Constant Content

Just a question, but this latest round of public requests (the insurance articles, the how-to photograph your girlfriend nude for a 17 year old audience?), were they screened before they were submitted to authors?

The insurance one is odd, because with our editorial process, how on earth could we ever ensure that articles make a 10-hour deadline?

And photographing your girlfriend nude to a 17-year-old target audience? I don't know, that request makes me really uncomfortable. I'm not speaking morally here, but legally, is that a request that should be out there?

The insurance request is unrealistic even without CC's submission system. It's impractical to report and write a traditional news article in less than 10 hours, unless the writer has developed sources in the industry and can access them quickly. However, if the buyer just wants someone to rehash (not meant derogatorily) news articles, it can probably be done.

I had the same reaction to the 17-year-old request. It's probably not a legal problem to write an article at a 17-year-old reader [i]level[/i]. But, directly targeting minors could be another story. Ethically, most writers probably won't touch that request.

I don't think the nude photography requester is suggesting writing this to a teen audience -- but rather the style of writing needs to be easy to understand. Perhaps his choice of words could've been better. It didn't sound like a teen porno type of request to me but rather a serious artistic photography article that is easy to read and explains the steps clearly.

Yes, the request for content are approved or denied just like articles are. If there was any suspicion that there was something amiss, the request would not have been approved.

ED

I reread this twice, I didn't get the impression that it was for a 17 year old audience either. The requester could have put this in better words, but they just want to keep in non-technical and basic in my eyes. We have had requests for adult related material before... ignore it if it's not up your ally.

I re-read the request. I'm not ashamed of adult related content. I think it was just a case of poor wording in the request. Since Cyndy also received the same impression, I am sure I am not alone, so it was probably a good thing that was cleared up.

That still doesn't answer the one about the insurance company, and the requirement of the 10-hour and 24 hour turn around time. Not to mention they want bidding lower than $10-$20 an article.

I guess I am just confused because it was just posted the preferred format of this site is buyers request, authos submit, Q&A is for any questions that may arise, but not intended for bidding and "I can write these articles for you in 8 hours at $4 an article". It it touted in the FAQ that this isn't a "bidding" site.

Yet, here is a request that I could see may new authors jumping at the prospect of normal work, not even realizing a 10-hour turn around time is next to impossible, even if there wasn't an intermediary like C-C to go through. Plus, the request even wants the author to explain their back up plan in the event the deadlines can't be met.

I would just hate to see a new author be taken advantage of, or for this buyer to refuse to buy work, or heavily discount it because it was "late."

Just my humble opinion.....

I think some of these requests are written in such a way that they can be posted to a number of writing sites - they're spreading their net as widely as they can. I can easily see the last few requests we've received being posted to other writing sites where the authors do 'bid' for the job. I imagine the customer has just put together a request and posted to a number of sites perhaps not taking into account how some sites, e.g. CC, actually 'operate'...

you can ask questions to the requester, that is the whole idea behind "Questions" area as well as posting articles. If something is unclear and you ARE interested you can ask. The $$ amount selection isn't necessarily the amount they are willing to pay. No author is going to get taken advantage of.... You have 3 options. Ask questions if you are interested but need more info, ignore the request, or write.

Yes, I do do that. It's a good way of knowing if it's worth writing to a request. For example, I emailed the customer about the football one that came in the other day as it wasn't obvious if the customer meant American football or soccer (as you guys call it) - especially given the number of requests that seem to have come from the UK recently. As least if you don't get a reply to your email, you can take that into consideration when deciding if to write an article for the request.

As far as the insurance/news request, they never said they want bidding lower than the posted price. They said. "The bid is open." I wouldn't jump to conclusions. They could just as easily mean that they're willing to pay for quality and prompt turn around. The only way to know for sure is to start a dialog with them (if you're seriously considering their request).

Turnaround on this one may be tough to meet based on the editorial review but Ed does his best to approve private requests for regular customers promptly. I can see an established writer who rarely gets reject notices having success pulling this off.

Newbies (or anyone for that matter) could get taken advantage of on any request - if they're willing to allow it. No one is twisting anyone's arm to write at any price. IMO, if someone sets their price too low, that's their own fault and they lose their right to complain about it because they're the one who entered that particular price in the field and/or agreed to write at that rate. We can always say "No thanks" and move on or ignore the request altogether.

Sorry to chime in too late, but going back to the initial concern - the requester who asked for an article about nude photography does not seem like he is targeting an underage audience. It sounds like he was trying *not* to say that - I mean, most people would say, "sixth grade reading level," which could possibly sound . . . not okay, too?

Ed