Looks like my last post stirred a little tempest in a teapot, so I thought I’d address the Associated Content issue from an editor’s perspective. It would be easy to assume from my last post that I don’t think you should ever use Associated Content. Quite the contrary.
Should you use Associated Content posts as writing samples? As evidence that you are a published writer? HELL NO. Not for any serious publication, anyway. Do you want to know the secret? What makes editors (not just me) turn their nose up at this?
Two words–editorial review.
As in, there isn’t much doing at Associated Content, and good editors know that. The simple fact is, posts on Associated Content have value to a writer, but not quite in the way most people assume when they start publishing there. Editors know that there’s no real motivation to edit someone’s posts on AC because they are NOT in the business of publishing in the same manner as Travel + Leisure, Poets and Writers, or Spin Magazine. Associated Content is a completely different business model, and doesn’t require the same kind of editorial rigor you’d get from somebody behind the desk at Fangoria or Scottish Life.
If you want to write for publication, you need clips from magazines and websites that conform to INDUSTRY STANDARDS about the quality and content of the writing. A blogger doesn’t need to worry as much about content–look at the fast-and-loose writing that goes on in this very column–but I promise you, my writing for publication is much more precise and on-target. It’s AGONIZED over in a way that much of the stuff you read on Associated Content is not.
Writers, you CAN use AC to increase your Google clout. Bloggers can profit from this, and it’s a great thing to be able to say (yes, I am bragging here) that my quite common name turns up in the top five results in Google. How did I do that? By getting my name EVERYWHERE on the net, including posts on AC.
I used AC in the early days of my fulltime freelance career to A) pad my pockets with cheap and easy cash B) to increase my Google clout and C) to pad my pockets with cheap and easy cash. Did I say that twice? Yes I did. For emphasis.
Freelancers need all the money they can get. AC is great for quick cash, but I would NEVER sign my rights away to something I could use later for bigger bucks, so let the poster beware. Instead, I wrote about stuff I knew I’d never need to use anywhere else.
I sure as HELL never used an AC post as a writing sample, and I also have turned my snotty little nose up at people who do when their resumes and cover letters come across my desk. Why? Because it displays a fundamental cluelessness about the way this game works. And I don’t have time to coddle you. Neither do 99% of the editors you are likely to meet. You need to have your work in front of and approved by editors who ACTUALLY EDIT. People who try to pass off material they wrote for AC don’t realize that the editors viewing those clips know you didn’t get any kind of editorial scrutiny. Technically, they may be published on the web, but they aren’t what me and my editor chummies would call ready for prime time. Even if the clips are frickin’ brilliant, the lack of editorial rigor at AC gives them a taint.
Call those clips blog posts, call them “content”, call them Granny Sue in a flaming baby cart, but don’t call them PUBLISHED CLIPS.
Do your homework. Ask questions on writer’s forums, read writing websites and learn about how you need to do business in your chosen part of the freelance writing game. Or, you can disregard my last two sentences and sit on your thumbs wondering why nobody is responding to your queries. It’s up to you. Don’t take MY word for it, go out and do your own research. One day, you’ll think to yourself that the cynical snotty guy on Freelance-Zone.com was actually RIGHT about something.
Fancy that.
You are freaking me out Joe…but I LIKE it!! You are encouraging waves of epiphany in my little red head. Bring it!
Joe,
I think the stir with your previous clip was due to the fact that you did not really make that clear. Had you specified “for print” then the stir would have been more of a simmer. LOL.
Some of your points are well taken, though I still find it short sighted and borderline offensive to dismiss someone out of hand for using an AC clip. It is blinding you to some fantastic writers.
Just my opinion.
I have to agree with Rodney. When it came to personal and upfront coverage of the latest hurricanes as well as resources for staying on top of the information, AC writers were often getting more hits from people using search engines than many of the major news sources. Information was getting to people who needed it and getting to them quickly, as their comments later indicated.
The ability to publish instantly online at sites that tie directly into Google searches can be an advantage when it comes to readers who want timely information. By the time it makes it into print, it can be old news.
Some of the slides from people who were at the DNC on AC compare to what I’ve seen in magazines for quality and composition. Having noted that, I do agree that the quality of writing can vary widely there and is often a point of discussion with the writers who want the site to have only quality content. Citizen journalism can be a messy process but when it works…..it can also be pretty amazing. I still think writers should be judged on individual pieces of writing. My first jobs came from cold calls and an editor who liked my pitch and let me write “on spec.” She became a regular client and I won national awards from writing for that publication.
This discussion has been really enlightening! Jcorn’s comment about writers wanting the site to have only quality content is very telling. It seems that (from what I have been able to gather from this discussion and what I have heard before) there seem to be a couple of different types of writers using AC. Those looking to make a quick buck by offloading whatever they churn out or have on hand and those who are working hard at their craft and take real pride in everything they write.
I’m beginning to see why this thread has ruffled more than a few feathers!
Speaking from my perspective–I work a good deal in print and AC has not had the best rep there from things I’ve heard from other writers/editors in the biz. I personally don’t know much about the site other than what I have heard. I’m going to make it a point to go on there and do a little looking around to see for myself……….
Very illuminating thread! Thanks all for your thoughts on this!
Since I think this has been a very civilized debate and I appreciate that, I’d like to give other examples that helped me think more positively about AC. First, keep in mind that many people who come to AC are looking for information quickly. They may have other needs than someone who sits down to read a magazine article. I like to read books and magazines, including complex ones (and…ahem..I hope people check out my piece about Edgar Sawtelle if they get a chance, a minor digression here, but I do read…and that book has been an oddity for many reasons). Having a long background as a bookseller gave me a historical perspective on that.
Consider this: when a hurricane is coming or someone has to find a particular hot item NOW, a magazine lag – even a weekly magazine – can be too long. AC helps fill that gap. I nearly listed a ton of hurricane resources for people, including breaking news, but I was simply too tired from writing an article on how to troubleshoot a water heater, one I think is detailed and informative and based on personal experience, too. I’ve also written (again, from personal experience) about how to transcribe interviews, something I learned on the fly, pitch hitting for other writers who bailed on projects for city magazines. I’ve told people how to skin a deer from top to bottom and explored how and why people stockpile food now.
What may be muddying the waters is that print magazines and SEO (search engine optimization) aren’t always aligned. Consider this as well: Atlantic Magazine did away with fiction. Others stopped having summer fiction issues. People want info in short bits, easily found, and are moving to online publications and searches to get it. Many magazines are finding it hard to stay afloat, according to the editors who talk to me 😉 Your experience may differ.
Anyway, sorry for this thesis of a comment but I felt the conversation deserved some more input.
I brought up the fiction because finding fiction online is easier than finding it in many magazines, except for literary ones that people often stop buying when money gets tight. Amazon actually had a contest for short fiction and people could read those pieces free. Things are moving when it comes to how we get our content. I intend to be where the reader are, one way or the other.
Sorry, meant “readers”. I often type quickly and can’t find an edit button for these comments.
(I hear you on the edit button for comments–all is forgiven if you don’t judge me too harshly!)
Very interesting.
I personally think that print mags will be around for some time yet. Those that adapt, that is. The format needs to be different–just as you said w/ the web. People like snippets and don’t have extra time to get knee deep in stuff. I agree.
But-
I think that many people still love the feel of a mag (or book for that matter) in their hands. Until the generation that has grown up on this type of thing is a non-factor, I think mags and books will remain in demand. Beyond that–I don’t know. And since I am part of the generation that was raised that way–I guess I’m not that concerned about it. ; )
That said–I LOVE the instant gratification of writing for the web. I enjoy the more casual tone in some cases, the quick turnaround and publishing and the faster pace of things in general. It appeals to my nature–which can be somewhat impatient when it comes to the length of time in print that things often take.
I’m plugged in to some pretty stable magazines, so I’ve not been hit too hard by the economics of all that is going on out there. Plus, I do try to diversify, so I also do SEO writing, marketing material, and web work as well. I do not think it’s a good idea to put all those lovely apples in one basket!
Don’t apologize for the “thesis” of a comment—I love the thoughts! As writers, it really helps to dialogue with each other. Even if we don’t all agree on everything. Everyone is different and that is the beauty of sharing things with each other.
Catherine – I collect vintage magazines so you’ll get no argument from me about preferring the feel of a magazine or book in my hands. Here’s an interesting twist, though…people tend to be have more allergies, according to my allergist, perhaps due to environmental factors, perhaps not. Magazines today are full of perfume ads. People with allergies have problems with that. Also, think of this mindboggling fact. The entire New Yorker magazine, from first issue to now, is available on CDs. I bought that. Each year is available for current owners of the CDs. That is a new development and an interesting one.
I love to read while in the bathtub but do try to restrict my reading to magazines or books that aren’t valuable. There is no substitute for some vintage books and magazines. However, sometimes there IS a substitute and that is quick info, likely to be outdated, found on the fly online. Or even a recipe or possibly classic work found online.
Finally, AC actually has videos and…guess what?….a librarian at our local blind school uses them! Funding issues prevent his students from getting audiobooks so he turns to AC. Perhaps now you can see how some niche areas, seemingly insignificant, can be very significant for the right user. My son learned to cook chicken noodle soup by following an AC video. Another one, timely for back to school season and visual learners, showed how to cover a book in a cover made with a brown paper bag. I don’t know why teachers make this a requirement but people were searching for it.
And when they wanted to know how to make 3D glasses for Hannah Montana concerts, I wrote about it….and reaped the rewards of those page views 🙂
Great observations! (I don’t have allergies, but HATE the perfume ads! I have noticed less of them these days, though…)
I think print mags serve a different purpose–or should serve a different purpose. I will say I get my hard news online. No doubt that it is quick and easy. But one thing I do not want to do is read an in-depth feature online; or a book. I read quickly and scrolling on my computer drives me mad. I don’t dispute that online pubs have a place–indeed a rising one–but I do think that print will be around for a good while yet.
The videos on AC and utube are an interesting development, and one that I think is pretty neat. I love that you wrote about the 3D glasses–that is a great topic with excellent rewards, I’m sure!
Also, I have heard that the eye does not like reading online. The eyeball has to make tons of “microadjustments” constantly that it does not when you read print. Since many people work on computers these days, this may wind up being a very big deal. (Wish I could recall where I heard that info, but alas, I cannot.)
I dislike reading online and always have. It bothers my eyes, so I can buy the “microadjustment” thing. Whenever possible, I print research to read rather than doing so online. (And yes–I recycle and use those sheets multiple times for scratch, notes, etc!) I adore my computer, but I’m afraid I am an “old timer” when it comes to how I like my info! Quick bites are fine online, but you’ll find me with a mag or book as well….