What’s on the iPod: Statesboro Blues by The Allman Brothers
Yesterday was slow, but I got more accomplished than I thought. I managed everything on the to-do list, plus I had some time to work on personal projects and a little marketing. A day without marketing is like a day without work.
Has Google figured out that crap content is, well, crap? It would seem so. Eileen Coale sent me this link to an article on how Google is attempting to decrease the number of search results that include content farm content, which according to Google’s spam killing team, is “pure webspam.” As if we needed to be told. Give the article a read.
What I found interesting was the effect this move is having on legitimate news services. And they’re voicing their complaints because their business model is to gather news from various sources and redistribute. Under Google’s anti-spam campaign, they stand to lose ranking right alongside the content farms. The interesting part (for me at least) – their voices are added to the growing list of those who are unhappy about content farms and their products.
I don’t think too many would argue that the majority of content farm output is garbage. If you’re writing for a mill and you disagree, I’m afraid you’ll have a tough time proving it to anyone at this point. While I’m sure there are good, even fantastic writers working for content farms, there are just as many mediocre writers or writer wanna-bes who don’t think to, or know to, question what it is they’re expected to do. These are not writing jobs. Please don’t think they are, despite any company’s claim to the contrary.
More to the point, I question the impact of the decision to write for these places on a writer’s business and reputation. I know a few high-level writers who choose to work for them. They call it pocket change. I call it a waste of valuable time and talent.
Writers at any stage of their careers who work for these places are not only getting paid abysmally for work that isn’t exactly noteworthy (do you honestly think that article on how to brush a yak is a good published clip?) – they’re also in danger of damaging their reputations. Beginning writers especially need to understand the difference between legitimate work and serfdom. A litmus test for you – if it pays you under minimum wage per article, it’s not worth it. And don’t tell me you can write six articles an hour and make a whole $30 doing so. Try that for eight hours a day, five days a week. We’ll see how long that lasts.
Instead, actively seek work. That means stop trolling job listings and feeding off the chum of these virtual sweat shops. Decide now who your next client will be. Research the client’s business, competitors, and needs. Then go ask for the job. It takes about as much time to do that as it does to write those six articles. The difference is you’ll be paid a fair wage because you’re going to ask for and expect no less.
Writers, what do you think of the article? When was the last time you took a job you weren’t proud of? How did you move beyond it?
12 responses to “Content Farms: Is the End Near?”
I think it's great that they're taking the initiative to produce quality results. I'm sure it will take a lot of tweaking the formula to get it right, though. I imagine the companies that thrive on these articles for advertising revenue and site traffic will just bump up their efforts to get around it.
If some of these content mills go down, then other avenues will be on the rise. Content like PLR will probably skyrocket. Yes, I admit that I've worked for PLR producers. They make the moola selling them and you, as the writer, make diddly-squat. That is where the “How to brush a Yak” article would be appreciated. Seriously.
Google has known mills were spam content for a long time. They're MFA sites pure and simple and that was always against the guidelines. They just found a way to bring in enough Adwords revenue that even Google had to stop and decide if the cash was worth the cost in reputation. I knew they'd eventually come around, and I think they still have a long way to go (like tackling article directory spam and free press release distribution site spam as well). But at least they're off to a start.
I have absolutely no sympathy for the news sites. If their content is unique then by all means it should rank well if it's relevant to the search term. If they're redistributing material from elsewhere, that individual page should be buried. Only original sources are supposed to rank well. Regardless of the type of site the exact same piece shouldn't appear constantly in search results. That's a fault in their own business model if they want to compete via search. They're not special. They aren't above the rules the rest of us independent publishers have to follow. Period.
Lori, I'll email you some interesting material I found on one content mill in particular that will be behind an upcoming article. Their own transparency (a good thing) proves what we've said all along — that the VAST majority of their writers don't get impressive stats or earnings and could do better with sites of their own.
Ha! Forget what I just said about that content mill's transparency being a good thing. They must have found out that the info was available publicly and cut access off. Now it tries to make me log in. Because I still have old articles up earning money I still have access to login and view the info, but that wasn't necessary just a couple of weeks ago. Fortunately I saved offline copies of some of the info anyway. 😉
Sadly after reading the article you linked to it doesn't sound like they're talking about real content farms like DMS. They're misusing the term as a synonym for aggregators instead of the mill / farm that creates frequent low quality content that amounts to little more than a rewrite of someone else's material. So for the time being, long live the MFA sites it seems. And there I was hoping they finally came through. At least Demand still realizes they're a major threat based on the IPO info that came out last year.
Wendy, I am SO glad I don't know about these places. The problem isn't so much the farms, though – the problem is writers being enticed by marketing that frames them as successful writers for taking this stuff on.
Jenn, I wonder if their omission of sites like DMS was intentional? I hope they're including in the webspam description, and I hope it's because Google users are complaining in droves about the garbage that shows up on these searches. I've stopped using Google – I want content, not crap posing as content.
One word: Halleluiah! It's a start anyway. Might put some very good writers who put all their eggs in the CM smelly basket out of business though. The "easy" route isn't looking so easy anymore.
Great minds, different hits… I don't 'get' the 'problem' with sites like HuffingtonPost… surely not that they have a point of view? What am I missing?
Before I knew what a content mill was, I'd go about my business doing a Google search and click on eHow or some other site. When I read the article, I couldn't help believe how unhelpful it was. It's funny that even someone who doesn't know better thinks it's crap. I don't understand why people keep clicking the links.
Everyone else has covered your first question Lori, so I'll that the second one. While a few of my earliest pieces weren't exactly great (like the ones butchered by those former sports-writers-turned-trade-pub-editors), they made decent enough clips back in the day. The only job that comes to mind as something I'm not proud of is one that wound up looking nothing like the original.
I've mentioned it here before. A new-to-me editor assigned a first-person account of my family's experience exchanging hand-made gifts. I followed her assignment letter precisely. I even turned it in early. Weeks passed before she responded saying she wanted a rewrite focusing on three gifts projects anyone of any skill level could make in 30 minutes. Right. The things we made took days or weeks. I talked her up to an hour. But that meant finding three lame last minute "gifts" people could slap together with no talent and no real though. I dug up three ideas, provided URLS to online examples as requested. They paid, but she never sent me a copy even after several requests. I finally spotted it online and only one of my examples was used and the "article" looked as if it had been cobbled together in 30 minutes. My name is on it, but I never used it as a clip since 1) it sucks, and 2) less than 1/3 of it is my work.
Oh Paula, that stinks! That's not your fault, but obviously not something you want the world seeing.
Ashley, good eye. 🙂 Most of the stuff I've found that's been generated by content farms tend to be slapped together and not well written. There are exceptions, including the plagiarized piece (complete with stolen illustrations) that the author found and went after eHow for. And like I said, some exceptional writers for some reason think it's easy money (not realizing the damage to the reputation).
Anne, I sent you a note. 🙂
Kathy, amen is right. Now is when these writers need to step up their marketing (meaning learn HOW to market) if they plan to survive.
I'm thrilled with this development. I do a lot of research in support of my copywriting, and I get really tired of ehow and its ilk always being near the top of search results.
Thanks for the link love, Lori.
Thanks for sharing it in the first place, Eileen. 🙂