Constant Content

I commonly use more than one subheading as a way of breaking up sections of an article. Is there any sort of policy (positive or negative) regarding the use of multiple subheadings on constant content?

The following may be of help:
http://www.constant-content.com/blog/?p=49

Thanks,
Ed

I am confused by this blog post. I didn't think we could use bold, and I didn't think we could use italics on the text in the paragraphs. I've had many articles approved just with the spacing that way (same as example). please clarify.

Also I've been getting a lot more rejections for revise clarity but I haven't dropped the quality of my articles. Meanwhile at least one author has had a lot of articles published this week with two or three titles misspelled (the big, bold red titles on CC's sales pages). it feels like we have more than one editor, or just a very harried editor. But it is getting confusing to know if articles will be approved. I've never had six rejections in two weeks before or problems with formatting the short summary correctly.

Thanks for any insight. Sorry, Ed, if you are overwhelmed and getting frustrated with us. But I feel like it is risky to even submit new articles. Therefore, I have edited everything again and reduced my submissions rate by 75%.

Thanks Ed,
I submitted an article for review yesterday. Within the file, I used bold lettering, in addition to larger point text, for the subheadings. Also, I couldn't find a way to use bold letters on the preview, so I just separated the subheadings from the text with a double space. Is that an acceptable format or are they going to be issues in terms of the article being accepted?

Also, is there a designated time frame for the review or does the length of time the review takes depend on the volume of articles being submitted?

To answer some questions this thread has brought up:

1) Double spacing between heading and paragraph is good practice.

2) There is no designated time frame for reviews. Time depends upon volume as well as number of customer requests.

3) Bold font and italics are permitted to a limited degree, but the entire article may not be submitted in bold or italic font.

4) There has not been a change in editorial staff. If an article is not deemed suitable or clear, it is rejected. Authors are expected to learn from their mistakes and improve their work. Articles that do not make thorough explanations, that contain instances of awkward wording, that do not present useful information, or that raise more questions that they answer will not be accepted. Our guidelines state that articles must contain useful information, be error-free, and exhibit quality writing. This is more thoroughly outlined in the following blog post:
http://www.constant-content.com/blog/?p=99

Writers who do not consistently submit quality work will see rejections. There isn't a single article submitted to Constant Content that is perfect and can't use improvement. When a rejection is made, it is the author's responsibility to consider the entire article carefully and take time to make corrections.

In addition, another author put it best when she said, "I've found it's not productive to search for everyone else's errors that have managed to slip by the CC editor. It is ALWAYS easier to spot flaws in someone else's writing rather than our own."

Thanks,
Ed

Also, I think that Ed is like a teacher who expects more from us as we develop. While a borderline word choice or clarity issue may have been okay in the past, a rejection could very well be an "I know you can do better because I've seen you do better" nudge.

I know that my own writing quality goes up and down. My quality is often affected by: being rushed, being bored, falling into bad habits, staying up too late, trying to write before the coffee kicks in and so on. It also goes up when I'm inspired or challenged or after having read something truly great.

So, as authors we are aiming for continuous improvement then! Keeps us on our toes and a high standard for CC! It is frustrating when you happen to notice other errors that do slip past the gatekeeper, but I think what Ed is saying is to keep focused on our own writing and how we can improve. I like that idea. I also love the idea of continually improving and offering quality articles, instead of just writing for the sake of writing - when tired, or waiting for the coffee to kick in, for example.

Personally, I've set myself a task to get at least one article on the premium list. I've tried several in depth, thoroughly researched articles and just haven't quite got there yet. The articles are getting approved ok, but obviously just not reaching that high bar of 'premium'. I think it's a great practice to aim high and look for ways to improve our writing as authors.

By the way, in answer to the original question - I use bold sub-headings all the time in my articles, as I find it gives a good structure. In fact, I usually write the introduction, then the sub headings and then go back and fill in the text between the subheadings, then write the conclusion. This is how I organise my thoughts and work towards a clear thread within the article. The bold formatting does not appear in the long summary, but my subheadings are clear anyway, by the use of spacing, as you have suggested.

Hayley

The goal of writing for the premium content section is an excellent one. Not only does this goal help you write an article that can command a higher price, it forces you to look hard at your writing - word by word, sentence by sentence, paragraph by paragraph. In addition to the technical aspects, it also forces you to consider uniqueness and the overall approach. The extra attention paid trying to craft CC "premium" rated articles will show through on your subsequent submissions as well. When you do land in the premium section, knowing that you earned a nod from Ed is priceless!

Who's in for trying to write just one "premium" article for March 2009? It sounds like a good challenge to me! (Sorry if I'm going off topic here - maybe we should start a new thread?)

One of the topics in this thread was not addressed. Why a particular author is getting so many articles prioritized over everyone else even if you look past the errors. When new authors see the quality of some high-volume submitters, it probably makes them wonder how the system really works.I admit I've been a high volume submitter more than once.

A high volume of health articles (among other topics) was not in response to any public requests this week. Ed was quick to approve my article for a public request on Monday just like everyone else. That is not in question.

It may be because I've had rejections, as noted above, but I have an article sitting in the queue from Feb. 20. If the rejections are the reason, I can accept that. I've seen articles approved this week that were just submitted on Monday, Tuesday, etc. Everyone can see this because the site now shows names of pending article titles. You can match that with an article once it appears at the front of the new articles. We need a fair system. There is no blame, just room for improvement just like our individual writing efforts.

Best of luck with your goals aiming for the Premium Section.

While articles are supposed to be approved in order, I believe Ed has some discretion. Ed has mentioned that sometimes he lets an article rest so he can look at it with fresh eyes and put his personal feelings aside. I wouldn't want an article rejected simply because Ed disagrees with a point I might make or is irritated at me for something I said on the forums. Being fair in this way is admirable.

Ed should have some discretion as far as how he tackles his workload. If he wants to approve articles in batches based on writer or topic, that really should be his perogative. It's probably more efficient than going in order since he can use past submission histories or customer request info as a guide.

As far as prioritizing certain writers, that's a tough call. Having edited the work of others, I know that I can depend on consistency from some while also knowing that others need special attention. It's easier for me to look at the work of a single writer at once rather than jumping back and forth. I know that a writer with a consistent history of clean work is most likely to submit clean copy. This is a judgment call with its risks. Typos and minor errors do happen even amongst the best writers and may be overlooked when quickly scanning the article. Ed does a great job at screening CC articles, but it's ultimately each individual's responsibility to submit clean copy - and no one gets paid for an article if a customer doesn't buy it.

While getting a subpar article accepted may seem like a free pass at the time, it's not necessarily so. I'd rather be alerted to an embarassing typo or awkward sentence beforehand than to be left wondering why my article hasn't sold.

The system is not perfect and it is frustrating when you're waiting for an approval. Hopefully your article will go through and you can get your confidence back. You're a terrific writer and a valuable member of the CC community.

I would generally agree with everything Celeste and Hayley said. Thanks for chiming in.

I would also add that writers should spend more time concentrating on their own work and make it the best it can be. Only staff members know what goes on behind-the-scenes at CC on a daily basis and what adjustments must be made according to the current needs of the site daily, weekly, or monthly.


Ed

Okay, I might not have understood audrabianca's last point correctly, but I think one of the things she was bringing up was the unfairness of priority. If that wasn't her point, I'm putting it out on the table. Not that I grudge Ed's right of discretion to edit in any order he wants. However, it would be nice to know that when an author submits an article, it will have a period of time to sit on the front page. Sometimes that does not happen because the article sits for awhile in review, for whatever reason (longer, more in-depth?). Meanwhile, articles by other authors that were submitted after that time are approved and uploaded to the site, and by the time the article in question is accepted, it slots into the second or third page. I realize that if the article is quality it will sell eventually. But one of the strategies for making regular sales on CC is to submit frequently so your name is seen, and if a customer likes your style, but maybe not that particular topic, she might go search for other articles you've written. It stings a little to see an article is accepted, and then have to search for it a few pages back.

There, I said it. I feel better. I know you probably realize all of that, Ed, and you do such a fine job - I'm not asking for an explanation of behind-the-scenes. But I do wonder if anything could be done to put up the articles in the order they were submitted (except, of course, for private and public requests). That would be fair to everyone, even those who are extremely prolific and submit in bulk.

Of course, if you (Ed) only put an article on the back burner because at first reading you were bleary-eyed and prone to rejecting anything that dared to cross its eyes at you, I'll go away and shut my mouth firmly, and let you get back to being so gracious to all of us.

Emma (eekane)

Yes, better leave it at:
"Of course, if you (Ed) only put an article on the back burner because at first reading you were bleary-eyed and prone to rejecting anything that dared to cross its eyes at you, I'll go away and shut my mouth firmly, and let you get back to being so gracious to all of us."

The "front page" discussion has occurred before. Not only is it not a place where customers look, it is a pretty irrelevant function of the site. Maybe it should simply be removed if it is such a cause for concern.

All writers have had instances when their articles have been immediately approved/rejected or they have had to wait a few days. The writers taking part in this discussion have all had this experience. Every writer on the site has had this experience.

Ed

I can live with how we have talked through this problem. I know Ed can't give me the response I want to hear, but at least he is willing to talk about it. Another point that I am not sure has been made before is this:

If you have articles pending for a week and the older ones are the ones you think Ed has put on the back burner, so to speak, there may be newer articles you've written since your rejections. Those articles also sit in the queue. When a writer failed to meet the editor's or CC's guidelines on a rough day or two (or three), which in my case the rejections felt like Ed thought I had a bad week, the newer articles are so much better only because you think now you know what Ed is looking for. Your new articles may be excellent articles, but they sit because perhaps Ed is not sure how long your spastic submitting phase lasted. I took my rejections to heart and tried really hard to produce better ones during this week. I am committed personally to excellence and I will keep cautiously submitting until Ed thinks I get it right. I'm not sure how all this is benefitting me as a writer because I didn't experience amnesia or misplace my writing skills.

Ed, thank you for trying to provide me different kinds of feedback in my three new rejections today.

Audrabianca, I really appreciate your response. I didn't want you to feel like I was picking on you, but I do really want to see you produce the quality work that I know you can produce.

For all writers:

Leonardo da Vinci said something like, "A piece of artwork is never finished, it is only abandoned." Each article is like that. We just have to choose to abandon our work at a place at which others will stop to admire it.

All writers can improve, whether you're just starting out or a published novelist. One thing that makes us better writers is to identify those areas we need to work on and strive to bring them up to par with those aspects of writing we know we're really good at. It also helps to re-evaluate those habits we have felt have worked for us in the past but may not be up to our current standards or even current accepted writing standards. Age, life events, and changing influences can hold sway over our writing, and quality can fluctuate from day to day or year to year. (You can witness this change in any writer's oeuvre.)

Please remember to review your work carefully and spend adequate time considering your article once a rejection has been made. You may have chosen to abandon your piece of artwork too soon.

Thanks,
Ed