You know, sometimes I get so hopeful when the seasons change. A time of shifting circumstances, a clean slate, a transition into something new. It’s all good.
Unfortunately, the only shift in lousy job postings is when someone adds an F to “shit.”
What just grinds me big time about these offers, and maybe particularly as October marches on, is that there are freelance writers out there who are staring at the calendar and thinking “How they hell am I paying for Christmas?”
And these parasites who put offers like this out there know that. And bank on that.
This installment of This Job Not That Job comes from Jenn Mattern, who has launched Freelance Writing Pros, retooling her business focus to writers with a bit of experience on their CVs. Jenn’s got a guest post for us next week, but for now, she sends us this head-scratching number:
Freelance writers (New York)
Do you like to help people by simplifying messages? That’s what our Curation Strategists do: Take important, long articles and curate them (i.e. Write shorter articles, highlighting the key points and enabling readers to get more details by going to the original article and other resources.)Blah Blah (name changed) is an interactive, community platform that helps people make better blah decisions. We’re a startup looking for freelance writers to join our Writing team. An ideal candidate is someone who:
• Quickly understands the context of an article related to Blah issues
• Stay on top of Blahing news to find original articles
• Understand our customers and tailor the article to their needs
• Have great communication and writing skills
• Have great research skills
• Can handle pressure and complete deadlines 100%To apply, send us:
1. A description of what you think Blah Blah is
2. Who is our target market?
3. 5 articles you think would make a great article on Blah Blah.
4. A sample of your writing.
Do you like to help people by simplifying messages?
That’s what our Curation Strategists do: Take important, long articles and curate them (i.e. Write shorter articles, highlighting the key points and enabling readers to get more details by going to the original article and other resources.)
3. 5 articles you think would make a great article on Blah Blah
AARP magazine is a leading publication for people 50 and older. Needs stories on health, personal finance, travel and other areas of interest to the magazine’s 37.3 million readership.
Pays: $2 a word for print; $1 for online
God, how much simpler does that make your life, right there?
Writers, what are some of the lousy job listings you’re coming across?
13 responses to “Writers Worth: This Job Not That Job”
The sad part? There are so many self-describe “content specialists” out there cherry picking “content” from published sources that some newbies believe it’s a legitimate, accepted practice.
That’s why I steer clear of anyone seeking content specialists, content managers — basically positions that don’t stress the need for ORIGINAL content.
As for AARP….several months back I pitched an idea to AARP. The submission guidelines say to submit it via email (or standard mail). I sent to to the email address the guidelines linked to, but received a reply from their members’ address, saying I’d sent it to the wrong address. I triple checked: It sent it to the correct address—and you could see it. I tried again and cc’d it to the editor’s email address (which he gave me through LinkedIn a while back). No reply. So a couple weeks later I sent my pitch by mail—and alerted them to the glitch with e-mail submissions. Still no response, but I noticed their guidelines no longer state that they’ll respond within a certain time frame.
AARP is interesting. I knew someone who worked for them full time, and he liked it there (and his role led to books that got him on Oprah). They seem well-run, but there’s always the situation where there’s too much to do and too little staff to handle it all.
Good for you for alerting them to the issue. Hopefully, they can get someone to fix it.
It was 2-3 months ago, but I never heard from them one way or another, not even a “Thanks for letting us know about the problem you encountered.”
Another thing on your point there, Paula — it’s the content regurgitation issue. There is a well-known writer who not only practices that behavior, but promotes it to their audience of newbies. I’m sorry — at some point I have to speak out about that. I won’t name the source, but I remember the posts that told people how to create these “curated” bits and turn them into “original” content. That is NOT original. That’s just theft from more than one source.
The karma that awaits anyone who pushes that kind of practice is going to be huge.
I think I know the person you’re talking about, but sadly, there are many others promoting this lazy “business model.” The one I’m thinking of was the person I first heard use the term “mash up,” back when Glee was a popular series and did a musical mashup in almost every episode (my favorite: “Singing’ in the Rain” with “Umbrella”).
This resurfaced on a larger scale with the “skyscraper content” BS being promoted by well-known (and often rather sleazy) marketers. It’s the opposite of this ad length-wise though. If it’s about the same, it’s “spinning.” Not sure how they think shorter versions is “curation.” But when you take info from multiple sources and turn it into a much larger article now it’s “skyscraper content.” Just as pathetic. But marketers now pretend that length equals authority or better quality. In the end, if you can’t write about something without ripping off other authors, you add no value, and you’re little more than a copyright-infringing creep. When exactly did these folks forget creating derivative works without permission is still copyright infringement?
Skyscraper content. Another phrase to be wary of. Ugh.
I didn’t used to think it could get worse than “bum marketing.” LOL But every few years it’s the same thing. Some skeazy marketing type takes a legit concept (longtail searches, authority content, etc.), slaps a stupid name on it, dumbs it down until it has questionable value, and acts like they’re some sort of business mastermind. It’s so gross. But sadly there are always people w/o the experience of having seen it a half dozen times who fall for it, hoping for an quick fix.
One of my clients occasional hires me to edit and review content from new writers. He just had me give editorial feedback on the worst I’ve seen (and he confirmed he won’t be working with them moving forward thankfully). They were much like what you describe here.
In addition to the atrocious grammar and flat out false “facts” with no sourcing, nearly the whole thing was plagiarized. Not from a single source, but they were pulling a line or two from each site they linked to. No quoting. No attribution other than tucking the link into the text in odd places.
I’ve seen a lot of this on a smaller scale over the years — “writers” thinking they can use others’ words as long as they link to them. But this was on a whole different level.
Jenn, I once had a job “offer” from a company that told me the articles I’d be writing were to be “55 percent original” — they wanted me to take two or three articles and “rephrase” what was there to make a new article. For $50 per.
You can imagine the note I sent back both turning down and condemning the practice. Woman had the balls to respond “No, the writers will be creating new articles, just using the facts from these articles. It’s perfectly legitimate.”
Right. Theft is now “legitimate.”
Yuck. I don’t know how some people can stay so blissfully ignorant, but it’s beyond gross. You can use “facts” from other articles. But that requires quotes, sourcing, etc. Not making sure your language hits some arbitrary percentage of originality.
These just make you want to bang your head against the desk. Indefinitely.
I remember being a desperate freelance beginner. I do. I don’t remember being this desperate, though. I remember seeing content mills and thinking “Wait. What?” and knowing that someone was making a LOT more money off those articles than I ever would.
Most people have to common sense to realize a lousy deal. But these shysters excel as wrapping garbage in a rose-scented bow. If you’re not reading closely, you could easily misunderstand the terms or get into an ungodly bad situation.
I beat my head against flat surfaces too, Devon. I just don’t understand the mindset that sets out to cheat a decent human.