Low Rates for Online Writing

People often ask about finding work through job sites like Elance.  Here's a current listing on Guru.com:

California's largest car buying service is looking for a proficient SEO writer to write and post thousands of articles on the used car business for an on-going SEO campaign. We would like you to have basic knowledge of SEO writing, blogging, search, and linking strategies. Our process will involve the "Article Manager" software program. We will train the right person. This is a part time position as we intend to post two articles per day which may take you two to three hours for research and to write both articles. You may work seven days per week if you wish to. Our pay is $15.00 per article for the right person.

I like this (she said with sarcasm.)  They want you to spend one to 1.5 hours researching, writing and posting through special software an unspecified number of words in a specialized type of writing (SEO, which usually means Search Engine Optimization) all for a measly $15.  That's a worse pay rate than graduate assistants make.  A "proficient SEO writer" should expect the pay of a specialist -- I'd estimate at least $40 an hour.

Unfortunately, this is the highest-paying job offer I've run across for SEO writing! 

Consider the alternative:

The editor of a traditional print publication who lacks the professional courtesy to place even a one sentence form rejection letter in the SASE you sent with your query and return it. It takes no great effort to compose such a response and save it in a Word file where an editorial assistant can duplicate it as needed. If the Post Office gets its way, it will cost the writer 84 cents per no-response query by this time next year.

Traditional print publications where the odds of having an article idea accepted and published are about 1 in 30,000 (four articles from freelancers used per year, 10,000 queries per month).

At least the E-lance job pays. That is, if it ever existed in the first place, or if it wasn't filled by the time it appeared on the web site. If it wasn't, you still have to wonder about the desirability of jobs that can't be filled by word of mouth, or by dumping the work onto someone in-house, and end up being dangled as bait on freelancers' web sites.

I write for an on-line write-for-cash web site. It pays, and the editors are accessible. Some of the content is pretty good. It can also seem like a dumping ground for college term papers in desperate need of line editing.

I hate posted SEO jobs because, yes, most of them are ridiculously low-paying. I don't think most of these job posters realize that online writing isn't some whimsical hobby; people actually do it for a living - especially SEO stuff. And 1.5 hours for a $15 article isn't going to cut it. You could work at Burger King or McDonald's in the city, and make the same with less stress.

If I'm going to look for a writing job, I normally avoid the job boards and go directly to the source: I contact websites directly asking them if they need SEO or any other type of articles. Sure this takes time just like searching job boards and writing back to posters, but it takes a lot less time in my experience. Plus most sites are willing to pay rates that will earn you at least $30-$40 an hour (depending on how fast you write of course) if you contact them directly.

I completely agree.  I don't bother going through content sites--the pay rates are just plain insulting. I would rather take the traditional route of directly contacting publications and websites.  Sure, it takes a little longer to hear back, but once you have a strong routine in place, at least you're being paid what you're worth.  The only way to become a respected writer is to treat yourself like one, and not take writing jobs just for the sake of writing.

Krissy Brady, Writer
Keeping The Passion For Writing Alive
http://www.krissybrady.com

misfits&mascara
Mastering the art of productive procrastination.
http://www.misfitsandmascara.com

This sort of writing isn't the only thing that pays poorly. Look at the small regional and trade magazines that pay $35 for a 500-600 word piece.

I was always amazed at the self-help books/magazines that tell you that you can make a living at this (by recycling stuff you've sold elsewhere, as long as you retain rights). You end up putting in ten hours a day managing your queries, re-writing, researching, etc. And if you think you're going to sell three of four of these a day, you're nuts.

belowtheradar:

Consider the alternative:

The editor of a traditional print publication who lacks the professional courtesy to place even a one sentence form rejection letter in the SASE you sent with your query and return it. It takes no great effort to compose such a response and save it in a Word file where an editorial assistant can duplicate it as needed. If the Post Office gets its way, it will cost the writer 84 cents per no-response query by this time next year.

Traditional print publications where the odds of having an article idea accepted and published are about 1 in 30,000 (four articles from freelancers used per year, 10,000 queries per month).

At least the E-lance job pays. That is, if it ever existed in the first place, or if it wasn't filled by the time it appeared on the web site. If it wasn't, you still have to wonder about the desirability of jobs that can't be filled by word of mouth, or by dumping the work onto someone in-house, and end up being dangled as bait on freelancers' web sites.

I write for an on-line write-for-cash web site. It pays, and the editors are accessible. Some of the content is pretty good. It can also seem like a dumping ground for college term papers in desperate need of line editing.

 

Every single thing is you say is completely wrong.  No response saves everyone time and money, and generally means you write crap, anyway, so why do you want an editor to tell you this?

Saying the odds are 30,000 to one at a print magazines is just plain silly.  I'd use a stronger word, but this is a family site.  They're certainly untrue of the vast majority, and don't matter, anyway.  Few editors close their eyes and choose stories and articles at random. They pick based on quality. Unfortunately, very little an editor sees has any quality at all. I don't think there's a print magazine in existence with your submission/acceptance ratio, but teh moment you say "odds", you're aren' ttalking from any knowledge base. 

There are no odds.  If you can write well enough, and know how to fit a piece to a magazine, your "odds" of being accepted are one hundred percent.  If you can't write well enough, and don't know how to fit a piece to a magazine, your "odds" are zero.  Very, very few who submit to magazines know how to do either.

The alternative to selling to low-pay online market, where editors buy mostly crap from chumps, make a huge profit, and pay peanuts, is simply to learn how to write well enough to sell to big magazines where one good sale can pay more for a week's work than online markets will pay you for a year's slavery.