Don't worry John, Upmarket didn't understand either! LOL
Upmarket, what I was talking about wasn't rewriting my own articles. I've seen a number of freelance assignments where they have wanted someone to rewrite other people's articles. That's the projects that I'm not so sure on the ethics about. For instance, say that I accepted a writing project, and they gave me 20 articles, one of which was one you'd wrote, and they told me to rewrite it so that it said the same thing, had the same formating etc etc etc, but was worded differently. I'd be using your research, your ideas and your spin on the topic, and I'd be getting paid for it. This is the kind of project I'm talking about.
I think as writers most of us "rewrite" articles of our own, but we usually rewrite them from a different angle or make them "unique" in some other way than just changing the words.
Katie-Anne
Links with our articles
Moderators: Celeste Stewart, Ed, Constant
-
Katie-Anne
- Posts: 96
- Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 6:05 pm
- Location: Sweden
- Contact:
-
constant-content
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1330
- Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 9:20 am
UpMarket Content wrote:The goal of rewriting your very own article is to make it unique in the eyes of the search engines so it doesn't seem like duplicate content, of course. So if someone sees one of my articles and wants a "unique" version of it, they just pay me to rewrite it. I personally don't see as much point in selling multiple licenses of content to different publishers unless it's on password-protected sites; once the content is no longer original and is out there published on other sites, well, why not just get free reprint content?
As for getting links from distributing content dying away, why would you think it's dying away? Reciprocal linking is definitely dying away, paid linking is already in Google's cross-hairs, so how will a new site get links in a reliable way? At any rate, the links themselves do generate natural traffic so they're almost an alternative to PPC.
Sorry I just noticed someone had replied to this when I got a hit in my referrer logs from my sig.
Yes.... but have to understand, not everyone is looking for content for the search engines. Many people are just looking for content to keep visitors interested in a site.... In this case the content doesn't have to be unique. Search engines are not the only reason to have content on your site, its just one. Free content is normally outdated and poorly written (in some cases), and it usually written just to get a link out there. And some times you can't find free content on certain subjects.
Agree with Admin...
Hi,
Just thought I'd jump in here with my two cents worth. I've been in business on the web for over five years, and must say that content is important, and it's not only to build search engine popularity. The more content you have, the more your visitors and potential customers will appreciate your site and the longer they will stay in your site. They're more likely to trust you as an actual business when you offer lots of free information up front. This is one of the primary selling angles of top marketers such as Jay Abraham. The Internet just provides a different avenue to get information more quickly. We should still be focusing on the customer's wants and needs - not just the search engines.
Content at my own site is related to the products I sell and services I offer. The content itself is bringing in lots of se traffic even though it was not written for this purpose. I didn't even know about seo for content when I placed all the content on my site, and they still listed all of my pages because it was good content and valuable to surfers.
So, content will probably always serve these two main purposes for the serious business website owner.
Hope this helps!
Candicep
Just thought I'd jump in here with my two cents worth. I've been in business on the web for over five years, and must say that content is important, and it's not only to build search engine popularity. The more content you have, the more your visitors and potential customers will appreciate your site and the longer they will stay in your site. They're more likely to trust you as an actual business when you offer lots of free information up front. This is one of the primary selling angles of top marketers such as Jay Abraham. The Internet just provides a different avenue to get information more quickly. We should still be focusing on the customer's wants and needs - not just the search engines.
Content at my own site is related to the products I sell and services I offer. The content itself is bringing in lots of se traffic even though it was not written for this purpose. I didn't even know about seo for content when I placed all the content on my site, and they still listed all of my pages because it was good content and valuable to surfers.
So, content will probably always serve these two main purposes for the serious business website owner.
Hope this helps!
Candicep
Well, OK.
I can understand building content on a site to increase traffic to the site, maning more hits equals money. That's basic marketing. And I can certainly understand posting your own stuff on your site. The more content on a site, the more credibility to potential buyers. I can see where free stuff can create a volume of interest. I've seen other content sites, especially those fishing for articles to boost their credibilty, offering content writers the "opportunity" to write for them, and in so doing building the site's credibility at the expense of writers looking for markets. I'm not saying that all sites are like this, but quite a few seem to be on fishing expeditions that leaves me less trusting,
What also bothers me from a writer's view, is the offer made to rewrite someone else's stuff, even tho it was free. My feeling is that even if articles are "free" they still are the property of the writer who posted them. If any site owner wants content rewritten for a site, they should contact the author directly. Maybe the author would be willing to do it for free, maybe not. I certainly would not, but, then again, I'm not posting stuff to build links to my site either. Offering another wriiter the "opportunity" to rewrite someone else's material, unless it is stuff that has been purchased outright, still smacks of plagarism and a lack of ethics. Seems the viewpoint expressed is that the written word has no value, yet is necessary in order to build traffic. What's next? Borrow material posted here and there, then say "oops" we made a mistake and BTW now that you are here, take a look st the stuff we have for sale? See our volume, we must be really big, right? Look at all our content.
It seems to me that since there is great concern for duplicated material, with Google penalizing and downgrading sites, and content site buyers wary of any material that has been copied, ready to pounce upon the hapless "writer" who claims originality, and rightfully so, then there should be the same concern for original material that somehow ends up on another site. When this occurs, both content site owner and writer are the losers.
If you want to build a site, you will need to invest in content to bring traffic. It's clearly a case of "If you build it, they will come." But if you expect me to build it for you for free, guess again.
I can understand building content on a site to increase traffic to the site, maning more hits equals money. That's basic marketing. And I can certainly understand posting your own stuff on your site. The more content on a site, the more credibility to potential buyers. I can see where free stuff can create a volume of interest. I've seen other content sites, especially those fishing for articles to boost their credibilty, offering content writers the "opportunity" to write for them, and in so doing building the site's credibility at the expense of writers looking for markets. I'm not saying that all sites are like this, but quite a few seem to be on fishing expeditions that leaves me less trusting,
What also bothers me from a writer's view, is the offer made to rewrite someone else's stuff, even tho it was free. My feeling is that even if articles are "free" they still are the property of the writer who posted them. If any site owner wants content rewritten for a site, they should contact the author directly. Maybe the author would be willing to do it for free, maybe not. I certainly would not, but, then again, I'm not posting stuff to build links to my site either. Offering another wriiter the "opportunity" to rewrite someone else's material, unless it is stuff that has been purchased outright, still smacks of plagarism and a lack of ethics. Seems the viewpoint expressed is that the written word has no value, yet is necessary in order to build traffic. What's next? Borrow material posted here and there, then say "oops" we made a mistake and BTW now that you are here, take a look st the stuff we have for sale? See our volume, we must be really big, right? Look at all our content.
It seems to me that since there is great concern for duplicated material, with Google penalizing and downgrading sites, and content site buyers wary of any material that has been copied, ready to pounce upon the hapless "writer" who claims originality, and rightfully so, then there should be the same concern for original material that somehow ends up on another site. When this occurs, both content site owner and writer are the losers.
If you want to build a site, you will need to invest in content to bring traffic. It's clearly a case of "If you build it, they will come." But if you expect me to build it for you for free, guess again.