Not to open Pandora’s box again, but my better half came across an interesting post that speaks directly to why content mills have a less-than-stellar reputation. He frequents a Scottish forum, and one of the forum members was livid recently. It seems her published book was plagiarized. The alleged thief posted a good portion of the book’s “text adapted from the book and a list of tips and materials that come almost directly from the book.” (Those were the original author’s words) She was even more upset when the man posted 26 illustrations he took straight from her book, in her words. Where was all this posted? eHow.com.
In my opinion, that’s what writers feel forced into doing when they accept payment that requires them to write tons of articles in order to earn enough money to make it worthwhile. It’s a line that many may cross in an attempt to deliver more copy.
I’m not saying content mill writers have no morals. In fact, we can point to at least half a dozen instances where staffers on newspapers and magazines have either concocted their own news or have lifted stuff from other writers and made it theirs. My argument is that the mindset of “rewrite and revise” someone else’s content is all too prevalent, and that mindset has been exacerbated by the pressures of providing a lot of copy – the content mill copy. Where are the failsafes? Does anyone behind the scenes check to see if these articles contain all original copy or if the copy’s been lifted? And I’m not talking about CopyScape. That’s a decent program, but it’s not perfect. Compare it to Microsoft Word’s grammar check function. Somewhat useful, but mostly not.
I’m going to ask something odd – I want to ask the content mill writers out there whether they’ve ever used one source and done revisions and rewording instead of originating the entire piece. Please, post anonymously if you want. I’m more interested in whether this is a common trend or if it’s simply a handful of instances. How do you compile original copy – especially those of you who said they write five or more articles an hour?
Writers who don’t work for content mills – same question. Have you ever used just one source and rewritten it? Why?
I have a couple of clients that are more than willing to pay higher rates for the material I write for them, but they are very, very strict about what they receive. Frankly, I can’t blame them. If you’re going to pay good money for something, it better be good.
One of them reported to me that he was burned in the past by writers who wrote material too fast. I have no problem working with him as none of his projects is done in less than an hour-that includes one blog post. I don’t do things that way, but if I did- he would ream me.
The other client is adamant that you don’t use anything on eHow or AC as sources. He has also, reportedly, been burned by other writers. Neither one has stated whether the writers worked for content mills or not, or if anything was plagiarized, but it doesn’t matter. Once you’re burned, it’s hard to trust again.
These two can be difficult, but they’re my absolute best clients; believe it or not. It took some time to build some trust with them though.
I don’t use one source if I can help it. I only use sources for facts to use and ideas on which direction to take a topic for an article. I don’t rewrite anything. If I use something within a source then credit is given to that source.
I don't even re-write copy from press releases. I may use it as a jumping off point, but I like to do a little research to confirm what's stated in a press release is actually true.
Never. It's just wrong. But some clients don't get it. I think I mentioned before that one client didn't understand why I had to interview sources to get the information needed. He asked (twice!) why I couldn't just pull information off the Internet. I had to explain to him why that wasn't possible. And he was a lawyer! Needless to say, that project went in the dumper because the dude just didn't understand how material gets created. I politely warned him, though, that if he restarted the project with another writer, he'd need to be careful about how that new writer compiled the info. Like he cared!
I will never, ever believe that someone can consistently write original 500-word articles in 10 to 15 minutes. Those who say they can simply don't understand what an original article is, IMO. They change the Wikipedia text enough to pass copyscape…that's about it.
I don't recall ever using just one source, but I concentrate mainly on copywriting, not general articles, so the process is a lot different than Google and rewrite.
Wendy, I bet one mistake would have them running in the other direction! It's good that they vet, but it makes it tough for the writers who put the additional time and effort into producing the best product. We're all lumped into the same mold until we prove ourselves.
Exactly, Paula. I don't trust anyone's copy – especially press releases!
Gabriella, these are the same people who don't think writing takes all that much time or talent. I don't care how high up the corporate food chain they are – if they aren't writers by trade, they're not going to fully understand our ethical codes, our business practices, or our boundaries. Good for you for educating him!
Krista, I write three blog posts a week. It takes me more than an hour for them because I make sure I have multiple news sources on which to base my ORIGINAL content. I can't understand how anyone can churn out a number of articles an hour while delivering original content. It's impossible.
Being a copywriter and not a content writer doesn't always save you from these issues. I had a client once that I was contracted to do a big website copy overhaul for ask me why I couldn't just use the same writing that was on one of his competitors' websites. I said "because that would be plagiarism." He asked why I couldn't just rewrite it a little so it was "original content." Ugh.
Oh my lord. Jen, that's ridiculous! They really don't get it, do they?