Is Demand Studios the new Associated Press?

I recently wrote an opinion piece defending Demand Studios after another blogger chose to label them as a scam based on the fact that their pay is somewhat low and they make frequent requests for rewrites of articles. I still side with Demand Studios on that issue, but I do want to point out a better (though not perfect) article about Demand Studios at ReadWriteWeb. This article doesn’t try to portray the writers as victims but rather tries to analyze the effect of such a large content mill on the Internet as a whole. The basic premise is that Demand Studios has a content creation system in place (using both automation and live reviewers) that results in an assembly-line style article that RWW compares to Henry Ford’s original automobile production line. The article takes issue with the quality of the content being produced, and that is a more legitimate criticism than the exploitation of writers.

4000 Articles a Day

According to the RWW piece, Demand Studios produces approximately 4000 articles a day through its combination of freelancers and editors. The one issue that I have with the article is that they use this as an indictment of the quality. They ask:

The bigger question is: there are surely many examples of good Demand Media content on the Web, but how many of the 4,000 articles it produces every day aren’t?

To me this is a poor argument. Yes, I’m sure that some of the 4000 articles aren’t great, but no one can judge what the percentage of this is so it is a specious question. I mainly read blogs by single authors. Mass produced blogs leave me a little cold. As a follower of individuals I can tell you that even the best bloggers put out lousy articles on occasion. Lord knows I do. No one is brilliant every day.

The better point the article makes is that the Demand Studios assembly line style and fast turnaround time creates a certain sameness to the articles being written, that there is a Demand Studios style, and it isn’t very interesting or incisive. I don’t read enough of their types of articles (like I said, I follow individual bloggers) to know if this is true, but it seems like a legitimate possibility.

In the Eighties the Definition of a Content Mill was “Associated Press”

Way back in the eighties, I served as the Associated Press Wire Editor for my college newspaper. Having an AP feed back then was as close as you could get to having Google News now. Article after article printed out on the dot matrix printer they provided, and I looked at them all (while dressed in my linen Miami Vice jacket) to see if they were relevant. I can tell you that AP’s style (they do have their own stylebook after all) was pretty bland even then. For most articles, you got the facts, and nothing but the facts. There was little room for color or individuality. A single article might get published in 500 different newspapers all over the world. Any sort of colorful writing had to be killed in case someone out there didn’t get it, or worse, was offended by it. Another interesting similarity between the Associated Press and Demand Studios is that AP has always used a number of low-paid writers (they call them stringers) to freelance for them. In the eighties, the saying was, “You can’t spell stupid without UPI and you can’t spell cheap without AP.”

Obviously Demand Studios is not identical to AP. The journalistic standards and the general level of talent at AP are considerably higher than at Demand Studios. AP is more selective about who they hire and more stringent about the sources for their articles. It is the similarities though, not the differences, that catch my eye. Both organizations tap a worldwide pool of writers. Both organizations exist to provide content to other organizations. Both organizations rely heavily on freelance work. Most importantly, both organizations have writing philosophies based on a universal cookie-cutter style.

I believe that sort of generic writing was the beginning of the end for newspapers, and I think that it can only have limited success on the Internet. A certain number of people will be satisfied with these articles, and search engines may never be able to tell good articles from bad articles, but there will always be plenty of room for individuals with distinctive voices to keep writing. A loyal audience that comes back again and again is in most cases preferable to a large number of casual readers who never return.

Demand Studios is a company that is filling a content niche quite successfully. The fact that they have enough writers and customers to be publishing 4000 articles a day shows that they are filling a need that exists on both sides. That said, if someone else comes up with a better way to do it, then the market will change again. I think Demand Studios does a lot of things well, but I also think there is plenty of room for improvement. If they can make a profit doing things their way, then surely someone who improves on the concept can do even better.

For Further Information:

• Is Demand Studios Worth Your Time?
• The Answer Factory: Demand Media and the Fast, Disposable, and Profitable as Hell Media Model
• About Hub Pages: An Interview with Ryan “Hup” Hupfer
• FakeAPStylebook on Twitter

Option Paralysis and the Technical Writer

Option Paralysis: The tendency, when given unlimited choices, to make none. – Douglas Coupland

The saying goes, you can’t get what you want if you don’t know what you want. That is a problem that I’ve been struggling with for quite some time. I have spent the past several years settling for what I can stand, rather than what I truly enjoy. In a way, I have been challenging to see just how much I can put up with and still function. I would commute for two hours a day to work for eight hours a day and then come home and write / work on my blog for another three to four hours a day.  Last winter, after two years of keeping up this grueling schedule, I gave up on my blogging. This is unfortunate because writing this blog was by far the most enjoyable of the tasks that were in front of me.

I have been a technical writer for fifteen years. On my best days, I am great at this job. When the challenge is right and my interest is peaked, I can work magic. Unfortunately, the opportunity to work magic comes up only on occasion. Last summer and fall was one of those times. I was working with a talented and energetic partner, and we did some great work. For a period of over three months, I actually looked forward to getting up in the morning and doing what I was good at. Eventually though, the situation changed and I went back to forcing myself to go to work every day. In June though, I got lucky. I lost my job.

I had lost a lucrative job and all of the security that comes with it. The job market was terrible so my prospects seemed weak. I had mortgage payments, car payments, student loan payments, utilities and a grocery bill to worry about. On occasion, I was scared out of my skull. Most of the time, however, I was happy. I had lost a job, but I had gained ten to eleven hours of my day. My stress level dropped. I stopped having to drink Coffee and Monster energy drinks just to get through the day.

I even managed to keep making money. That was the strangest part of all. The Internet took a shine to me. I found that magic money making formula that Tim Ferris and all of those ads on Facebook claim to have. I figured it out myself though, and unlike them I’m not telling anyone what it is. My site has never been about getting rich on the Internet and it never will be. Sorry.

The upshot of all this is that I have freedom for the first time in a long time. I can do what I want to do. I can write what I want to write. I can pick any direction I please. This has brought on a case of option paralysis. Do I return to blogging? Do I look for that “perfect” technical writing job? Do I pick a new career path?

I am free. Now what?

The Organized Blogger

My adventures in organization have had a few rough days as I have been battling both a cold and a ruthlessly time-consuming new project at work. After performing the big purge on my home office, I have had to be content with small moments dedicated to the overall task pf putting everything in its place, especially all of the unfulfilled mental loops that come from 40+ years of living on this planet. There are many things I want to do, many things I need to do, and many things I need to decide I am never going to do. This is all part of the organizational process. You cannot get a handle on all the tasks that lie before you until you make an accurate list of them and decide what you are going to do about them.

Because I am using the Getting Things Done organizational system, I am obliged to make a complete and accessible collection of these unfinished projets. At minimum I need to list each project, the desired outcome, and the next action step towards achieving that outcome. Projects may be as minor as transferring data from my wife’s old notebook computer or as major as publishing a book of poetry or taking a trip to New Zealand. Once this information is collected, I need to track my progress on each item. This is no small task, but it is certainly achievable.

My first major hurdle was to decide what system to use to track these projects. Getting Things Done proposes several systems, but none of them suited me particularly well. Paper files were exactly what I didn’t want. The idea behind getting organized was to free up both my mental and physical space. I want to dispose of every piece of paper I can possibly be rid of, so having a file cabinet full of them was not a pleasant thought. I tried it, but I just had no enthusiasm for the idea. If I have too many papers to keep in an inbox, it is time to purge.

The alternative to paper was electronic organizers, but the problem with most of them is convenience. I want to be able to access my tasks from anywhere, but I don’t want them tied to a particular device because then I am out of luck if something happens to it. I needed something that I could access from my Blackberry, my iTouch, my personal computer and my work computer. In fact, the best solution would be something that I could use even if I didn’t have access to any of these. I thought about using some of the Google tools or some other online package, but I wasn’t sure I could have access to them from work. An organizational system would do me no good if I couldn’t use it in the main place that I needed it.

It took me an embarrassingly long time to realize that the answer was right in front of my face. What I needed was a blog! I’m a blogger. I know Wordpress better than almost any other tool at my disposal, and it is perfect for capturing individual items that require notes and updates. I can write as much as I want about each task and even attach files if I need to. The list is searchable and can be filtered using both categories and tags. More importantly, I can access the blog from every one of my key devices or from any open computer. I know enough about WordPress and file protection to keep the new site secure and invisible so that nobody needs to see it but me. I can even use the scheduling feature to move items into future cues so I see them on certain dates and not before. In essence, WordPress is my new organizational tool and it meets every one of my needs. Blogging has scored another brownie point in my life,

Of course, there is theory and then there is practice. I am still imputing all of my loops, but I’ll keep you updated on how things go and at some point I’ll give the details behind setting an organizational blog up for yourself.

I See Dead Projects

One of the great things about blogging is that, for the most part, there is little lead time. You write something and then you publish it. If you’re lucky, you get feedback and if it is particularly good you get repeat visitors. You might write ahead, gathering several days or even weeks worth of posts in advance, but for the most part you are writing as you go.

In the world of technical writing, you are often assigned to projects that last for months or even years, and in many cases the material you write today may not be read for a long time. Occasionally, it won’t get read at all, at least not by the people you intended it for. This has been a fairly regular occurrence in my career. My first major project lasted a year. At the end of that year, the company was part of a merger and moved to the other company’s software platform, negating all of my work.

Later on in my career, I documented what was expected to be a major product for a very large hardware/software company.  Because of the lead time for localization, I had to complete the documentation two months before the product was to be released. I had just finished up and sent off my work to the translators when word came down that the project was being scrapped due to a poor business case. Poor business case was code for, “our competitors decided to include this tool for free in their new operating system”.

My most recent bout of deadprojectitis hasn’t been quite as severe. The product I have been working on for the past two years was released and most of my documentation is at least available to customers. Nonetheless, the product is on its way out. It won’t be gone today or tomorrow, but it is being replaced by something newer and shinier and almost certainly better. The change came suddenly. Just a month ago, it looked like the product would be getting a major overhaul that would have me up to my armpits in documentation for the next six months, but things change.

In all of these cases, far more than my own efforts were negated. There were programmers, engineers, project managers, product managers, business analysts and a host of other people who had their efforts negated. These things happen. Companies change direction, market forces change people’s needs, competitors beat you. This is the world of business and it is frustrating. In some cases people don’t just see their hard work pushed aside, they actually lose their jobs. There isn’t always another project waiting around the corner. These are the realities of the business world. In the current economy, it is something you’ll see more and more of. Companies will be cutting expenses, and often that comes in the area of new development, or the elimination of existing products.

There is no magic solution to this problem. It helps if you can be assigned to more than one project, so that you aren’t defined by a single product, but those choices aren’t always your to make. This is the business world. When things do wrong you pick yourself back up, dust yourself off and get back in the game.

Next Page »