Writing for the Web

Over the weekend, I talked to a friend who was stressed out about some web content she was writing. Since most of the writing I do for a “real audience” these days is web writing, I thought I might pass on some of what I’ve learned to her–and to you.

1. Think short. This is probably the most important thing to remember when writing web copy. Most people don’t have the time or the inclination to scroll down a LONG document or to page through many screens to read. They’re reading quickly before they go to work, or between projects at their desks, or on a cell phone screen in the airport. If you can’t keep what you’ve written below 600 words–and even if you can–consider breaking your piece up into subheads, with each section reading about 150 words apiece.
2. Web users don’t read; they scan. Understanding how readers use the web is crucial to web writing. Most folks online have found your writing by entering keywords into a search engine; they’re looking for that one bit of information that applies to them. If it’s buried in a treatise, they’re likely to get frustrated and go someplace else.
3. Search is key. I’m not yet the expert on SEO (search engine optimization) that I’d like to be, but I do know that a lot rides on whether your writing contains words or phrases people are searching. As such, you can throw out that old “print” rule of varying things up by using synonyms, unique phrasing, and SAT-words. Instead, use the words people are likely to be searching–and sneak them in more than once.
4. Be conversational and clear. Folks aren’t looking for the latest literary masterpiece when they’re reading online. They’re looking for interesting, quick information. They’re also coming from diverse educational and occupational backgrounds. That old rule about writing to a “sixth-grade reading level,” definitely applies to the web.
5. Be direct. In other words, avoid passive sentence construction. Passive sentences generally add length to your work, and they make the writing lethargic. The New Moon editors’ manual said passive sentences were like, “sentences that lay around in their pajamas and refuse to do any actual work.” You can think of your readers in the same way; while you don’t want lazy sentences, accept that you’ll have lazy readers. Make your writing do all the work so they don’t have to.

Pros and Cons of Writing for Content Sites

Pros

• With all the content writing sites available, there’s a good chance you’ll find something that jives with the type of writing YOU want to do.
• The Internet now presents more opportunities to make money off your writing than ever before.
• Your work is viewed by a real audience.
• You determine the size of your workload and when and where you will complete it.
• You build a diverse portfolio.
• The work is steady.
• There’s large potential to earn residual or “passive” income — your articles can continue to bring in money as long as they’re on the ‘net, without you having to put any additional work into them.

Cons

• The pay is often low, sometimes ridiculously so.
• It’s difficult to rely on content writing as your only income, as you’ll have to write a LOT of content before it can start paying off in big ways.
• The lower pay on the “write what you want” websites makes it hard to devote time to writing about your interests; instead, I tend to commit most of my time to websites that promise an upfront payment, even if the topics interest me less.
• The return on your time investment varies, depending upon how efficient a writer you are. The slower you write, the less payback you’ll receive for your time.
• Writing for content sites does not necessarily increase your credibility as a writer or expert. Like self-publishing, people in the industry know that not all content sites have quality control; as such, they may not perceive you as an expert when they read your article on Associated Content the way they would if they saw it on the Mayo Clinic website, no matter how much you know.

I’d like to experiment with more content sites and build up a healthy pool of articles that could earn residual income. But for now, monetary concerns restrict the amount of time I’m willing to devote to experimentation. But I definitely encourage writers to try it; getting paid for your writing is good, even if that pay isn’t quite the figure you fantasize about.

Content Writing Sites: What are They?

A friend of mine (who, incidentally, has a great blog here) recently asked about content writing sites. I realized that I mention them often in passing but haven’t actually defined them in this blog. Basically, content writing sites are sites that are hungry for content–usually text, but sometimes video or other formats as well. They’re usually quite easy to write for, some of them not even requiring an application process. As they view it, the more content they have, the better. With a lot of content, their chances of showing up in search engines are better; more visibility in search engines means more click-through, which means more people will see the ads on the site/purchase the products on the site, which means the site makes more money. Most of these sites offer some sort of payment to writers as incentive, although it’s quite minimal in some cases. Also, there are varying levels of quality control on these sites, with some of them focused on any content, period, while others find it important to maintain credibility. At any rate, content-writing sites make it easier than ever for folks to earn a little money freelancing on the side. Below are some of the content writing sites I’ve explored.

• Associated Content – Associated content lets you write about anything. You can choose upfront payments for content you’re essentially “selling” to them, or click-through based earnings on content you’ve published elsewhere. I’ve tried uploading several pieces from my blogs for click-through based earnings; unfortunately, Associated Content basically accuses me of plagiarizing every time because they do searches and find my content on my blogs, claiming it already exists on the Internet and is not associated with my name. And if content from this blog isn’t associated with my name, I don’t know what is. I’ve basically decided AC is more work than they’re worth.
• Textbroker – Textbroker is a content-writing site that acts as the middle-man between writers and other sites desiring content. You can choose what to write from a list of available topics. The pay is ridiculously low — about $2 per article when you start out, with the potential to earn more. I’ve never bothered to put in the time with those kinds of rates.
• Ehow – Ehow accepts content from anyone, and your earnings are based on how many people view your article. There are no upfront payments. Most of my articles from Demand Studios end up here, but the payment from Demand is better than going directly through Ehow because Demand knows what people are most likely to be searching.
• Suite101 – I’ve never written for Suite101, and most of what I know of them comes from Freelance Home Writer’s blog. In a nutshell, they pay per click, no upfront payments, similar to Associated Content – but with a better reputation for high-quality content. They require an application process and have editors work with their content writers.
• Demand Studios – Like Textbroker, Demand Studios fields content requests from other websites. You can choose from a massive, ever-changing list of topics, with payment usually ranging from $5 to $15 per article. You can also write revenue-share articles for Demand Studios, for which there is no upfront payment but the potential to earn on an article indefinitely over time. (A recent Demand Studios email claimed that the same article that would have earned you $15 upfront will earn you about $80 in revenue share over 5 years. But who can wait that long? That’s why I do a little of both.) Demand Studios requires an application process and has recently become more strict about their content, requiring references for each article and employing fact-checkers. This makes writing for them take a bit longer, but I respect their measures to weed out sloppy content. Because of the upfront payments and variety of topics, Demand Studios is the only site I write for on a regular basis.
• Helium – I’ve only discovered Helium recently, so I haven’t written for them yet, but there are a few things I really like about them. One is that they have different “channels” (topics) you can write for. They pay per click for most articles, although upfront payment seems like an option for their higher-performing writers. The best part about Helium is their marketplace section, where you can submit articles to various providers seeking content for the potential to earn substantially more than you’ll find on other content-writing sites. The competition also seems to be less stiff than at sites like Elance.

There are tons of other content writing sites out there, but these are the ones I have personal experience with. My friend Jenny also has a great post that covers content writing. Doing a search on “write for us” will usually pull up hundreds of sites that want your content.

Lacey, expert on . . . everything

A bunch of my articles just went up on Ehow. Is there anything I can help you with?

• Perhaps you have nasty acne, but don’t want to use nasty drugs?
• Worried your kitty might have had a stroke? (Don’t worry, kitty strokes are rare.) But scabies and Feline Herpes Virus-1 are much more common. And of course, it always helps to be able to read your cat’s emotions.
• Think a nursing career is for you?

My pride and joy is an article about how to cage a cat, because I learned all those lessons the hard way, but that one isn’t up yet.

Content Writing Made My Dreams Come True

OK, the subject line might exaggerate — but just a little.

Although I’ve been an approved writer since January, I just recently started writing for Demand Studios. Before this, I’d always been so busy with my other clients that I only had the chance to give Demand Studios a cursory check. Usually, the topics weren’t in my area of expertise; I think a good general rule might be that, if you don’t understand the title, you probably shouldn’t write the article.

But last week, I discovered that a lot of medical titles had come through. Alongside theology, medicine is one of my true intellectual loves. When I worked on New Moon magazine, I would always vie to work with the Body Language articles, and I usually got them — although I was always a bit flabbergasted that not everyone wanted them as much as I did. I mean, there’s no one in the world that this stuff doesn’t apply to. We all have bodies, right?

I’ve often internally bemoaned the fact that I didn’t go into a medical profession — usually when I’m feeling a bit dismayed at the chronically low income my chosen profession predicts. But then I remember that people who work in the medical professions run a higher chance of coming across vomit in their day-to-day life than I do, and then I remember why I didn’t go to nursing or medical school.

So I’ve fantasized about medical writing, wondering exactly how one does land a cushy gig like that. But in the past week, I’ve written two articles about bipolar disorder (with another on the way), three about ADHD, one about autism, and one about acne. At least part of my question has been answered: content writing is one way to earn both experience and money doing the kind of writing you’ve always dreamed of doing.

Last Year’s Publication, #2

I got a copy of the BiWomen newsletter that published my article, “Kids Keep me Kloseted” yesterday.

A few of my thoughts –

1. I’m sort of bummed that she didn’t keep my original spelling of Kloseted, but I guess that’s an editor’s perogative.

2. This article has “jumps”, meaning it appears on about four pages of the newsletter. Eeek, I really do need to learn to be more concise.

3. Other than the title, I don’t think anything was changed, but I haven’t done a microscopic comparison (and don’t think I will).

4. It’s nice to be in print. I must do it again sometime.

Yes, you, too, can publish.

Yesterday I got an email from my friend and fellow writer, Jenny Armstrong, with the subject line, “WHOO-HOO!” I knew that a subject line like that could only mean one thing: publication.

Much to my delight, I was right. (My writers’ group believes publishing success is contagious, so it’s especially exciting any time one of us makes a sell.) Jenny’s article, a fictional email from the Pharisees to God regarding this Jesus fellow, will be printed in the July 2009 issue of Plain Truth magazine. The article manages to be both hilarious and thought-provoking, and it’s a good read regardless of where you personally stand on the Jesus issue.

So, I told Jenny I’d like to plug her success in my blog, and I asked her if she had any advice she’d like to include about the sell. What I got was this wonderful guest post. She says:

1. Write what you know.

Okay, that is probably the most stale piece of writing advice on the planet, but when you’re submitting to magazines, (or anyone else), it helps to know your subject inside out. We’ve all read half-baked articles by people who didn’t have a good grasp on their subject. It shows. Submit an article about something you have a deep knowledge of, and that will show, too.

A variation on this tip is to write to who you know. Have you read the magazine yourself? Are you familiar with their audience’s tastes and needs? Magazines are kind of like social cliques–there are certain norms, certain jokes, certain subjects and tones of voice that you need to pay attention to if you want to break in.

2. Don’t be afraid to use your voice!

Shortly after starting the article I just sold, I changed directions completely. I was afraid the tone was too irreverent, too antagonistic to get my point across. I toiled for hours on my “cleaned up” version, making sure my arguments were watertight, my perspective inoffensive while still being truthful. Then I showed them both to my husband.

“I think you should submit the first one,” he said. “No question about it.”

When I pressed him on it, he said the first one “sounded like me” and got the point across better, and that he had read lots of articles like the second one. It wasn’t what I wanted to hear after all the hours spent on my amended article, but after looking them over, it became apparent that he was right (and that the second one was a total snoozer–he had been nice enough not to come right out and say it!). I submitted the first one, and it was my unique voice and perspective that caught the editor’s eye and won me a spot in their magazine.

3. Only God is perfect.

So, in Genesis, God made the world and saw that it was good. Not perfect. Not faultless. Just good. And He clicked the “send” button anyways.

You will never write a perfect article, and you shouldn’t beat yourself up trying to. Instead, use that energy to write a lot of good articles. Then swallow your perfectionism, hold your nose, and click “send.”

That is BY FAR the hardest step for me, but my recent sucess has encouraged me to submit more, to use my voice and unique perspective on the world to speak to issues that matter to me. Write passionately, write truthfully, write the articles only you can write, and then put them out there. Because people need to hear you.

This is good stuff, people. I especially love #2, and as a veteran magazine editor myself, I can back Jenny’s advice 100%. It is true that you should know a magazine’s “norms” before you submit, no doubt about it. The magazine editor on the other end will be judging you on whether what you’ve written will “fit” with her audience or not. But if your understanding of the market and subject matter are good, but your “voice” is a little out of line with that particular magazine’s voice, all is not lost. As an editor, I always looked at content first, voice second.

That doesn’t mean you can be sloppy as long as you know your subject; it’s absolutely true that editors judge folks harshly if they cut corners with their submission (really, why should we give your piece adequate time and consideration if you didn’t?). But one of the reasons editors exist is to blend the many different voices from many different authors into one coherent magazine “voice.” So, I’ve never rejected a piece based on voice alone. On the other hand, I’ve moved pieces to the top of the pile that have an incredibly unique voice.

So, the bottom line? You’ve got nothing to lose by being bold and honest with your voice, and everything to gain. (OK, maybe not everything, but at least a better chance at publication. And to a writer, that can certainly feel like ‘everything’!)