You know, someday I hope that the world will sort itself out and that freelancers will shun the crap that is posted on job boards. Alas, that is not happening today.
Thanks to Paula Hendrickson, who shared this particularly ridiculous job listing that came to her via a friend. And while this one pays better than $20 an article, the use of AI is front-and-center and yes, concerning. A perfect contender for This Job, Not That Job. So let’s get to it:
…. new (industry) website that was literally created just a few weeks ago. But we’re not just any new website. The creator of this website (aka me) already owns another very successful website that brings in multiple grand every month. You’ll be joining me on my journey to dominating the (industry) niche with this new website.
So what’s in it for you? Well, besides making good money writing in the comfort of your (industry spot) , you’ll be an integral part of a website that will soon be taking over all the top spots on Google, and you’ll be our vanguard to do so. We’ll give you a consistent flow of work with flexible deadlines, coupled with world-class editorial tools, to bring out your full potential and clear the path to help you produce only the very best content. In 6 months’ time, just by quoting our website’s name, website owners will be clawing over each other for your services.
The best part is, we’ll be training you to use AI to create high-quality content and drastically speed up your content creation process. Of course, this means you’ll be paid slightly less per article, but your earnings to time ratio will be much higher given that AI will be doing most of the work for you.
Requirements
Must have at least 1 year of experience (in the industry listed)
Must have minimally 1 year of writing experience
Benefits
Competitive freelance rates [USD$100/article which will take no more than 4 hours to create with AI]
Flexible deadlines
Stable work as part of a high-performing team [4 articles per month]
Where to start, I mean really? Let’s start here:
“….new website that was literally created just a few weeks ago….”
I find this interesting because this person has tossed up a website and is expecting it to bring in “multiple grand” every month as they “dominate” the industry they’re writing about. Except that we have no idea who this is, what this other mystery site is, and what “multiple grand” means.
Someone can claim domination (a la Pinky and The Brain), but someone can claim anything these days. Proof is required, ‘kay?
Here’s another gem. This one is the what’s-in-it-for-you section:
” …. besides making good money writing in the comfort of your (RV, it’s an RV), you’ll be an integral part of a website that will soon be taking over the tops spots on Google ….”
Again, where’s the proof? And when we say “good money” do we really think a few hundred bucks a month is “good money?” Honey, McDonald’s pays $15 an hour now. One 8-hour shift and I’m making more already.
“….and you’ll be our vanguard to do so.”
Gosh, don’t you feel like a trailblazer?
“In 6 months’ time, just by quoting our website’s name, website owners will be clawing over each other for your services.”
Really? Your website is so special that it’s going to hold more weight than say a Fortune 500 client that the writer already writes for? Somehow, I highly doubt it.
“The best part is, we’ll be training you to use AI to create high-quality content and drastically speed up your content creation process. Of course, this means you’ll be paid slightly less per article, but your earnings to time ratio will be much higher given that AI will be doing most of the work for you.”
And right there is the catch. You, my writerly friend, will be “trained” to edit AI-generated content. Oh, I know the ad doesn’t say that, but look at that last little bit: “….your earnings to time ratio will be much higher given that AI will be doing most of the work for you.”
Gosh, you’re going to teach us how to use the simplest freaking technology on the planet and pay us less because, gee, AI’s doing all the work anyway? What do you need us for then?
I’ll tell you what for: Your presence is required for a few reasons:
- To legitimize the content
- To fact-check and do the legwork that an editor would do
- To get underpaid for the four hours it’ll take you to clean up plagiarized content (for AI excels at that, my friend)
- To be blamed when there’s inevitable legal action taken against this company
Four hours to create an article with the help of AI? I don’t know about you, but I’ve written bigger articles in that time. By myself. Including interviews.
Don’t waste your time working for a bot. Instead, try this (via Jenn Mattern’s All Freelance Writing job postings):
Freelance Content Writer – Transportation, Trucking, Automotive
Bobit Business Media is seeking freelance writers for custom content creation for clients in the transportation, trucking, and automotive industries. Pay is $.50-1.00 per word.
– Ability to stick to deadlines while maintaining high editorial standards
– Willingness to sign NDAs when required by the project scope
– Willingness to work directly with Bobit’s clients as-needed
The difference between these two gigs is massive. The first is an unknown entity that is asking you to generate AI articles and somehow legitimize them. The second is a known, legitimated entity that is hiring you to write articles for a fair rate.
Writers, which would you choose?
How do you determine if a gig is worth the effort of applying?
4 responses to “Writers Worth: This Job, Not That Job”
I have to admit I have mixed feelings on this one. When Paula sent us the job lead yesterday, I got bored (and admittedly distracted) and couldn’t get through the whole ad. The self-importance was weird and off-putting. But I didn’t realize how bad that element alone was until you broke it down here. Just… wow.
I’m fine with the rate on this if we’re talking short-ish blog posts on non-complex topics, which would take an hour or two for even a newer writer. Better than a lot of early-career gigs out there.
But…
1. They don’t mention the word count targets, so there’s no way to estimate what you’re actually earning per hour. Given the AI involvement (which I’m also 100% OK with as long as they aren’t crossing the line and directly posting plagiarized AI-generated content, which it doesn’t sound like they’re planning to do if they’re hiring writers). My concern is they could be over-estimating AI’s efficiency and expecting these to then be very long pieces.
2. The weird ego bit is another red flag, but it does make me wonder who’s behind the site. There are plenty of SEOs and other webmasters already making huge amounts of money with AI content, so they could be experienced enough with this that they’re right. Or they could just be some BS-artist kid who heard this is the answer without fully understanding the AI environment right now, and when they don’t get rich quick with your help, they’ll blame the writer. No way to tell, but if anyone reading this ends up taking this gig, I would love to hear more about what’s going on.
3. The other thing is they mention AI generally. Are they expecting the writer to work with something like the free version of ChatGPT? That would be a problem because it’s already famous for “hallucinating” non-facts, it isn’t connected to the internet, makes up sources, etc. Now, GPT-4 is a completely different story. So are some other specialized tools. They can provide actual source documentation, are much better at vetting facts, and can even give you a list of what needs to be fact-checked before publication if you know how to write ai prompt sequences properly. But those are premium tools, some with limited access. Is this client going to provide, and pay for, that access? I didn’t see that mentioned either.
4. The real cringe moment when I stopped reading the ad completely was when they said it would take 4 hours per article. Just, no. Any client who tells a freelance pro how much time their work should take is not the kind of client you want to work with. Either they’re underestimating and really saying “this is all the time I’m willing to pay for, and if it takes you longer, it must be your fault,” or they’re overestimating and they’ll look for a reason to cut pay later when they realize you’re earning more than the $25 / hr they think you deserve (which is half what I recommend even the newest freelancers charge in the beginning given freelance pay is massively different than employee pay structures with all things accounted for).
So in general, this would fall in what I’d call a low-pro market (which is often mid-level to high in just the types of gigs that are publicly advertised), there are far too many questions to know if this would be a good deal, if it would be an ethical use of AI or not, and if this client would even be a good source to learn about AI as a tool from. But the ego oozing through is hands-down the biggest red flag for me.
The whole thing put me off, Jenn. This mystery person who’s all but promising the writer’s success, the “mulitple thousands” whatever that means, the use of AI to do “most of the work” and the feeling that this is yet another posting where the poster gets rich and the writer gets the shaft.
My take: Those four hours will be spent res-pinning someone else’s work (multiple someones — maybe that’s what they mean by “multiple thousands” 😉 ) into a bastardized version of the original. Let’s hope that person who is about to be grossly underpaid for “four hours” of work understands fair use and copyright law.
Along with all of the ick factors you both already mentioned, I focused on the bit where he (and sorry for assuming, but it feels like a safe bet) decides that saving time by using AI means paying writers less. Saving time is an advantage to the (effective and ethical) use of AI in large part because it boosts productivity, which should in turn increase your earnings potential. But instead, he’ll expect more work for the same hourly rate.
Puke.
Great point, Paula. How is that a bonus for anyone?
Puke is right.