AW Amazon Store

If this site is helpful to you,
Please consider a voluntary subscription to defray ongoing expenses.


 

Welcome to the AbsoluteWrite Water Cooler! Please read The Newbie Guide To Absolute Write

Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: PrivateContent

  1. #1
    Comic guy Bartholomew's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Kansas! Again.
    Posts
    8,487

    PrivateContent

    PrivateContent posted a job listing here a while back. I'm just popping in to say that his work is legit. I finished my first project and am about to go spend the money he wired me.

    Bart

  2. #2
    Mostly Harmless SuperModerator CaoPaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Coastal Desert
    Posts
    13,108
    Can’t find the interim posts, but I questioned whether keyword/content work was “legit” in the context of being a publishing credit, which spawned the debate concluded thusly:

    06-06-2006, 02:27 PM
    PrivateContent
    Esteemed New Member

    To be honest, I don't think most of the people who apply for the ghostwriting position even expect a reference. I rarely get asked for one - and when I do, it's always the type of reference that Veinglory mentioned: a proof of employment reference with some mention of the quality of writing they do and their work ethic.

    About the content site comments - I've explained this once in this thread and once in my advert thread: They're not writing for me. They're contributing to packages that go to a client. I obviously can't tell you what exactly they are doing and for whom they are doing it without breaching contract with my clients. So talking about it is pointless. In a rare case, one of my clients might allow me to mention him/her in a reference for my writer, but I obviously cannot post something like that in a place as public as AW; nor is it something I will promise any of my writers (I didn't in the advertisment).

    All someone is going to get from this job is steady pay from work that involves writing. And if they want, I can provide them with a personal reference and proof of employment; but I never claimed anywhere in my advert that they would get a fantastic, evidence-laden reference - nor has it ever been a problem.

    The original poster, Bart, said that the job was legit because I was honest with him and paid him on time. This is true--and is true of my relationship with all of my ghostwriters. In fact, I'm almost positive no writers have left the job without first being hired somewhere else. Most ghostwriters stay on staff for months and constantly ASK for more work. They know they aren't getting a byline - and they know they can't get an evidence-laden reference, but they still like the job because it pays on time and gives them exactly what they wanted when they applied.
    06-06-2006, 02:29 PM
    Kasey Mackenzie
    Blonde & Bookxum

    The point is that writers should go into this process with clear expectations of what they are and are not getting out of it. There is nothing wrong with discussing the pros and cons. Indeed, a writer who knows exactly what they will be getting out of the process will be a happier writer than one who goes into it with unclear or unrealistic expectations and doesn't get what they thought they were going to get.
    __________________
    06-06-2006, 02:47 PM
    PrivateContent
    Esteemed New Member

    I completely agree, Kasey; however, I do think I made what I'm offering abundantly clear in my advertisement. How do I know this? Because I never have problems with the people I hire. They know exactly what they're getting into; and they don't expect a byline or a reference with samples.

    I actually would have no problem discussing pros and cons if it were simply that harmless, but it isn't for me. If you re-read my advertisement thread and this thread, you will see that complaints were lodged against me from people who haven't worked for me and from other posters who said the work isn't "legitimate" or is a scam. To me, those aren't really fair, objective pro/con comments about the nature of the work. They're flames - and they're essentially non-productive.

    Right now, I'm no longer trying to recruit. I've got more than enough writers for the time being. The only reason I'm posting is to clear up comments people have made about me or my business that are either completely wrong or baseless personal attacks.
    06-06-2006, 02:48 PM
    CaoPaux
    Mostly Harmless

    Thanks to all editors who chimed in.

    Schoolmarm, have you browsed the site in question? IMO, there's little comparison to Constant Content, et al.

    Regardless, I believe the core issue is whether a writer expects human eyes to remain on a keyword site long enough to find, read, and/or appreciate his/her work. Quick money, certainly, but I would hope that contributors harbor no illusions about who or what is reading them.
    __________________
    CAO
    06-06-2006, 02:52 PM
    PrivateContent
    Esteemed New Member

    Cao Paux:

    Please refer back to my posts. The site I use for my email client is a site I'm renovating. People I hired from AW are not writing for me. They're writing for clients.
    06-06-2006, 02:58 PM
    Kasey Mackenzie
    Blonde & Bookxum

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PrivateContent
    I completely agree, Kasey; however, I do think I made what I'm offering abundantly clear in my advertisement. How do I know this? Because I never have problems with the people I hire. They know exactly what they're getting into; and they don't expect a byline or a reference with samples.
    PC: Your post snuck in before I hit post on mine, apparently. I knew I should have used quote! I was responding to Schoolmarm's words: "Hmmm. . . I've got to say, comrades, that it seems counter-productive to turn up one's literary nose at income simply because it is derived from an online site that requires a great deal of fresh content to feed its visitors." rather than your post.
    __________________
    06-06-2006, 02:59 PM
    PrivateContent
    Esteemed New Member

    Ah, that makes perfect sense then. Sorry about the mix-up.
    06-06-2006, 04:00 PM
    CaoPaux
    Mostly Harmless

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PrivateContent
    Cao Paux:

    Please refer back to my posts. The site I use for my email client is a site I'm renovating. People I hired from AW are not writing for me. They're writing for clients.
    Per your advertisement, "contributing to packages" is still writing for keyword purposes.

    In any case, I apologize for anything construed as a personal attack. It is difficult to discuss the worth of writing as it relates to a writer's aspirations without touching upon quality, presentation, and compensation.
    __________________
    CAO
    06-06-2006, 04:54 PM
    PrivateContent
    Esteemed New Member

    Cao Paux:

    Likewise, I apologize if any of my responses were unnecessarily harsh.

    I would, however, like to respond to several things: the first is that contributing to one of the packages I provide for clients is necessarily writing for optimization purposes. That was an assumption some people made when they read my original advertisement--not something I actually said. I believe I cleared that up in responses, though.

    To be fair, a good amount of the writing will, as you said, be used for optimization purposes; however, this doesn't mean it wont be read. Keep in mind what is going on when someone researches and writes an article for a specific, targeted keyphrase. They are aggregating and summarizing information on an answer to a specific question people are looking for, but cannot seem to find anywhere on the Internet.

    The other thing I wanted to respond to is the assertion that writers are chosen based on their ability to insert keywords. I'm not sure what other SEO firms do, but for me, making such a decision would be absurd. My clients who purchase packages that include articles for SEO purposes actually run large sites, very few of which only contain content. When I select writers for these projects, I base it on talent and work ethic, not on their ability to insert keywords. I would much rather have a writer who can research and write well, but can't seem to figure out how to fit keywords into his writing. In most cases, writers actually do not fit the targeted amount of keywords into the writing. Sometimes they use it more; sometimes they use it less. It all depends on what is natural for them and for the piece. My editors usually end up setting the keyphrases to the correct amount, not the actual writers.
    06-06-2006, 11:10 PM
    Bartholomew
    Board fanatic

    Even if my work with Mr. Hull were completely useless and utterly wasted-- its far better than writing for nothing and letting it rot on my hard drive or in a note book.

    Far better still the fact that it is helping stabilize my income.

    And far better still as it allows me to, as Mr. MacDonald once said, and I'm paraphrasing, to work through the million odd words I'll have to write before I begin writing well.
    __________________
    06-07-2006, 06:22 AM
    LeslieB
    Geek Unique

    As long as people clearly know what the terms are, (no byline, etc.) I don't see why there is such a flap about it. Okay, so it isn't the 'best' writing around, and it won't get you a publication credit. It will still earn money. For some people, that is enough. Telling someone that they shouldn't do it because it doesn't contribute to their writing career is like telling an aspiring actor it is a waste of time to wait tables while they go to auditions. Sometimes that whole "putting food on the table" thing has to come first.
    __________________
    "I'm your worst nightmare, a computer geek with a badge."
    06-07-2006, 07:35 AM
    Schoolmarm
    Equi-slave First Class

    Cao, I wasn't comparing Private Content's site to CC. What I said was that the work I sell on CC goes to the same sort of client Private Content sells to. Three of my articles wound up on a site that pushes low-interest mortgage rate comparisons. No by-line, no clips, nothing but the money I got from selling the articles and the new knowledge I gained in writing them. When you post something on CC for sale, you aren't generally told to whom it was sold. You get a paypal payment from the entity that runs the site ("iwinweekly", in this case). The end. I know where those three articles went because the buyer listed his URL. The others are somewhere in cyberspace, and I'm pleased to have written them because they are good, well-conceived and well-written articles.

    I've said it before on this board. Content writing is a lot like a timed essay on a college exam. In order to make the effort pay, it has to be quick, good, and on-target. That's a challenge, particularly when you're writing about subjects in which you are not an expert but have some cursory knowledge. It's far more stimulating than most of the little story starters and prompts that abound for the purpose of breaking a writer's block. Try it. It's fun. And in the end instead of a few paragraphs of verbiage based on "They were young and in love, and never expected the lights to go out", you've got an article you can sell and the content of which you can rework into other articles on similar subjects. Now that's the way to break a block!

    So, the concept and process are the same. These are legitimate markets. Illegitimacy lurks in the market ads that promise payment that never follows. I've got one of those to my discredit right now, and I promise you all of you would have fallen for the same deal. They contacted me based on things I'd posted on CC and AC and asked me to write for them. It sounded like a wonderful market, not because of the rate of pay (which was modest even as listed), but because of the type of publication it is. Eight articles later without a single check, I'm done. I've been shafted by some of the best.

    At least PC has satisfied writers in his corral. Writing doesn't always have to be about clips. Sometimes it can be simply for the cash. Really. I kid you not.

    Bartholemew said it beautifully. Buyers like Mr. Hull don't accept drivel, and writers like Bartholomew and I don't write any. But the erudite blatherings languishing on my drive because no one "gets" what I was doing (not even me, in some cases) are doing no one any good. Writing is good. Income is good. Writing for income is the best.

    Yay MONEY!
    __________________
    Joanne M. Friedman
    06-07-2006, 07:41 AM
    crobinator
    Board fanatic

    um... i could use some money.

    __________________
    06-07-2006, 07:47 AM
    Aconite
    Full sun to light shade
    Mod Squad Member

    The "Writers Wanted: Paying Markets" Forum here on AW may interest anyone looking for paying markets.
    __________________
    ICAO
    ---------

    Censorship always defeats its own purpose, for it creates in the end the kind of society that is incapable of exercising real discretion. -- Henry Steele Commager
    Achievers strive for excellence. Perfectionists drive themselves to extinction. -- A Grapple A Day
    I've never known any trouble that an hour's reading didn't assuage. -- Charles DeSecondat

    II 2016: 2017:

  3. #3
    Mostly Harmless SuperModerator CaoPaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Coastal Desert
    Posts
    13,108
    I hope all his checks cleared, cuz this looks to be the last trace of Isaiah Hull.
    ICAO
    ---------

    Censorship always defeats its own purpose, for it creates in the end the kind of society that is incapable of exercising real discretion. -- Henry Steele Commager
    Achievers strive for excellence. Perfectionists drive themselves to extinction. -- A Grapple A Day
    I've never known any trouble that an hour's reading didn't assuage. -- Charles DeSecondat

    II 2016: 2017:

  4. #4
    Comic guy Bartholomew's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Kansas! Again.
    Posts
    8,487
    Quote Originally Posted by CaoPaux View Post
    I hope all his checks cleared, cuz this looks to be the last trace of Isaiah Hull.
    What is it? I can't make heads or tails of the website. It's an endless sea of links that lead to spam. It's like some kind of internet gutter.

    The pay was obscenely low, but I never had an issue collecting.
    Last edited by Bartholomew; 08-15-2010 at 01:42 PM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Custom Search