Constant Content

I've heard rumors that Constant Content only rejects articles for unreasonable reasons and that's why no author makes any money.
Is this true? Of course, I'm going to hear no's, but do explain why these rumors float around.

These rumors come from people who can have their work published on less picky sites, such as AC, and assume that means they are writers. Also, when you are rejected for somehting legit, albeit picky, it does hurt your pride. Some people do not know how to handle this hurt and take it as an affront. You have to be a good writer to write here, and you have to know proper punctuation and spellings, as well as techniques for writing for the internet. But some people make a lot of money here!~

Plenty of authors at CC make money. However, CC is committed to quality content. Rumors get started for a number of reasons. If an author's work is not of the caliber we require, we will reject it. That upsets some people. We remain professional - others take personal offense.

"Sour grapes" explains most rumors...

I've seen a lot of comments on other sites (specifically AC) regarding the rejections on CC. Personally, from what I've seen people are offended (and likely to start rumors) due to the fact that they do not sugar-coat rejections on this site. Also, the standards they have are high and they do not hold your hand through each rejection.

Many writers online are used to sites that cater to new writers or "amateur" writers. CC caters specifically to professional writers so their style may seem harsh to writers that are used to a different style.

Lastly, I think that individuals that are used to sites like AC are somewhat spoiled by the fact that they are very nearly guaranteed payment for their work within a couple of weeks. CC is based on a different model yet in many cases is still faster than print. If a person is used to a model like AC’s, they will likely get an even bigger shock when they deal with standard magazine and book publishers.

That’s just my two cents.

First of all: what would CC gain by rejecting articles for no apparent reason? CC wouldn't make money on those articles, so why punt back any piece that meets the quality standards at this site? It just makes sense to accept the well-written articles and get them "out there" for people to see and, hopefully, buy.

CC will reject articles that do not meet the standards. We're all made aware of what to expect. We can revisit the Help section/FAQs/guidelines any time we want or need a refresher.

But what happens is this:

Some writers start out at other sites. They produce an average-quality piece that is immediately accepted and published. This encourages them to keep doing what they're doing. They figure that, because their pieces aren't being turned down, they're fine the way that they are.

And some writers get the idea to come here and publish these pieces again for usage rights. That's not a bad idea. It's a great way to boost income, in fact.

But then, sometimes at least, CC rejects an article that was just wonderful as far as the other sites were concerned.

The writer of said article either goes for the sour grapes or learns from the rejection and improves. The choice is entirely up to each writer.

Oh, and writers make money here at CC. Some make more than others, but then again some are more productive than others *grins*

[quote]I've heard rumors that Constant Content only rejects articles for unreasonable reasons and that's why no author makes any money.
Is this true? Of course, I'm going to hear no's, but do explain why these rumors float around.[/quote]

Since you've already received some excellent responses to your post, I won't add my two cents, but just fyi. . . the next time you hear or read about these unreasonable reasons, you might want to ask the person to define unreasonable. Once you pinpoint the source of the grievance, decide if you agree or disagree, and then do a little research to determine if you can back up your claim. Viola! An article - either how-to, opinion, or informational - with a great lead-in.

Always look for the slant. . .
Mary B.

Before I started subbing here I poked around and read a lot of the Forum topics. I got a little intimidated by what I read and wondered if I would be able to make it through the rejections. Luckily, an experienced writer here encouraged me to try, and lo and behold I discovered that if your writing is professional and accurate, rejections shouldn't be a problem.

Sub your best work and you'll find that CC is more than fair.

Before I started subbing here I poked around and read a lot of the Forum topics. I got a little intimidated by what I read and wondered if I would be able to make it through the rejections. Luckily, an experienced writer here encouraged me to try, and lo and behold I discovered that if your writing is professional and accurate, rejections shouldn't be a problem.

Sub your best work and you'll find that CC is more than fair.

I think you will find rumors any where you go (offices, schools, online...) & YES, they do expect you to be able to write well to have your articles accepted. I have been here since Novemeber of last year. I HAVE made enough $$$ each and every month to cover my expenses, so authors DO/CAN make $$$ here. I have had rejections on my articles & the way I "look at it" is if you are never challenged in life, what kind of life would you have? I know it is hard to not take it personal, but what I would suggest is to take it as NON-personal as possible. Step back, take a break, talk/discuss it with fellow writers, and most important - learn from it. Then sit back down & get to work! You have to always "consider the source" when dealing with rumors. If you are a good writer you WILL be accepted & just think of how GREAT you will feel then!

GOOD LUCK & MAY we ALL make bunches of $$$!!!
Catnipp333

It may feel like they're being unreasonable at times but they're not, they're just doing their job and making sure you submit your best work. I write for AC too and although it's easier to make money there because they're not nearly as picky I like the fact that CC has a higher standard. I like knowing that the work I've submitted is my best and error free (bonus: you can make more money here).

*side note* I've just sold my very first article here! Yay!

Liberty,
Congratulations! May you sell many more!

Personally I'm a newbie here, and submitted a number of articles all at once not knowing what to expect. Some have been accepted, others rejected, and some still are yet to be reviewed.

I found the rejection process painless. As an aspiring writer I find constructive criticism welcome at any time, as I feel it can only help me to improve and grow. We all mistakes, and I would assume most people here would have had something rejected at one stage or another... the people who can't handle the criticism and turn it into an opportunity to mudsling CC simply don't deserve to be here in the first place, and are wasting valuable opportunities that the rest of us really want and will work hard for.

My rejection letter for one of my articles was so concise and clear, and outlines exactly what I had done wrong. Alternatives and examples were also offered to me in that rejection email, as well as highlighting key points from the rejected article to reiterate what mistakes I had made. The email was professional, to the point and easy to understand. I appreciated the feedback and will use it as a learning experience.

In my opinion, high expectations breed quality, which is why I want to be here. I want to grow as a writer, and to publish things I can be proud of...

Sorry about rambling

[quote="yatrik"]I've heard rumors that Constant Content only rejects articles for unreasonable reasons and that's why no author makes any money.
Is this true? Of course, I'm going to hear no's, but do explain why these rumors float around.[/quote]

Personally speaking I'd have to say that I don't make near the amount of money as those who tend to sell a large amount of articles here, however I can say that I have made money through CC. A decent amount in my opinion. Every reason that I ever got for having an article rejected was reasonable and I could understand why it was rejected. I don't know why such silly rumors would float around. CC is the only website that I use like this in all honesty. I think it mostly has to do with their honesty and the great work that they do here. Hopefully, if there are rumors like you mentioned, people will stop spreading them.

I know nothing about the other site you have all mentioned, but I do know this: I would rather be rejected (which I have been) on CC and have the chance to edit. I would be embarrassed to see a careless mistake in print with my byline.