.
But we, as writers, need to work on ourselves and our acceptance of each other. We can’t change all of society, but we can lessen the divide between the negative attitudes floating around.
I think another issue is that many high-paid writers (usually print publication writers and literature novelists) tend to look down on lower-paid writers (web content writers). Pay rate perceptions of worth and value are again something that web content writers struggle against daily. Because web content writers are paid less is no reflection on the quality or the skill required to get the job done.
In fact, take a literature novelist and have that person try some web page content. It’ll most likely fall flat and be horrible. Same thing goes the other way around. Web content writers suck at literature.
What we need to do is what many have suggested here. Live and let live. Do what we enjoy the most, accept that others enjoy other types of writing and get on with it.
Get our noses out of the air. Stop with the prejudices. Walk a mile in each other’s shoes. Quit the lofty sniffs and the bitter resentment and the snotty remarks.
Do all those negative behaviors exist? Oh yes. Anyone who says they don’t is sticking their head in the sand.
March 29th, 2008 at 8:10 pm
I do both but my bread and butter comes from online work because it’s faster and more immediate.
If there is snobbery, I ignore it. Too many other more important things in my life.
March 29th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
Two comments: Well, actually a question and a comment.
QUESTION: How is it that some of the responses here have a PM time line on them when it is still AM across America? Are all these comments coming over from Europe? Or is someone’s clock off somewhere? I’ve seen this happen here before, and I’ll be dipped if I can figure it out.
COMMENT: I spent the better part of 30 years in broadcasting. I recall the “hurrumphing” that went on when television came into being; I recall how, when I moved into TV I looked down on radio. I also recall how, even in a TV newsroom we scanned the paper for leads So there’s always a time period when “the other” medium looks down on its siblings. In time electronic writing will, I feel, be on a par, as far as acceptance is concerned, with print.
Meanwhile, I think the real concern for all journalists is the decline in newspapers. Where TV news could outdo radio news is one thing; to say that news snip pits on-line can replace the depth and quality of newspapers is another matter. I believe we’ve gotten our children so “plugged in” that they miss the impact of print. Unfortunately that discussion can go for far longer than we are allowed on line here.
Bob Hale
March 29th, 2008 at 8:54 pm
Deb, do you mean “if web markets paid $1/word”? You say “if print markets paid $1/word” above in bold, and they do!
I am a travel writer, and many PR companies want to know you have a PRINT assignment before they will let you on a press trip or comp you a hotel stay. Print still seems to rule, at least in my niche, but it’s changing. Slowly. Those PR companies who understand that web articles remain on the internet forever, vs. the Sunday newspaper travel section that ends up lining a bird cage, garner some great, wide coverage.
On one freelance writing board I’m on, some folks who have been in the industry for 20+ years very much have their noses in the air about writing for the web. Which is so silly. They need to ride the wave if they’re going to survive!
March 29th, 2008 at 10:13 pm
I’m not going to name the author or the publisher, but I’ve spent many years chatting with print authors. I can say that I know of one author who was paid $5,000 plus royalties for a book that was around 80,000 words. That’s about 6 cents a word. I make more than that writing for the Internet.
I know another author whose first novel, about 150,000 words landed a major contract for one million plus royalties and then managed to sell movie rights a short while later. The latter is definitely a rare occasion.
Those who think that published authors make a mint may well be sadly mistaken if they get into novel writing for the money.
March 29th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
@ Ann G - Ha, that’s true! Mag writers earn more than web writers, generally (not always), but there’s definitely not much to earn out of a novel.
@ Bob - It’s a mystery.
March 29th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
@James - By snobbery do you include your views regarding PLR writing?
March 29th, 2008 at 11:02 pm
@ Kate - Good quetsion.
My gut honest answer is sure. I can be a snob as much as anyone else can be. No one is never a snob and we all have our prejudices and views.
But I will say that my views on PLR are not based on snobbery from prejudices. I am not ignorant of PLR. I’ve written it. I’ve been behind the scenes in a production mill. I’ve worked with a PLR site owner. I know what it is, I know how it works, and I know the effects on the virtual world.
I look down on PLR because I believe it to be morally unethical and often illegal. Is that considered snobbery? Am I a snob for having experienced all sides of the coin and collected facts before taking a stance?
I don’t know. That’s a good question in itself. Your thoughts?
March 29th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
I’ve done both print and web writing and, to be honest, I prefer the web. I love the instant (or almost instant) gratification. In my experience, the work and the pay have both also been quicker. Ever since I took print queries out of my routine, my productivity has gone through the roof. So, I guess it all depends on the writer. I think it’s strange that one writer would look down on another . . . we’re all writing.
March 29th, 2008 at 11:53 pm
I love topics that generate loads of discussion! Again, thanks for opening up the topic. It’s been great to hear the diversity of opinions from writers. The good news in this group at least is that we all seem to be engaging in what we love, in my book that is the only thing that matters. Well, paying the mortgage matters too.
March 30th, 2008 at 1:06 am
@ Jodee I completely understand about your family taking your job more seriously once you’re in print. I just recently became published in print via a magazine in my area of expertise and now people just seem to “get” that I’m a writer. Before I think they thought I played solitaire online and said I was working..who knows??
I think there’s a divide just as there is between web writers and the various forms of online content (features for major websites vs ghostwriting for small biz vs original vs PLR vs blogs yadda yadda)
Heck, life is like that–there’s always someone looking down on someone else, so why should writing be any different?
Personally I think it’s crap. If you like what you do and make enough money at it to make you happy then you’re doing fine. So is there a great divide? I’d say it’s there to some degree but I think over time it will diminish.
March 30th, 2008 at 2:32 am
@Bob - I’m on the GMT+2 time zone.
That’s why my posts are pm when it’s still morning in the US.
March 30th, 2008 at 2:58 am
I have experienced some snobbery by a writer for a local paper. He wrote an editorial on Soldiers’ Charity Scams. I followed up on his start and did more research connecting the culprit to more Charities, other businessmen and produced a post on the subject.
I e-mailed this writer and thanked him for bringing the scam to my attention. In parting I mentioned my post and how as a Blogger I didn’t have to soft peddle the gravity and distastefulness of this kind of behavior.
My hope was to get feedback from him the way I have from some of the top bloggers. Instead he simply never replied to my e-mail.
Here’s the thing. I regularly converse with accomplished writers who are read by hundreds of thousands of readers and this guy with a readership of 50,000 or so couldn’t take the time to return an e-mail.
It turned me off the guy and his paper.
March 30th, 2008 at 6:40 am
The Great Divide that I’ve experienced seemed to stem more from what we referred to as the “traditional side” throwing wrenches in the cogs of the “digital group”. Our theory as to why this was happening is as follows:
As someone else mentioned, we’ll all be writing for the web eventually. Digital (web) had been seen as the ugly duckling for quite some time… the nerd in the corner rather than the enigmatic artist, but the client continued to pull more and more funds from the print budget and put more and more into the web and other new media. The more money that went into the web, the more difficult it became to work with traditional. Quite sad actually.
March 30th, 2008 at 7:33 am
Like most people who have chimed in here, I write for both print and the web. I think the next generation won’t see any divide at all. Decades ago, actors who performed exclusively in live theater looked down on their counterparts who “only” starred in movies. These days, I don’t know if an actor can still make a living in live theater. In fact, the situation has so far reversed itself that many Broadway productions rely on Hollywood names to attract audiences. We’re starting to see a little of the same thing happening in writing. A few writers have gotten print contracts because they’ve attracted a lot of attention via their blogs. I believe Diablo Cody, who just won an Oscar for her screenplay for “Juno,” was discovered when someone referred a director to her blog. So that “Great Divide” is shrinking even as we write about it.
March 30th, 2008 at 10:36 am
I write online and print, and don’t see a divide any more than I see a divide between some different print publications. While some great journalism has come out of small print publicattions, they’re still often looked down on by writers for bigger pubs. I’ve also seen the “big fish” phenomenon of TV pushing down radio pushing down print. That’s why it was so great when Bill Veeck owned the White Sox. Even when a big TV station came in to talk to him, he would tell them to wait until he was done with his current conversation, even if it was a small paper (I was a sports writer for the small paper at the time).
I will also agree with James that literary writing tends to be at a different level. I’m reading a George Will book and find myself reaching for the dictionary. Not the kind of writing you see in the typical newspaper or online.
March 30th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Speaking personally, I would say that I haven’t experienced much of the whole Great Divide thing from other writers. On the other hand, I fully admit that I’m a stuck-up snob when it comes to writing; and I don’t care if you’re writing a novel or an SEO article.
Mentally, I think I do put literary writing above web content. I guess I do sort of look at it as more of an “art” than web writing, and I put art on a pedestal. If it’s a matter of money, though, I am far more likely to earn a living writing web content than a novel. That doesn’t mean that I can’t attempt both, though, right?
March 30th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
I’m intrigued. As I mentioned to Deb yesterday, the debate so far has been far less heated than either of us expected.
What’s clear is that snobbery exists everywhere, in all industries and groups of society. What’s also clear is that people should do what they love, despite negative feedback from others with differing options.
Regarding print and web, it’s also clear that web is overtaking a good portion of print markets, and that web is here to stay. Acceptance of that isn’t always easy - change never is - and protest might come from those who are sad to see what they love most get crowded out or from those who wished change wasn’t happening.
Change is inevitable. And opinions always rage strong. There will always be market for all types of writing, and I think that no one type or style or format is better than another. Each has its purpose and goal.
Quality based on type of work is a standard we all want - and no one type is lesser than another, no matter how it’s written or presented.
Is there snobbery? Sure. There always will be. I can’t change the world. Does it matter in the long run? Maybe. Maybe not. Do I care? Of course - I like everyone to get along.
Those are my thoughts this morning. Cheers.
March 30th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
While I have no doubt I’m one of the least experienced, least skilled writers who visit this fine blog, I’ll throw in my opinion.
There is a divide, but I don’t think it’s necessary snobbery. It certainly sounds like snobbery because when people go off about why they’re worth more than X/word, it’s usually because they have a long track record of print gigs.
What I really feel is at the base of the situation is the fact that people see the writing world at large changing due to the rising interest in writing for pay the internet has spurred.
When you hear someone talking about how long they’ve been in the business, how much they earn, and how new writers are ruining the market by accepting ‘insulting’ offers, the thing they usually point to is the low quality of writing that’s being put out right now. I think what’s really going on is that such people fear becoming obsolete. They fear a world where knowledge of SEO or actual copywriting will weigh more than their decades in the business and their impressive bylines.
The internet tends to be more results oriented than the print world. Sure, you can still brand yourself and develop a reputation on the internet, but the days of being ’special’ because you’ve been published are numbered.
Add in the fact that some of these ‘low quality’ writers aren’t bad, they’re inexperienced. They will get better as they write more and learn what works, both in the wordcraft sense and the business sense. I would imagine this causes a great deal of insecurity in anyone who makes a fine living based on performance in a different arena.
For what it’s worth, I also think the days of the $2 article are very numbered. Those who are paying this will go out of business, those who are offering this will either go out of business or realize they need to be compensated more for their efforts.
March 30th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
I don’t see the days of $2 articles going out anytime soon. I know of too many of my son’s friends who see them as a quick way to earn money without leaving the house. I also know I’ve spoken to people from Mexico and India who feel these $1 - $2 articles are a great way for them to earn a decent wage for their area.
What bothers me more are the sites that charge that little and don’t make any effort to hide their take. Then they get defensive when people call them out.
I was looking at one today at Freelance Writing Jobs - the guy is offering $5 to $7 for 500 word articles. If you look at his site, he’s selling these articles for $12 each. He’s taking a $5 to $7 cut out of every article writers are sending him.
March 30th, 2008 at 8:06 pm
I don’t see the days of $2 articles fading into the sunset any time soon either. They are poping up more and more in places that didn’t used to (online bidding sites) and places like Amazon.com’s Mechanical Turk seem to lend a validity to these slave wadges.
Like Ann said, as long as there are places where $1 or $2 an article is a good wadge we will have to weed through those bleak offers to get the the good paying ones. They are out there, though, and I find it gets easier to find them once you’v make some contacts and regular clients. Still, for those just starting out now–I don’t envy you!
March 30th, 2008 at 8:19 pm
Everybody’s entitled to an opinion, and only time will tell.
I think the reason the $2 article is still around as a phenomenon is because it’s still working. I’ve spoken to people who own article directories and they’re concentrating on the quality of articles they accept because they’re all afraid Google will delist them at some point because of the really bad articles many are accepting.
While I don’t ever expect to see $20+ as the low end for articles (until the dollar falls enough to cause that), like I said, when these articles aren’t effective in bringing in money, the people who depend on them as their business model will fold up and move on.
The people who can’t write quality articles will fold up and move on with them. Everybody left will hammer out whatever the market dictates, pricewise.
March 30th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
It’s funny. Way back in my college days I majored in English lit and minored in journalism. It was like crossing from one world to the other when I went to class. The lit students pored over Shelley and Byron the same way the print journalism students pored over the NY Times and Newsweek. There was a divide, both groups (in general) thought their study was more noble.
I was torn. I loved both; I appreciated both forms of critical thinking and writing. I still do.
It saddens me that in general there is less of an appreciation for writing among readers. Because most people in the general population can string words together, there is little understanding of what it means or what it requires to write a blog or to write an article or to write a novel or to write ad copy. It looks easy to the reader. They think, “Anyone can do that. It’s just writing words.”
It is up to us as writers to respect each other and appreciate all writing forms. No one cares as much about words as we do. It is a disservice to us if we criticize each other.
March 31st, 2008 at 1:58 am
Dude and Dudettes -
Arrogance is not soley the issue of the literati, online or in print.
Arrogance is a serious issue in EVERY profession - and it is also, unsurprisingly, the most destructive.
Whether you’re a writer, a doctor, a lawyer or a candle-stick maker, if you’re arrogant - you’re NOT doing your job - and you’re a disgrace to your profession. Especially, if you’re a writer.
The writer should know better. It’s the writer’s job to serve as a conduit, liaison, whatever you want to say, between all people’s. It’s the writer’s job to get their message across.
Arrogrance serves them little in doing so.
Is it ever a wonder we have an increasing and ever-damaging illiteracy challenge in America (and around the world)?
For starters, we can blame our school librarian’s, who encourage a false sense of pride in those who can read - as opposed to those who cannot.
Bottom line is this:
If you’re an arrogrant idiot as a human being, in your personal life, then you’re going to be an arrogrant idiot in your professional life.
First, fix your attitude as a person, then your professional attitude will fall perfectly into place, whatever it is you do - or decide to do - to make money.
Then, too, once you get the money - don’t be cheap. Instead, be generous, and take care of your fellow human beings, whether that means boosting the economy - or paying your bills - or just plain properly taking care of your own family (within your means).
Real bottom line: Don’t be attached to money, and don’t think it makes you a better person. And don’t set your sights (”sites”, as in “web”?) on your writing career making you rich.
Write or become a writer, online or in print, because it is a noble profession…and because you will have the power to do good (with your words and your work).
All the other stuff (independent wealth, financial security, the Mercedes) - will follow as blessings of a life-well lived. And you will SUSTAIN such status (instead of lose it, like so many arrogant successful snobs who ultimately go on to fail first as human beings - and then in the workforce of their choice.
Herbie J Pilato
Published Author AND Online Editor/Blogger
March 31st, 2008 at 3:46 am
Like many of the other posters, I’ve written for print and online outlets, and for all intents and purposes, I don’t see much difference anymore. Respectability is, in many ways, in the eye of the beholder, and there’s not much to be done about that. Except, of course, to earn trust, by doing the hard work, fighting to establish integrity, and so on. It’s happening now, and will continue to happen.
I think the real issue is that right now, it’s easier to look down on Web writing, as opposed to print writing, because there is a lot more crap out there on the Web than there is in print. Why? Well, there’s a lot more online writing, for one; it’s relatively easy to get written material online, and so there’s just a flood of text available. You don’t need the traditional editorial setup to be published electronically, which has its ups and downs, but one of the more visible downs is the lack of editorial oversight at some outlets. Poorly written, poorly spelled, poorly thought out; some of the stuff I see online makes me grit my teeth and think rather unkind thoughts. Proportionally, it’s probably about the same as in print (some of the things I see in supposedly professional print publications … ay yi yi), but when you’re dealing with the far vaster marketplace of the Web, the numbers get enormous very quickly. Online writing is still a young medium, and since it seems to be human nature to need to look down on somebody, online writers can look forward to being the red-headed stepchild of the literary world for some time. Being patient and being professional will win out in the long term, I suspect. For myself, I’m going to try it and see.
March 31st, 2008 at 6:06 am
Web writing has potential for world-wide readership, but at this stage of my writing career, as long as I’m getting paid, it matters very little to me.
March 31st, 2008 at 10:20 am
Well, I tried writing web content keyword “articles” last year, and I absolutely hated it–I found it mind-numbing, dull, and fluffy. Articles that exist solely to bring in traffic–not to actually entertain the reader–are not, to my mind, articles. They’re marketing, and they’re useful, but writing them just bores me to death.
Beneath me? I don’t know. But definitely not something I enjoy writing or write easily. I’ll write press releases, magazine- or newspaper-style journalistic articles (online or print, doesn’t matter to me), personal essays, blog posts, and lots of other things, but not keyword or filler articles whose primary purpose is to drive web traffic.
March 31st, 2008 at 10:21 am
Oh, yeah–I do look down on ghostwriting student papers, and I’m ethically uncomfortable with ghostwriting academic journal articles unless it’s permitted by the guidelines of the journal (and even if it is, it’s not something I do.
March 31st, 2008 at 6:30 pm
All I know is when I tell family and friends I blog and write web content, their eyes glaze over, but when I mention that I write for some magazines, I get an interested, “Oooh!”
And when I worked as a newspaper reporter, web content writers were practically a non-entity in my mind, although I now realize quite the opposite is true and believe the Net will save newspapers.
March 31st, 2008 at 6:31 pm
I’ve written mostly for print, but I dabble in writing for web sites and even am a blogger for hire.
I would say the most frustrating thing for print writers is getting used to things such as writing for search engine optimization and networking at sites such as Mixx, Propeller, etc. to “sell” an article and get web site traffic to in turn generate more clicking on ads, etc. This is an entirely separate process than writing, and in fact, is not necessarily good writing but is now inextricably linked with blogging and writing for general.
Personally, this is not such a great development and is more akin to good coding and marketing than good writing.
But then again, marketing has always been part of the writing for money equation - it’s just taking a different form than we are accustomed to …
I think was some might perceive to be “snobbery” may in fact just be people who are threatened by all these new developments. The new technological world is TOUGH for those of us who did not grow up in it. I never had a computer until my 20s, and a slow one at that. We have heard to learn on the fly and are at a disadvantage compared with folks in their 20s who had a computer always like they had a TV.
But THAT’s LIFE! We all have to suck it up, make the best of it and adapt to it. Enough said!
March 31st, 2008 at 8:39 pm
Divide is most certainly an issue. In the UK webwritwers are most certainly the ‘poor relation’ of the writers world!
Like Jennifer I write for ‘love to know’ and get the best buzz out of writing about topics of interest. I also write for 2 magazines and quite frankly it is boring and they never pay on time!!!
When I say I am a writer people always ask “so what hyave you published”? Omitting to care about the hundreds of interesting web articles I have written. By sheer fact that I’ve morphed from a nurse to a writer is good enough for me, to then face snobbery and a writing ‘cast system’ is just another challenge!
March 31st, 2008 at 8:52 pm
Yes, I see arrogance — on both sides of the divide. (And I see a divide.) Even though he says otherwise, James’ arTEESTs comment was haughty and, I felt, a swipe at those of us who appreciate literature and fine writing above slap-dash articles (no matter where they are published) or who prefer to be published in print or who used traditional methods to publish a book. That shouldn’t be any more accepted or tolerated than writers who look down their nose at professional bloggers or others who write primarily for the web.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:02 pm
Gee, James, I guess this means you don’t like to read great literature, huh?
I say again that I think the point a few people are missing here is that James is not in anyway against literature, just against the attitudes of snobbery among those who think they are better because they are novelists, published book authors, etc…
It’s not about the type of writing, it’s about the attitude that SOME think they are entitled to hold over others.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:14 pm
I’m not sure about the whole snobbery thing, but personally I hold novel writing (aka “literature”) in higher esteem than brochure writing, etc. Not that I look down on brochure writing, by any means. But there are relatively many writers who can write decent brochure content, and very few who can write “The Great Gatsby”.
On the other hand, I am able to make a living writing those brochures — not even Fitzgerald could make a living from his novels…
~Graham
March 31st, 2008 at 9:17 pm
@ Sue - No, arTEESTEs are in a class all their own. There are some really haughty people out there that put *themselves* on a pedestal that’s so high, I think they scrape the sky. They’re in a class all their own, and they can be web writers, content writers, designers, you name it.
I’m just talking print versus web for the Divide.
@ Mary - Thanks for seeing what I’m trying to get across. You have the right of it.
And… uh… no, I don’t like classic literature. Personal preference, nothing at all against it. Or those who write it.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:38 pm
Some of us have the best of both worlds. I write professionally under my ‘real’ name. I write for the internet using a pseudonym. I see this turning into a war similar to the Mommy Wars (to work outside the home or not). Why can’t we all just do our own thing, and let everyone else take care of their own business?
March 31st, 2008 at 9:55 pm
I do both, and don’t prefer one over the other. I appreciate how you get paid quicker when writing online but it is also quite thrilling seeing your name in print.
Unfortunately, I don’t have time for everything so in any given month, the balance may be tipped to favor one over the other.
I do feel the divide as well - it’s almost as if the two sides don’t understand each other. But, I am one of those writers who does both and enjoys both.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:55 pm
BestofBothWorlds - Why do you use a pseudonym for your Internet work?
April 1st, 2008 at 11:18 pm
Well, I followed James over here and was surprised to see that the great debate continues on. For the record, I am off of my chair now…
I just posted my own thoughts today on this subject after having a few days to think about it, and I believe I fall into the catagory that writing is still an art. Anyone that looks down on anyone else who feels the desire to express themself through the medium of the written word, in my opinion, should zip the lip.
We all have a right to express ourselves through the written word in the way that suits our creativity, our needs and our budgets. No one way is better or worse than an other.
Any time one person feels the need to make another person look or feel bad, I am checking to see where they are feeling insecure within themselves.
oh.. and Herbie J. Pilato..I agree.