How Can a Freelancer Build a Web Content Client Base?

by 9 Comments

So, you want to write web content for more than one-third of a penny per word.  Or you’re doing the Demand Studios thing and would like to branch out.  Maybe you write for some of the other content mills and think it‘s time to cut out the middle man/woman.  Maybe you’ve been working the bid boards and are tired of giving them a cut.  Maybe you haven’t received so much as a “thank you” for anything you’ve written, but you’re ready to get things rolling and you want to deal with real-life clients who’ll toss work your way on a regular basis.

You’re not alone.  I know that because I get emails asking, “How in the hell can I get decent clients?” on a regular basis.  I know that because I see folks quizzing discussion board participants with variations of the same question. [Read more…]

Niche or No?

by 7 Comments

There is one big question freelance writers must tackle regardless of their experience or career length: niche or no?

Newbie writers will read article upon article and blog upon blog touting the importance of finding a niche, picking a niche, taking a niche out on a date…Veterans will find themselves bombarded with articles and posts on when it’s time to leave a niche, switch, combine, create a Frankenstein and give a manic laugh…

The truth is – you have a choice.

Pro Niche:

1. Building a good reputation as a writer is important. Getting steady work is important as well. Niche writing can set a writer up as a knowledgeable, working expert in the subject matter, that writer can then leverage their experience for more work.

2. Depending on the niche, not only can you establish yourself as a leader, you can do it fairly quickly. It’s hard to believe given the abundance of writers out there, but there are some niches that are so specialized there aren’t a lot of people writing  for them.

3. A writer who can establish themselves in areas that have a denser concentration of writers earn the distinction of being a pack leader – that translates to dollars and work (and tons of Twitter followers).

4. Passionate pursuits are another reason why people head toward specific subjects. I’m a “write what you live” kindof girl and my body of work reflect my current passions – writing, business/finance and parenting. It is often the passion of a subject that drives a writer to write so staying within their passion is a perfectly natural course.

5. It’s an easy road map, but a challenging road. Say you are passionate about WordPress themes. You review the site daily, keep up on the coolest developers and plug-ins, etc. You decide to to plant a flag in the WordPress blogger game. Everyday you know what you’ll be writing about – in general. You’ll know the types of publications and web sites you want to write for, etc. The challenge? Finding those sites  and publications, breaking in, keeping subjects and angles fresh and continuing to learn more after exhaustive study.

Nah Niche:

1. A writer can build up a steady work and a reputation just by being a good writer, it doesn’t have to be within a niche.

2. Niche burnout. It sucks and without properly identifying it, it can extinguish the passion for writing. Many writers cannot fathom writing about one or two subjects for an extended period of time.

3. This last one is a secret: You can do both. It is perfectly fine to have a core subject or group of subjects while dating other types of articles and writing in general. Freelance writing is the ultimate open relationship. Success comes from great writing, a solid work ethic, and a viable set of goals. How you reach them is completely up to you.

Are you having trouble picking a niche? Thinking about changing or leaving niche writing all together? Tell us below!

Visuals Count in Web Articles

by 4 Comments

Lede (lead), transitions, closing – check. Sound research, supporting facts, eye-catching headline – check. Full editing checklist – completed. You’ve got the perfect web article. It’s going to gain thousands of hits, right? One question: how does it look?

Writing for the web is different than writing for print publications. Magazine articles have a lot of help to look pretty for the reader. On the net, many pieces are like the ugly duckling – inside there is a bevy of beauty, but no one can get past the outside. The majority of articles need to be visually appealing for readers to click, stay and link.

White Space

When people pick up a magazine they often go straight to the headline story that captured their attention, but they are mentally ready to settle in for a good long read. People read web articles with a different mindset. These people hop on the net, look for information/news and once found, they scan for important points and main ideas. They don’t want to give a lot of time to a piece unless it’s critically important or if they are in deep research mode – like in the case of government conspiracies or celebrity sex tapes.

Admit it, you’ve clicked on an article only to see paragraph after long paragraph of words and thought, “Oh I don’t have time for this.” In fact, I’d wager people do it more often than they care to admit, which is why white space is needed.

White space refers to the paper or in this case, screen space people see when they look at a page. In other words, row after row of 20 sentence paragraphs – not appealing to the eye. It’s like your neighbor who takes off his shirt to mow the lawn only to expose his shirt made of human hair. Breaking up paragraphs into smaller bite size pieces is like giving your furry neighbor a shirt. The stuff’s still there but now it looks better.

Bullet points help as well. It tells the skimmer, “Here are the important points, cut up and chewed for you.”

Photos

Photos help break up all those pesky words and brighten up the piece. Take hairy neighbor again, put him in front of a wind machine, add a professional photographer and said neighbor becomes rugged and manly. Photos help illustrate the point and mood of the article.

Let’s face it writers, while most people know words and reading are necessary, most don’t value them as much as we do. Look at this period   .    Isn’t it beautiful? A beautiful dot that represents so much – a pause, a finished thought or if you have three of them … an unfinished thought. Literary ants marching to the next set of words if you will… We appreciate it. Everyone else? Slap a shirt on it so they are not bored or horrified.

Visual appeal in web writing is nearly as important as the words. Beautifully crafted and executed articles with great visual appeal are sure to land more hits and links than boring pages full of dense text. Take a look at your pieces to make sure they look as wonderful as they read.

On Bad Writing, Bad Proofreading and Responsibility

by 34 Comments

Sotp

Credit where it’s due: Carson Brackney’s most recent post discusses Angela Hoy’s latest  rant against content sites and the people who write for them. In his post, “Content Mills, Angela Hoy, Search Engines and the Quality of Writng” Carson explores who really bears responsibility for bad content. This isn’t to argue Carson’s point, more to discuss the difference between bad writing and bad proofreading and also to touch a little on the responsibility part. I was going to leave a comment on Carson’s blog but it got too wordy, so I’m sharing my thoughts here. Warning: This is kind of wordy too.

Every now and then I like to touch on the topic of bad writing. Because anyone can be a writer nowadays, there’s a lot of bad writing on the web. I’m not going to blame it on web content or low payers, because I know a few high payers who employ writers who, well, aren’t very good. I read “columns” written by high paid celebrities that are absolute garbage. I also know of some sales people who write their own content to sell a product, and bloggers with their own personal blogs who also put out some questionable content.  On the other side of the coin there’s plenty of content on the web that’s terrific but the author didn’t proofread very well. As this community knows, I’m guilty of this very thing (but I hope I’m getting better). Sometimes, it’s not bad writing as much as it is bad proofreading.

So I feel like exploring this a bit…

Using the “Loose” vs. “Lose” Theory

In Carson’s article he makes reference to Angela Hoy’s most recent “investigation” which entailed searching for the word “loose” and citing examples of articles where “loose” was used in the title instead of “lose” in order to prove how web content pollutes the airwaves. In all fairness, “loose” instead of “lose” is a pet peeve of mine as well. However, as we were only treated to the titles of the articles and not the actual articles, all Hoy proved was that someone didn’t proofread. We don’t know if the content is poor, because we didn’t read the articles. Using “loose” instead of “lose” doesn’t necessarily mean you’re a bad writer, it can also mean you’re a bad speller and a bad proofreader. There’s a difference between bad writing and bad proofreading. I post and run all the time, and though that’s not an excuse for publishing sloppy work, the truth is, it happens and it doesn’t mean you don’t deserve to live.

What makes a bad piece of writing?

Granted, some of the articles referenced in her article might be terrible, but Hoy didn’t link to them and I didn’t read them, so I have no way of telling. However, if the whole article was filled with typos, poorly formed sentences and misinformation, I would have to agree it’s a crappy article. If it’s factually correct and well-written, but simply has a typo in the title, I can be forgiving. I’ve found typos in Writer’s Digest on more than one occasion and I don’t see anyone going after them. There’s a difference between bad writing and bad proofreading. Should we publish articles that are victims of poor proofreading? Of course not. However, to say a well written article with a typo is what’s wrong with the world today is kind of silly.

Who bears responsibility

I’m very vocal about writers being responsible for their own writing. I don’t think it’s the fault of the content site any more than it’s the fault of McDonalds for hiring someone who can’t be counted on to show up for work on time. Anyone who accepts any gig needs to do said gig to the best of his ability or move on. However, I also believe content sites need to be more selective with the writers they hire.

The problem here is the content site’s purpose. If it’s a site geared towards hobbyists, there’s a whole different set of standards than the site geared towards putting out “how to” content or news. Getting upset because someone who writes for a hobby site used “loose” is like getting angry at the people who volunteer to put together a community newsletter for not properly structuring a paragraph. You can’t compare a site like Hub Pages to a site like Demand Studios. They have different pay, different requirements, a different purpose, and sometimes, different writers.The content site that wishes to be viewed as an authority and trusted source of information does bear more responsibility than the hobby site. You can’t go after a site for hobbyists and say “you’re polluting the web” because they’re not claiming to put out reputable content. However the site that employs editors and fact checkers has no excuse.

There are a variety of reasons why a bad piece of writing hits the web, but the bulk of responsibility belongs to the writer. It’s the writer who should proofread several times before hitting “send” and it’s the writer who needs to do more than Google and rewrite when researching information. It’s about pride. It’s about not wanting anyone to read something I wrote and seeing “loose” instead of “lose.” The authoritative content sites need to ensure they hire quality writers, and the editors must do their jobs properly, but any writer who habitually turns in poor writing, doesn’t deserve the gig.

Bad writing isn’t exclusive to content sites

I’ve said it before, if you think bad writing is exclusive to web content sites, read the “Twilight” series. Read the church newsletter and the high school newspaper. Read the newsletter at the Senior center or the weekly Mayor’s address. I find typos on a regular basis in books, magazines, newspapers and on websites. Poor proofreading is everywhere. To say content sites lower the quality of writing on the Internet is like saying the moms who started the neighborhood watch newsletter are lowering the quality of journalism.

Typos vs. Quality

Something I worry about more than a writer using “loose” instead of “lose” is a junior high school kid stumbling upon a piece of fluff in his research and thinking it’s good information. Content sites do bear the responsibility to make sure content is factually correct. Thankfully most schools (and parents) have caught on and don’t allow sites such as Wikipedia or Associated Content to be used as sources or references. Still, folks need to back up their facts. If a writer has no medical experience and they’re Googling and rewriting some bad medical writing they found, a disclaimer would be nice. Personally, I feel people who don’t know a thing about medicine shouldn’t be giving out medical advice, but since there’s no way to police this, we need disclaimers. Folks need to know how writers come across their information. I can overlook a typo if the article contains good information, but I can’t overlook bad information.

News vs. Content

Now, the question was asked if web content sites lower the quality of news on the Internet. I don’t know that they necessarily do. Most web content sites with writers who report the news are relaying the facts so it’s not like they’re getting it wrong. Multiple television stations, websites, magazines and newspapers report on the same scandal. Having someone in web content discuss the same thing doesn’t mean it’s lowering the quality. However, most content sites aren’t reporting news. “How to Tie Your Shoelaces” isn’t news. News and content are two separate puppies.

Are you done yet, Deb?

This went kind of long and I need to wrap it up. I hope it makes sense and I hope I proofread well enough.

Content isn’t evil. Web content sites aren’t evil. Bad writers are everywhere and it has nothing to do with where they work or how much they’re paid. It’s the writer’s responsibility to write well and it’s the editor’s responsibility to to edit. If you’re going after web content sites for a case of bad proofreading, you’re also going to have to go after sign makers, newspapers, sales people, newsletters and magazines. Typos are everywhere. Bad writing should go, but using “loose” instead of “lose” doesn’t a bad article make. It will make me stop and pause. It will make me think more about the writer and the writing, but it’s not a deal breaker.

Who bears the responsibility for bad writing?

Affiliates & Referral Disclaimer

Resources

Freelance Writing Jobs