What Is The Future Of Writing Articles For Income?
70
Why Are Revenue Sharing Sites TighteningTheir Rules?
In the past few weeks the playing field for writers on "revenue sharing sites" has changed. Sites such as the one you are reading this article on, Hubpages, have had to tighten the rules for writers in an effort to improve overall content. The story has even been in the mainstream news and it means big changes for writers who earn income from revenue sharing sites. These changes have hit some writers square in their pocketbooks.
Why is this happening you may ask? The main reason that so many revenue sharing sites are having to enforce new, tighter standards, is that Google has changed the algorithm that its search engine uses. For many years the company was happy to allow "content mills" and "article directories" to flourish. It was a win-win situation for all parties involved. Google made money from selling ads, and members of those content sites made money from revenue sharing. In recent months there were apparently complaints from Google users about queries displaying too many articles from "content farms" in search results, and not enough relative results. Search engines such as "Bing" were beginning to lure away Google searchers to results that did not feature Adsense ads. Since the majority of revenue sharing article sites on the web use Adsense advertising, this was not good for Google, nor for writers who publish articles on those sites.
The Change Has Been Coming For A While
Many of the larger revenue sharing sites have apparently known that these changes were coming for a long time. Demand Media, owner's of eHow, was one of those companies who decided to abandon revenue sharing for its members entirely and begin tightening up content. Others such as Hubpages and Xomba have chosen to tighten up their ships, and try to encourage authors to generate better content so as to offer higher quality search engine results. The concept of a "revenue sharing site" is quickly being replaced with that of a "writing community" or "source of valuable information". This re-branding is a necessary step and members of online writing communities will have to adapt, or be left behind. No longer will a member of any revenue sharing site be able to make good money simply by using clever keywords or other methods to cause search engines to find their content on the web. Now a writer's article will have to offer something useful to the reader, instead of just a collection of words strung together to encourage advertising clicks.
Why Changes To Revenue Sharing Sites Are Good For All Of Us
As the new reality unfolds, there will be sites that emerge as winners and those who end up as losers. Hubpages is one of those sites that will clearly remain at the top of the game, due to a loyal community of writers and a solid plan by management to improve overall content of the site.
As a writer, I personally see this as a challenge and am looking forward to the future. To do my part, I am trying to improve the quality my writing, as well as correct older articles that need some changes. I personally want to take a little extra time, do more research and write an informative and detailed article such as "How To Take A Long Exposure Photograph Of The Moon", and avoid writing those such as "Where To Find A Cheap Lawyer". I also want to expand my mind as a person as I do the necessary research required to create interesting content, and hopefully expand my wallet as I attract readers who actually care what words I type.
As a web searcher, I appreciate more relevant searches as I do research for my articles.
In the end, only articles that offer a reader some real value, and not just draw them in to then follow an advertising link, will earn a writer anything at all.
What are your thoughts on the recent changes to sites that share Adsense revenue with writers? Do you feel this is a positive change, or do you feel upset at having to change the way you write income generating articles? Feel free to leave your comments below, as well as take the poll below this article.
How do you feel about recent changes to revenue sharing sites?
See results without votingCommentsLoading...
I am personally glad to see this. It is why many schools won't accept most online sources for research papers. Anyone can say what they want and kids and gullible adults tend to think that anything in print must be gospel.
When Google pulls up sites like eHow, Answer.com or similar sites I don't open them. They seldom have good solid information and some make it hard for you to back out which I find despicable. If I want to leave a site making it difficult to leave isn't going to make me want to stay or return.
Helpful explanation. I research my information and will cross-check it between two or three sources before submitting an article to Hubpages. Anything that improves the quality of Hubpage articles can only be good thing.
I am still trying to understand the online world. I'll have to take it as it comes.
HubPages has real problems. There's this Filipino woman called Vadette971 who is clearly copying all her articles from Jehovah's Witness publications like AWAKE! or THE WATCHTOWER! She just changes the sentence structure of each sentence but it's word-for-word the usual JW style: start with some hard-hitting factual article then twist the subject around to Jeeeeezuz and Bible Quotes.
So I went to the Jehovah's Witness site; they post some but not all of their back-issues there. I found FOUR EXACT MATCHES between the subjects of their articles and what Vadette was contributing as Hubs. They were yanked off, but no matter what I do, HubPages won't kick off Vadette971 herself. I clearly don't have a complete stack of Watchtower magazines from the 70s and 80s and 90s to mine to check where she gets her hub ideas, but it's clear plagiarism. How much proof does HubPages need before they'll ban a RELIGIOUS author?
Good Morning Doodlebugs!
GREAT Hub! Your sound explanation and positive experience about all the changes are most welcome! Personally, I like all changes that enhance quality! Yes, HubPages will stay a leader in the industry - they have the best founders and team in the business! Thank you so much for sharing!
Dear Pierre, I am so sorry you are feeling such angst over another Hubber! I am not familiar with the Hubber you mention above in your comment! NONE of us appreciates nor condones plagiarism! We all work our little brains into a frenzy coming up with original content all the time!
But remember, HubPages is a pretty open and understanding place to post our writings, thoughts and interests! I may not share the same opinions with most Hubbers, but I do honor their right to have and express those opinions!
There is a learning curve about what is appropriate and what is not! The HubPages team knows this and encourages improvement! They are not going to kick someone off HubPages if they see they are trying to make the appropriate adjustments!
Remember also that for many writers, English is not their first language! So if someone sees the Bible or the Koran being quoted word for word in many Hubs, it may make perfect sense to them to quote from their sacred writings!
Also, plagiarism in other countries has a different definition than in the U.S.! So it may take awhile for some writers to fully understand the rules!
I am a publisher and have written a few completely original book reviews here on HubPages, all which were flagged for "duplicate content" because I quoted directly from the book I was reviewing! It took me time to understand the rules!
The HubPages team does NOT allow plagiarism of any kind! Your reports to HubPages are taken very seriously! Let it go; you wrote HubPages had taken down the duplicate content Hubs! If there are more, they will take care of it!
Your last sentence is very revealing in itself: "How much proof does HubPages need before they'll ban a RELIGIOUS author?" Obviously you and the other Hubber do not share the same religious beliefs! HubPages will not ban an author for their religious beliefs! Not only is it close-minded, it is against the law!
Blessings to all of you for this lively and sensitive debate! Reverend Earth Angel!
I say they are being extra protective of this particular author. If called upon to swear her remaining articles such as on insects, or Borobudur in Indonesia, were NOT lifted sentence-for-sentence from Jehovah's Witness publications, Vadette971 would not be able to say so. Either she indicates that she has permission to paraphrase these published articles (which are not themselves sacred text and ARE subject to copyright), or she's acting incorrectly.
Dearest Pierre,
Thank you for the comment on Doodlebugs Hub!
I know the founders of HubPages personally! Believe me, they play NO favorites! Not even to their own family members! Or closest friends!
The founders and owners of HubPages know playing favorites would be the kiss of death for HubPages!
It would be lovely for you to focus all this amazing energy you have on this subject into Hubs about original content and the many ways of spotting plagiarism! (Without singleling out specific Hubbers!)
It's a difficult topic because of so many "gray" areas and we could all use some lessons! I would read and vote up each and every one!
Thanks again to Doodlebugs!
Blessings Always, Earth Angel!
I'm not sure what I think of the new Google search, because when I've searched for information it often brings up terrible results. I've heard others complain about the same thing.
I'm going to continue writing on Hubpages, but only because I enjoy it. I think there must be better ways to make money though.
I can see and accept the changes of cutting out rubbish. There is and was a lot of it on Google. However, I am a bit upset about having to reduce the pictures on my hub. I think that if you see a full size picture it gives you more an idea about the article.
|
|
Understanding Style: Practical Ways to Improve Your Writing: Joe Glaser
Current Bid: $4.00
|
| No Photo |
Department of the Army Pamphlet No. 1-10 Improve Your Writing
Current Bid: $.99
|















Happyboomernurse Level 8 Commenter 12 months ago
Thanks for explaining why the changes are occurring. I agree that in the long run this will open up opportunities for writers who prefer substance to fluff.