Which Article Topics Earn the Most Money at Y!CN?

As a journalist and writing peer mentor here at Y!CN and elsewhere, I get asked often which topics are the best to write. What brings in the best upfront payments? What topics pull in page views? What topics does Yahoo!

want to see before giving high paying assignments? Overall, which topics make the most money?

Read more

2 Year, 2 Months - Month End Review

October is over and I doubt very seriously that I'll get my Hot 500 badge back for October.  My page views were even lower than September. 

While this hasn't been a very good month overall for any $ project, I did get a one of my highest upfront offers ever for a general article (excluding Featured Contributor assignments).  I got a good offer because my article relates to NaNoWriMo which actually begins today.  I also believe that I got a good offer on it because of my personal and professional experience with the topic.  If you care to take a look, click the title below.

There is No Such Thing as a Perfect Rough Draft

Another good thing that happened at AC this month was that I had another Yahoo! pickup.  One of my FC assignments was flagged by AC for Yahoo! Editors to look at.  While the article sits now in the "Partner" tab on my account page, I have to keep an eye out manually on the Yahoo! TV blog for when it might be published.  If Yahoo! rejects it, it will be published on AC, and I get to keep the extra compensation, but I think with it sitting in my Partner tab, it might have already been accepted.  Not sure.

In any case, I've had the opportunity to apply for a regular Yahoo! TV writing gig.  I'm currently waiting to hear if they want me to send a sample article.  I would be so psyched to write for Yahoo! on a regular basis!

In any case, here's hoping November will not only provide me more page views and upfronts, but also that I have more time to pursue those page views and upfronts.  I seem to be caught up enough to do just that.

Have a great November, everyone!

Oh, for a tip, get your Thanksgiving articles wrapped up this week and then start working on Christmas articles.  You want to have those Christmas articles up and indexed by the time the major searches start happening in order to take advantage of rising page views.  :)

Profit Power of Writing 'Display Only' on Associated Content

Top contributor Will Stape talks about Diplay-only articles in the following article and why there is a lot of value in this "free" work.

Before I provide the link, though, I want to reiterate that while this is a good option (I should know because some of my biggest paid months have been when I've just published DO articles), you shouldn't also dismiss upfront payments just because it seems hard to figure out.  Getting declined?  Then head to the forum and place it in the Workshop where experienced contributors can tell you why.

While I don't always have time to write on AC as much as I'd like to, I still see the value of utilizing both the DO side and the upfront side of AC.  Don't stop because you may be getting frustrated with it.  Doing so will hurt the amount of money you could make.

If you want to read more about the "upfront" topic, look in the right column at the label cloud at the top and click on the word "upfront" to see more posts.

Profit Power of Writing 'Display Only' on Associated Content
Don't like giving it away? Hate the idea of dealing in freebies? Does the thought of publishing display only give you the chills? Here's why you shouldn't hate nor fear the 'free' on Associated Content.
Read More

August brings more upfront pay but less page views

Examiner.com bit the dust for me this past month.  By doing a site wide "upgrade" that wasn't tested properly, they've screwed up much of the site.  After a few weeks, my pages (I wrote on two topics) are still messed up and not displaying properly.

So for the last few weeks, I've largely been ignoring this blog as I tried to salvage my readership from both my Examiner pages.  I've been developing new sites and such that left me writing less for Associated Content than I did before.  In the end though, while my page views have not been as great this month as they have been the previous two or three, my upfront payments were much higher than usual because I actively pursued topics that would get me an upfront.  I still had my 3 FC assignments but I also lucked up on two assignments that were targeted to FC's in the Arts and Entertainment categories and I had a partner call from Yahoo!TV which you can read about in this post.

Now as I proceed this month, my goals for my content and overall writing is to at least double what I've made for August.  I'm curious to see if I can make up for the Examiner.com loss through AC and my blogs.  I'm also expanding my network to YouTube so that should be wonderfully fun.

Continuing on, I'll be seeing if I can actually make enough to support myself and my children.  Right now, I'm borderline on being able to do that.  But in light of recent personal things, it is a reality that I'm going to have to face within the next six to eight months.   Can I reach my goal of being able to support myself and my children just with my online work?  It will be interesting to find out!  (Psssst, and that's why you should follow this blog!)

Why Am I Not Making Money at AC? Page Views, Offers, and More

Another great one from Lynn Lomasi...

Why Am I Not Making Money at AC? Page Views, Offers, and More
Struggling to make money writing for AC? About to give up and decide it just isn't for you. Maybe you just need a quick refresher on writing for AC and the web in general. As an experienced AC Contributor and web writer, perhaps I can help.
Read More

Associated Content Video Tutorials for Submitting Content

the Barefoot has put together a video series detailing every step of the content submission process. This is extremely helpful in finding out not only how to submit but also help in deciphering terms you may be unfamiliar with, in particular if you want to know about rights to your work. Thanks, Randy, for the work you've done with this!

The Easy Way to Determine if You Should Submit for Upfront

I promised that I would post this after Christmas so here is what I use to determine if something I’ve written would qualify for upfront or not.  It’s not as difficult as one would imagine.

After some discussion in the forums, it occurred to me that there are too many people who simply submit without even trying to get an upfront.  Others insist that this is where their major income comes from.  In either case, the guidelines on what qualifies for upfront, while it may have not changed, they’ve at least tightened.  As I’ve mentioned in a previous post, too many people have noticed a huge difference in the way upfronts have been handled, and it was a sudden shift, too, not gradual at all.  And something one of the staff members said to me makes me think that there is a completely new system being utilized to review content.  Either, or… there’s really nothing anyone can do about it.  All we can do is make sure our content actually qualifies for upfront before we submit.

First of all, make sure you check the guidelines to see if the type of article you are writing is actually one that AC gives an upfront payment for.  This is extremely important.  AC does not typically pay upfront for television reviews, website reviews, opinion pieces, creative writing, etc.  Check the FAQ’s located under “Help” in the top right corner of your account screen.

Second, when you’ve written a piece, take the title and keywords and do a Google search to see what comes up.

Third, do the same type of search but strictly on AC.

Submit your content for upfront only if the amount of similar topics on Google and AC is very narrow.  This isn’t as hard to figure out as you might feel like it is and after you’ve done this a couple of times, it will get easier and easier.  AC doesn’t want to pay upfront for articles that are already saturated on the web and on AC.  As an added twist, even if your topic is saturated, you can focus it (think of a topic INSIDE of a topic), therefore taking perhaps a different angle then most others.  For example, I’ve done a number of breast reduction articles.  Each one has been accepted for upfront.  But how is that since breast reduction is a topic that is common on the web and on AC?  It is because I narrowed the focus of it.  First, I focused on what to expect at a consult, another article focused on how to chose the plastic surgeon, and another focused on the criteria needed for insurance to pay for the surgery.  This format also has added benefits in that you can break up one topic into several pieces, thus increasing your content and revenue.  But even if you’ve narrowed your topic, you still need to make sure that aspect isn’t saturated online.

When in doubt, you can always post your work in the workshop in the forums.  While there are a few people who make the forums a bad place to be, don’t let others’ self righteous attitudes keep you from getting the support you need.  There are many more good people then bad.  Don’t be afraid to take that leap and seek help.

And if you’re one of those people who typically think that you have all the right stuff and you don’t need anyone’s help and everyone should accept your work as is and be ecstatic about it, then sorry, I cannot help you and I doubt anyone else can either.  Not being mean, just being honest.

I hope everyone has a great New Year and may the New Year bring new success on AC!

If You Want an Explanation, Do Not Go To The Forums

Maybe that's a little harsh but the last two times that I've had a complaint or wanted to know if glitches were site wide, I was told by AC staff to notify which ever email address they gave me if I needed to speak about something like that again, which indicated they did not want me posting such in the forums. No big deal, though.

First, the "Content Missing" glitch is something that occasionally pops up. It seems like the glitch is on a sporadic time line. Every so often, when it seems like everything else is going okay, the AC servers say, "Wait. Let's hiccup!" and they do so by hiding our content which hurts page views badly. If you ever have a "Content Missing" message, email the Help Desk. Don't go to the forums to see if it's a site wide glitch. You should only do that on holidays and the weekends when there's no one there to fix a glitch so that you can panic and gripe with everyone else over hundreds and thousands of lost views. :)

Second, if you have submitted content for upfront that is getting declined and YOU ARE 100% SURE that you've done the research necessary to ensure that it is a good candidate for upfront, then contact AC Admin to respectfully ask that they take a second look and why. I've had three pieces of content over the last month that have been declined and that I appealed by doing this. In each case, AC agreed that they warranted further review and I ended up getting upfront offers for each of them. (When I get back from Christmas break, I'll make a post about what I do to research an article I've written to see whether I offer it for upfront or not so feel free to bookmark or follow.) Like I said, BE SURE. If you aren't sure, it's best not to appeal. And if you do decide to appeal, don't have an attitude that your s*** don't stink. Be respectful about it. AC staffers go through oodles of emails and content every day. I imagine them a little like the postal service, ready to explode some days especially with the insults and abuse that is often thrown their way.

I hope everyone has a great holiday, however you celebrate this time of year!

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.

Upfronts Going Down, Down, Down

It's a conspiracy!  Well, no, not really.  Just something that AC isn't being completely forthcoming about.

As the Associated Content library goes up, up, up, upfronts are going down, down, down.  It has been this way for years from what I understand.  As more content is added across the board, it is a struggle for writers to create new and unique content.  Have things changed very recently?  On the surface, yes.  It is obvious from all the reports in the forums that SEVERAL people are experiencing a sudden rise in rejections and declines for upfront.  However, when openly asked about this, AC has given the standard response.  Nothing has changed.  But it's obvious that something has.  Are they just buckling down more?  Is a new employee reviewing content?  Why can't we get any clear answers?  Even an acknowledgment would go a long way into calming many people down.

I still love writing for AC.  Sometimes it's frustrating, yes, but I still enjoy seeing my page views go up, I've enjoyed the benefits at being a new category editor at AC as well.  But to look at us and say there hasn't been a change is slightly insulting to our intelligence.  My upfronts have gone down dramatically and even yesterday, I had a local news story declined for upfront when I've never had a local news story declined for upfront before.

So what's going on?  I don't want to speculate.  Speculations lead to stupid theories about cover-ups and conspiracies and I'm just not the paranoid type.  I do wish AC would acknowledge, though, what we are trying to tell them and tell us what they are doing.  In the meantime, though, I've decided to focus on page views instead of upfronts.  If I get an upfront, that's great.  If not, that's great, too.  At least I get page view love which is something very few sites offer.

A Comparison of the Best Content $25 Assignment

This has been a heated debate among the forums, springing up thread after thread of ideas, speculation and others who have outright said they were leaving over it. If you have no clue what I'm talking about, perhaps you should read my previous post on the subject. But all that stuff aside, there were more good feelings about the assignment then bad (in general). Even though everyone didn't get the $25, the offers were still generally higher then what is usually given. Let's take a closer look at these articles. I tried getting all the links I could. There were a ton of them. So I took five that were offered lower amounts and five that were paid the $25. I apologize to the people I've missed but I just couldn't fit everyone in the mix. Feel free to leave your Best Content - $25 link in the comments section if I didn't mention you and let us know what your offer was and the reason AC gave. There are some people that are still waiting on their submissions to be reviewed by AC.

The goal? To try as we might to figure out what it is that AC is really looking for. They certainly don't tell us and the only reason I can think of is because they really don't want to spoil the spirit of AC which is for writers to write what they want. But at the same time, AC claims they want us to strive to earn. The more we drive traffic to AC, the more potential our articles have. A lot of theories are thrown to the wind. It's gotta be unique, it's gotta be SEO friendly (which a lot of writers just don't get the concept of, including yours truly), it's gotta be popular. So let's see how this turned out. Maybe this will help with the next assignment.

Oh, and do yourself a favor while you're going over these. Don't just click on the ones that were accepted. Click on those that weren't also. Only by reading over all of them can you get your own informed idea of what to do the next go around.

The Lower Offered Articles:

Lucinda Gunnin's Angie Wyatt Talks About Her Book, Timmy the Tractor: His Hay Day. Gunnin didn't specify how much was offered but we know it wasn't the $25. Why? Because AC called it a book review which doesn't typically get an upfront payment. Gunnin classified it as an author interview, though.

Travis Fox's How to Install a Doggy Door received an upfront offer of only $8. It was not unique to the web which was the reason AC gave for the lower offer.

Marie Anne St. Jean's Best Part Time Jobs for Seasonal Employment got an offer of $7. The feedback said that the topic was too broad.

Kim Keason's Choosing the Right Martial Arts Program for Your Child was offered $7. They claimed the topic was too common.

Jennifer Amlie's A Guide to Foreign Horror Movies was offered $7 also. AC said that even though the article was interesting, it was too similar to other content.

Articles Accepted for the $25 Upfront

I'll start off with mine: Why Nutrition Daily Value Percentages are Inaccurate.

Carly Hart's What to Expect If You're Diagnosed with Ocular Hypertension.

Tamara Water's Postpartum Depression: My Time in Darkness.

Cathy A. Montville's Past Life Regression.

R. Elizabeth C. Kitchen's BRCA Mutation: What Does it Mean and What is it like to Be Affected?.

I know that many of those who received the $25 also received a nice little feedback letter. That was nice on AC's part. We don't get much praise for what we do and it was a nice addition to the assignment. Thank you for that, AC.

I hope that this serves as a sort of reference for future assignments (which AC claims that they will be doing more of). Thanks to everyone who provided me links.

The $25 Offer and the Controversy - Did AC Pull a Fast One?

From the onset of the $25 upfront article assignment, there's been a scattering of approvals, lower offers, etc. etc.

When I claimed the assignment, I was completely aware, as I'm sure others were, that there was a great chance that my article could be declined for reasons that I don't completely understand. Do I ever really understand why a subject matter that I write on one week will be accepted for upfront but the next week it won't? Why do I get close to $5 upfront on some articles but as low as $2 on others? The feedback AC gives doesn't necessarily cover all crossings. As I've proved in past posts, AC isn't always consistent or precise. Nothing I've ever done with AC has always made sense to me. Sometimes you shoot and make it, sometimes you don't.

But getting back to the assignment, I was surprised to find other contributors reporting that they were being offered $6 to $10 for the assignment; in other words, the article was rejected on AC's end for $25 and so the contributor was being offered another dollar amount. Since I'm sure others were expecting rejections like I was, I'm sure the lower offers were quite a surprise and may have been even a welcome surprise by many.

But then Michelle Devon (aka Michy) announced in a thread in the forums that she was leaving AC. She's been with AC since May of 2006, someone with almost 800 fans and inching towards 2 million page views. She's an experienced AC writer, who newbies looked up to and asked for advice. She was respected. It was a shock to a lot of people to say the least. But apparently she must know more then I do because I do not find her leaving disturbing. If that's what she wants to do, that's her. But I'm not compelled to follow. Even if my $25 article was offered a lower amount, I would've been happy with the lower offer because even $6 to $10 is higher then the standard upfront pay. But that's just me. There's a lot of variables here and many theories that I will prefer to keep to myself in relation to this move.

I will say this... essentially what I've said before; no matter how long I'm with AC or think I have things figured out, I don't. I don't know of anyone who can say they do know everything - every reason AC declines one article but then turns around and accepts another article on a similar subject or premise for upfront - and I don't know of anyone, no matter how long they've been writing online that knows all the reasons.

But what if AC really did pull a bait and switch like Michy claims? Of course, I would shame, shame them. But I don't know that for certain. What I do know is that I'd had a weird feeling from the moment the hype on this assignment started. I stated as such in the forums which is why I started blogging about it to begin with. Was it right to change the wording on the assignment after the fact? No. As legal as AC tends to be, they should've have seen the liability in their choice of words to begin with. Did they do it on purpose? I don't think so but again, I don't know. And come Monday, I'm taking a ton of links that other contributors have provided to me and I'm going to try to make some sort of sense out of the ones that were rejected compared to the ones that were accepted. So look for that post here next week.

In the meantime, I really don't see the need to threaten AC with leaving. They have thousands of people who write for them and I'm only a little face in the crowd. They could probably care less. I could scream conspiracy theory if I wanted, adding to all the hype in the forums. I actually butted heads with another contributor a couple of weeks ago because he was sour about losing the short story contest, accusing the contest of being rigged. Sheesh.

But that's enough of that.

Toodles.

Your Best Content - $25

Associated Content has been very gracious with the assignment desk as of late; so much so that the list is exhaustive to go through every day. It's great that they are really trying to keep the creative juices flowing, so to speak, by providing these assignments. What's not so great is that probably over half of these assignments are not even eligible for upfront payment which is what most people rely on for their income. I skim through the assignments occasionally but not every day. When I popped into the Contributor's forum last night, though, I was shocked to discover that some people were getting assignments calling for "Your Best Content" which promised to pay a $25 upfront for an exclusive piece. I immediately looked in my assignments, found it, and claimed it.

According to the guidelines, this piece has to be at least 450 words, which is 50 words longer then standard guidelines. They also say an applicable category will be selected upon review which means they don't want to specify categories. It may depend, this time, more of how the article is written then anything else. I could try to speculate but I don't know. I'm taking a wild guess here that the current categories that they don't accept for upfront may be the same categories they won't consider for the $25 upfront. Who knows? The whole thing is not very concrete and is just as much a gamble as any other submission. Different content reviewers have different opinions on what is and is not acceptable on AC. This is obvious to me because of my past experience. So I'll play Russian roulette and just wing it.

Let's find out what the outcome of this assignment will be.

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.

Is Associated Content Worth It?

When I logged on to Stat Counter yesterday to check my blog statistics, I was surprised by a keyword phrase that was used to locate this blog. The phrase was, "is associated content worth it". I can see the person sitting there, contemplating how to make some extra money, or maybe even try to work full time online. Apparently they've been enticed by the Associated Content blurbs and wanted to hear some testimonies on the subject.

So I'm going to answer that question now. Is Associated Content worth it? My answer is that it is only worth what you make of it. As with any other online venture, you have to work at it and keep writing new content in order to keep upping your page view averages. It's the same with blogs or anything else you do. And sometimes it is really frustrating work as you soon discover that some articles get hit big and some do not.

Finding a regular full time job online where you are making the same thing you could make outside the home is very few and far between. It is so rare in fact that many employers who offer these types of jobs often have the job filled before even posting it anywhere. The problem? Millions upon millions of people want to work from home. Whether it's to be close to your children or just so you can sit in your jammies and work, working at home is the top rated job dream. And THAT'S why there are so, so many scams out there.

Let me just tell you a little bit about working at home. For me, it was a necessity. We couldn't exactly be comfortable with one income but when I started checking around for day care prices when I was pregnant (surprise!) with my second son, I realized that between day care for two children, gas, and all the little other expenses required for commuting back and forth to work, that I would only bring home around 10% of my paycheck. I needed to stay home with them. So I began to search for an online job or a job I could do at home. If you'll read back when I first started this blog, you'll see where I started out writing for Helium but was dissatisfied with it. But keep in mind, up until that point, I'd been searching. I tried a few things here and there that I didn't like and just didn't have the heart to stick to.

It took me a little time to start writing for Associated Content, but when I did start, I began to realize that it was worth it for me. Now, Associated Content is long past the point of offering twenty something dollars an article. Most offers for me hover between $3 and $5. Some writers have reported receiving up to $7 upfront. (Let me reiterate that upfront offers are only available to United States residence because of red tape international tax code stuff that I don't understand enough to explain.) Even if you do get upfronts plus page view bonuses, you need to realize that it is gonna take some networking and time to be able to make your articles really worth something. I know of writers who make in excess of $400 a month from AC. But they've also been there awhile and have learned the ropes. They had the patience to stick it out and make it worth something to them. While I can't boast those numbers yet, I do feel like I'm on the right track, (*cough* bragging to follow) especially when I checked my Google alerts this morning and found my AC article links on half a dozen websites including The Wall Street Journal and USA Today.

So what does this mean to you? You sign up, you start writing and submitting. That's it. Along the way, you'll learn more, you'll write more, you'll start to gain a following. My first month on AC earned me 4 fans, approximately $20 something in upfront payments and a whopping $.09 on the page view bonus. Now I have 40 fans, many of them actual subscribers, and I've more then tripled my earnings and it's only been six months. I can only imagine what I can do in six more. Some new AC writers are earning even more in their first month. But you have to stick with it and keep working at it.

One more thing. Don't expect AC to become a full time gig. Many of the "seasoned" writers on AC also write for other sites or maintain their own blogs as a source of income. But AC is a great place to start the learning process.

Not that I want to go pick out china patterns with AC but you get the drift.

The Bad Part of Writing for AC

I got an article pulled today. It was an article highlighting various win cash sweepstakes. The feedback to this article said that it was too promotional. This only makes the second article in six months that's been pulled from AC after I've published them as a DO. Even though I know it's not personal, I still can't help but feel like I've been cut down a notch every time something like this happens.

The thing is that I've seen a number of articles on AC that follow the format of, "I've looked up these things online, and here are a few noteworthy ones." That's exactly how I formed my article. I researched through a great number of individual sweepstakes (spending more time then I usually would on an article, I might add) and only chose the ones to write about that were easy, free, and offered a substantial reward. The comments I had gotten already for it the few days it was up was promising. It had 41 page views that I can't get back now. Thank goodness it wasn't higher.

While my first impulse was to be offended, I took a little while to take stock. While I can see the idea that it might be too promotional, I don't understand why it was pulled while other similar content remains. But, alas, it is not my site, I don't own it and they are certainly within their rights to reject it. They pay me to put up what they want. I don't pay them to put up what I want.

On a side note, I had an article awhile back that was rejected for upfront being called a "website review" while another source got an upfront offer for a similar article about another website. Sometimes I just don't understand the inconsistency. I suspect it's the theory of different AC employees have different opinions when it comes to deciphering the guidelines.

It's not going to discourage me from submitting content. On the bright side, I was offered upfronts for two articles today that I wrote last week, one of which I accepted, the other which I declined and posted in the Workshop forum for some SEO pointers in hopes to improve it. I'm almost certain that my next article to be reviewed will be declined for upfront. Guess we'll see.

My week has been all outta whack! Time to regroup and reorganize if I want to reach my 20 article goal by the end of the month.