I'm all about blogging for the good of Associated Content. But I also don't want to ignore the other stuff that comes my way. No matter how much I like AC, no matter how much anyone likes something, there will inevitably be those times that are frustrating.
If you've been following this blog (which has gotten hundreds of hits so I know someone's reading it!), then you know about the sweepstakes article that I wrote earlier in the month that was pulled for being too promotional. I get it. What I don't get is the number of similar articles that have went up on AC this past month which were nothing short of the same format I used to write my sweeps articles. Days after the first article of its kind went up, it remains available to view. I was actually alerted to these articles after more then one source read my blog and contacted me about them. I waited for them to be pulled and when they weren't, I contacted AC yesterday concerning the inconsistency in pulling DO (Display Only) articles. When I hear something, I will update. In any case, it's not that I want another source's articles pulled. I don't. I would just like to know why AC will pull mine but leave other similar articles up.
I also had a picture removed from one of my articles. It was a picture that I took and edited myself and was relevant to the article. Granted, it is not an article that gets a lot of page views but I know statistically, articles with pictures get more page views then others. I don't know how long it had been removed before I noticed it. I had the same photograph on an article before that and it hadn't been removed. Since the article in question was a DO, I resubmitted the picture with the article. So far, it hasn't been removed. I also wrote admin and let them know that I had resubmitted the photo and was wondering why it had been removed in the first place as sources are not notified of picture removals. I received an odd email back, letting me know that they would take a look at the situation and wanted to know the title of the article in question, even though in my original email stood the link to the article itself. I wrote them back. I haven't heard anything back as of yet but the picture remains on my article. That would be fine, but I would still like to know why it was pulled, if not for anything but my future reference when submitting articles. The two articles which have the same photograph was the HIV article (which was also picked up by both the Wall Street Journal and USA Today), which was published first and the photo was never removed and The Other Pam in which I resubmitted the photo with the article.
In any case, when and if I hear anything back about these issues, I will update to let my readers know.
The next problem I've had with AC this week stems from an article concerning toddler transitional objects. I write for USMOMSTODAY as the toddler section contributing editor. So while I write toddler related articles for them, I will offer the article first to AC for upfront. I knew it wouldn't pull in a high upfront but I wasn't expecting them to decline it altogether. Their reason? It wasn't a topic typically searched about. I don't get that. I get a lot of my toddler article ideas from Yahoo! Answers, paying attention to what people ask there and then deciding what to write about. There were many questions about transitional objects. I have also had articles in the past that I've submitted and they've accepted for upfront (even if it was a low upfront) that I know weren't topics typically searched. For example, my article about writing for role playing games, and more recent my article about geeks, nerds, and dorks, and even more recent, A Toddler's Garbage Can Fascination. I see the declined article being no different then any of those subject matters which were all offered upfront payment.
In any case, like I said, I'll update with any new news. That's enough of my griping for now.