Does it really matter if I have a picture on my article or not?

This question comes from John Robertson, a fairly new contributor who signed up under my referral and has published consistently since.  (Psssst, he was also an honorable mention in this year's Halloween flash fiction contest.)

His question was:

"Just out of curiosity: Does it make much difference if you add pictures? I thought about just taking some that I thought would work well with my articles, but I wasn't sure if it would really be worth the extra time.  Any advice on that?"

 Answer:

In short form, yes, having pictures does help, even if only a little.  Most people are visually inclined so in general, more people will click on an article that has a picture rather than one with just a headline.  Also, having an image makes it easier for the staff to feature your content on the front pages (and yes, the page views garnered from being just on category front pages is worth the few minutes it takes to find an image).

Here is a link to the images topic within this blog.  Read through some of these posts (yes, some are a little old but they still apply).

Don't be afraid to stick up for yourself when your photos are lifted

When you sit and work on a slide show for Associated Content or any other site, it's disheartening when you see others lifting your photos to use without your permission. 

So here's the scenario I had to deal with a few weeks ago.  I was doing publicity for a local event.  Knowing that I'll be doing the same next year for said event, I put up pictures on AC in the form of a 2 part slideshow in order to help promote the event next year.  Then I stuck the links up on Facebook for both my local website and for AC.  The next thing I know, I had over a handful of local Facebook friends posting MY PHOTOS on their Facebook pages.  I get that they were excited about the event.  I get and appreciate that they had a great time at the event and liked my photos enough to share them.  What they didn't understand was their actions were illegal and was directly causing me to lose money via page views.

Dealing with a plagiarizer is a different tactic although the premise is the same.  This is copyright infringement.  So how do you deal with people you interact with, your real life friends and family, when you know they really meant no harm?

First, don't fly off the handle.  That's southern speak for remain calm.   When it comes to people who don't work online or don't do much online period, chances are, they just don't know any better.  Second, send the "lifters" a polite message letting them know while you appreciate that they like your photos, you get paid from page views and they've just taken money out of your pocket.  Instruct them in a nice tone that if they wish to support you as the photographer, they can delete the photos they put up and proceed to share the link to your slideshow.  That way, others get to enjoy the photos and you get paid for your work.  In most cases, you'll see this is all you need to do.  If they are educated about photo copyright infringement, most often, they won't do it again.

What do you do if they don't take the photos down?  Well, that's really up to you.  Is it worth it to you to report them?  Is it worth it to cause a rift?  Only you can determine, based on the relationship you have with the person, whether it is worth it to pursue a legal path.

But whether it's an article or a photo, don't feel like you're being petty if you stand up for your self.  It's YOUR work and you are entitled to compensation for it.  Other people don't sit at their desks for 8 hours a day doing their work for nothing, yours should be no different.

Related Article:  It's okay for me to "share" any photo, right?

This post brought to you by Becca Badgett's Growing Blueberries in Gardening Zone 7

Image Violations Running Rampant

Alright, everywhere I look I see image violations on AC.  Even in the public gallery where images should ALL be okay, there's GOBS of violations.

I'm ill about this but I'll try not to go off on a tangent here.  Here are the Image Submission Guidelines. READ THEM.  FOLLOW THEM.

I realize that it's hard to understand some of it at first.  You can't just slap any image on and that be that.  Be aware that some of the approved AC image sources are not all free sources.  Be happy that the submission guidelines are as detailed as they are now.  They weren't that straightforward when I first started writing.  I might not have had to go through the trial and error that I did had they been.

AC has, from time to time, jumped in and put pictures on or changed pictures on articles that they feel should be featured.  They sometimes do not use pictures that we would recognize the credits on but rest assured, if AC is the one that placed an image on one of your articles, then the image is alright and you have nothing to worry about.

The Public Gallery 

The AC public image gallery was supposed to be something to make placing images easier.  But instead, it's a nightmare.  Contributors who should know better are placing violating images on the public gallery and then unaware newbies are swiping them up.  I've seen more instances of this then I can count.  Please beware of the image gallery.  For myself, I try to avoid it completely because I see more violations than not in there.


I'm upset at this because I dabble in hobby photography.  I don't want anyone stealing my images just as much as I don't want someone stealing my articles.  

Read a post I wrote back in January before I learned more about image submission.  Maybe it will give you some ideas of alternative images you might use if you can't find what you are looking for.

Learning How to Choose Images for Articles

Again, I'm postponing the social networking lesson in favor of something else that seems to be a hard job for new contributors... and it's not always easy for experienced contributors either.

While I'm not an expert, I have learned a couple of things here and there about choosing and placing images with Associated Content articles.  And certainly, if anyone would like to share something they've learned about posting images with AC articles, then please leave a comment below so others can benefit from your experience.  That's what this blog is here for.

Statistically, articles with pics average a little better page view wise then one without.  This is because people are visually inclined.  If you see a nice picture, you're more likely to take notice of the headline and then click to read the article.  

First thing you need to do is read the Image Submission Guidelines.  Yes, they can be a little confusing to use and understand at first but as you go along, you learn what works and what doesn't.  Listen, I occasionally still have problems getting images up the way AC wants them.  I've had perfectly good images removed from my articles with no straight forward explanation of why.  So, having said that, this post isn't about how to post the right images that AC won't take down but instead of finding images for tougher subject matters; thinking outside the box in terms of what images to place.

Last week, I had a contributor ask me for help concerning an image.  She was writing on the subject of teen pregnancy.  She had it in her head that she had to find a picture of a pregnant teenager.  Her search was coming up empty.  "Then look for something else to put with the article," I told her.  What else screams that this is an article about pregnancy?  Let the headline say that it is an article on teen pregnancy.  Let the picture say that it is an article on pregnancy.  So what images would work with that?  A close up of a pregnant belly for one.  Maybe an ultrasound picture.  Ultimately, I found a picture on Wikimedia Commons of a positive pregnancy test that she did end up using on her article.  I remembered having used that same picture on a previous article of mine.

Finding images that work with the topic you are writing is difficult when it's something that doesn't necessarily have a concrete object that can serve as a picture.  In those cases, you should take a step back from your topic and look at your article from a different angel.  For example, when I'm writing a television review, there's little chance that I'm gonna find an approved image of the show's cast, which is an obvious first choice as an image.  And using the image of a remote control (to indicate the article is television related) is a good choice but since I crank out the articles three or more times a week, if I didn't change up the image, my contributor page would be blah with nothing but remote images down the article catalog.  If you'll look at my catalog here, you'll see that I have a variety of images, yet all the articles are related to television in one way or another.  Some of them are no nonsense, like the picture of George Clooney with my Haiti article, or the picture of Ellen with my American Idol article.  (If you search on Wikimedia Commons and sxc.hu, you can sometimes find usable pics of celebrities.)   Then there are those which require a little more creativity.  For my Survivor preview, I found a picture of a totem (because, well, you know Survivor) and for my Kate Gosselin article, I found a picture of a briefcase as the show she was about to star in involved her learning her way around the work force.

The point is that you don't always have to have a picture that screams the exact measurements of your article.  If you can extract one element of your article and find a picture that represents that, you can use that, too.  It does take a bit of creative thinking to do this so flex those creative muscles!

It also bears saying, even though these points are on the guidelines, that blurry images ARE NOT OKAY.  I've seen a lot of blurry photos, usually it is a photo the author has taken him/herself.  Even if it is a little bit blurry, don't think that people won't notice.  We do.  Not only does it make your work look amateur-ish, it will affect your page views.  It is completely okay to use your own photos, but make sure they are not blurry and are relevant to your article.

Which brings me to my next point.  There are very few instances where your own portrait is relevant to put on an article (notice I said very few, not necessarily all instances).  You already have a place on your profile where you can post your own smiling mug and it will show up at the end of your article.  You can upload it from your "Edit Your Profile" page.  I typically see self portraits on poetry more then anything else (not sure why) and it is not okay.  Please don't do it.

Thanks for reading and stay tuned for more on my AC page view experiment as well as a post about social networking promotion.  Have a great week!

Issues Cleared Up (Somewhat)

Image removal issue: Apparently I didn't pay enough attention to the rights on the image. At least that's what my AC buddies in the forum tell me. It's hard for me to believe that after so many months of putting pics on articles that I've suddenly started doing something wrong when the guidelines haven't changed since I've been with AC.

My only gripe with this is I had to get help from the forums about this issue. In response to the email I sent to admin, I got a very vague and weird response. The responding email simply said, "Hi Pamela, Photos were removed from items in that particular assignment. Thank you." Um, duh? That's why I wrote in the first place. The assignment was a targeted one to me specifically and stated nothing about not being able to put an image with it. But it isn't worth my time to spend more brain cells on this particular issue.

My latest article about breast reduction published without the image I put with it also. I got the image from morgueFile so I know the rights were appropriate to use. I can't see where a woman's covered up chest area would be considered off putting unless it was someone who viewed the whole article different from what it was intended. Let's face it; we live in a day and age where a woman can't even feed a baby in public without someone getting offended because their mind is always on the sexual aspect of breasts instead of thinking of health and other issues. But I'm not gonna push the issue. I'll just choose a different theme of picture for my next breast reduction article.

As for the article I mentioned in a previous post about being declined for upfront even though I'd done the necessary research to ensure that it was unique; I got a nice little letter that stated they agreed the article was worth a second look. This was followed by an offer for upfront payment. So that not only gives me a little bit of faith in AC, but it also tells me to trust my gut. It was a standard medically related topic that was highly focused. I'm glad I questioned it instead of taking the decline.

In the meantime, I have one assignment due that I have to get done today as I'm having surgery later this week and need to prepare. But AC seems to be full of glitches this morning. Nothing really unusual. Just sucks that writers' time is being spent on waiting for glitches to be fixed instead of working. eHow has been the same way for over a week as well.

A Declined-for-Upfront Article and Image Removal

There are hundreds to thousands of pieces of content that go through the AC reviewers every week.  There will be mistakes and, as this blog has demonstrated before, there will be inconsistencies.  But when it happens to you, it ticks you off.  After all, if it is your content, they should be paying attention, right?  While in a basic sense that sounds rather narcissistic and silly, in another sense, everyone should be as concerned about the quality and appearance of their work to care when something is declined or "altered".

Having said that, when I submitted my latest short story, "A Persistent Journey", I had with it an image of Earth as seen from outer space that I'd found on Wikimedia.  The story is science fiction and is all about the main character getting back to Earth for her children.  Granted, short fiction and poetry don't do well page view-wise but I enjoy participating, nonetheless.  Even so, images attached to articles tend to raise page views, even if only slightly, so I take the time out to try to include photos with every article.  I'm very careful to adhere to all the guidelines and giving credit as required.  But when the story published (it was an assignment that had to be reviewed before publishing, otherwise I could have published it automatically), it published without the image.  I wrote AC yesterday with links and titles in hopes that they will replace the picture I had with it.  I will update when I've heard something from them.

Then yesterday, I had an article declined for upfront.  Anyone who read my last post here (or who has been experiencing these declines and low offers on a personal basis), knows that AC is like the government trying to cover up Area 51 on this one.  AC doesn't acknowledge that anything has changed.  But something has changed and the contributors know it.

I've been keeping a better eye on what I chose to submit for upfront lately.  Before I submit, I search for the topic both on the WWW and on AC.  If it is a saturated topic on either spectrum, then I won't even try to submit it for upfront.  So imagine my surprise when I get a "this content doesn't differ enough" feedback with my decline.  When I searched the topic, I found no other article that came close to focusing on the one aspect of the topic that I chose to write.  I even asked in the forums and had another contributor (thanks, Rose!) who had more experience and expertise in these things then I do take a look at it.  She found no problem with the article other then I might could add a keyphrase to it. So, I'm taking a wild leap and I'm going to plead my case.

I am irritated, yes.  At this point, I would be likely to be just as well submitting everything as Performance Payment only.  But that would be right up AC's alley.  They wouldn't have to pay upfront then.  Upfronts are a great incentive but if they are going to tell future contributors that they will pay upfront but then don't pay attention enough to what they are reviewing to fairly pay, all it creates is ticked off contributors who feel like they are being ripped off.  Not a good thing for a company who relies on contributors to increase their bottom line.

I will update when and if I get a response.

Still Frustrated - Update

I did get a nice reply from AC yesterday about the photo that had been removed from one of my articles. Their response was that they didn't know what happened or why it had been removed but that it was up now (yes, because I resubmitted it) but to contact them in the future should another issue arise like it. Maybe who ever reviewed my original piece decided that I couldn't have taken that picture? I mean, I think it's a pretty good picture and the effects I did on it were pretty cool. I don't know. At this point, I can only speculate why. I've had problems with photos before because there is a very strict rule when using photos on AC. I don't have a problem with the rules, though, and understand why they are in place. But when I use a photo that is from an approved source and cite all relevant credits and it still doesn't get put up with the article, then I feel that extra work to provide a photo is all for nothing. Most of the time, I put my own work up.

BUT, then I get another upfront rejection on an article about proper social networking. I'm going to publish it as a DO (display only) as soon as I get finished typing this. They said it didn't contain enough new information. Okay, maybe I'm getting a little too comfortable with submitting for upfront (I have had many articles accepted this month) that I'm getting a little burnt here.

I think it's time to take the rest of the week off from AC and work on my fiction. Let's start fresh with gusto on Monday.

See you then.

Not Very Happy About AC Right Now

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.