How to Dress Like a Demand Studios Forum Zombie
DSSers,
I’ll be jacking out of the Matrix for a few days.
So no updates.
The comments are kicking butt, though. Keep it up.
I was also wondering if someone wanted to write a guest Demand Studios Sucks spot?
The pay is minimal and I will keep 100% of the ad revenue from any writing that you do.
You can just email me (patrick at demandstudiossucks.com) or send it in through the contact form.
I can understand your thinking the natural response to the note about your gatekeeping meant you had to crack down. That was my first thought, as I’ve noted.
But a quick email to my lead straightened that out. He showed me how to spot inappropriate content and how to compose queries that would lead writers to approvals. I received the “gatekeeping” note because I was passing too many generic articles and content that didn’t fulfill the titles. It wasn’t about numbers at all, and if those notes create such an uptick, why has the rejection rate remained around the same numbers for three years?
My rewrite requests stayed about the same and my rejection rate dropped after my session with my lead, because I got smarter about my queries.
And the fact is other CEs and I are dinged whenever a reviewer thinks we’re making inappropriate rewrite requests or rejecting articles without grounds. You lose points for that.
The fact is, you made an assumption about what that note implied and didn’t bother to clarify it. I did.
On your other point, cyberbullying is reprehensible, but any large forum is bound to attract its share of nuts. I know my lead has proactively followed up on any reports he receives of bullying. Short of banning people from the forums–which the company certainly does–what can anyone do to stop some lowlife from pursuing you? I hate that anyone would stalk you. That’s foul, and the people who are doing it are cowards. But they do it because they are almost impossible to catch. Which is why none of us are stupid enough to print our contact information in any forums.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
As I have stated many times over: THERE IS NO OFFICIAL DEMAND MEDIA REWRITE AND REJECTION QUOTA THAT MUST BE OBTAINED BY DEMAND STUDIOS COPY EDITORS!!!! Why do you insist on side-stepping the issue and focusing on accusations that were NEVER made?
As I have stated on many, many threads here and on the DS Z-forums, it’s all about “gatekeeping.” According to my experience and many other DS CEs who I, personally (in real life), know, when a CE receives a review that reads, “You need to work on better ‘gatekeeping,’” the natural response for a CE is to crack down on writers.
This then leads to sending out more rewrite requests and rejections. Once my colleagues and I started sending out major batches of rewrites requests and rejections, our reviews suddenly changed to “WONDERFUL gatekeeping. Keep up the great work.” And since CE reviews typical are done near month’s end, writers see an uptick in the number or rewrite requests and rejections. It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to figure this out, MarkKL.
I hope you are not that naive and/or blind to what has been happening right under your nose.
As far as writer/CE animosity goes, Demand Media condones and encourages cyberbully and cyberstalking via the General Forum. Forum “moderators” currently are actively bullying and stalking anyone who doesn’t say, “I LOVE DEMAND STUDIOS!” I should know: I’m currently being harassed via home phone, cell phone, e-mail and at my workplace by several General Forum members, including one “moderator.” When any company forbids communication among departments, contempt is sure to follow.
Again, it doesn’t take a brain surgeon to figure it out.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Empirical evidence?
My empirical evidence is that I recently received the change to assume higher-paying projects at Demand because my rejection rate is SO LOW and, as my lead has noted, I consistently write comments that help writers to avoid rejection.
My empirical evidence includes the numerous directives that tell us to compose notes to writers that read as if we were addressing an esteemed colleague, and that we should “advise” rather than “admonish.”
My empirical evidence would include the editors the company has dropped for writing abusive notes or notes that were to vague to be helpful.
My empirical evidence would include the hours my lead invests in saving articles from rejection.
My empirical evidence would include the note he sent me only two days ago, when I had to reject a piece we couldn’t save. He wrote, “Gently explain the reason why we can’t salvage this. Remember, rejections are painful for writers. Don’t add to the injury with a thoughtless word.”
And your evidence of some some rejection quota or some policy to create friction is what exactly?
Name the lead who told you to maintain a certain rejection rate.
I read the thread you posted some time back in the Demand forum. I admired it because you admitted that it was based only on your perception, not on any hard fact.
I remember that you wrote you thought there was a quota because your reviewer cited you for not sending back enough article for rewrites or rejections.
I received a similar note when I first started. And so I asked my lead, “What percentage of articles should I return?”
And he replied, “There is no set percentage. Send back queries when the content is erroneous or unclear or poorly composed. Provide detail so the writer can fix the problems. Reject only when we can’t salvage the content.
You see, I had the same thought as you, at first. But I took the time to ask my lead for a policy clarification. In those threads of yours that I’ve seen, you don’t mention asking your lead anything. Perhaps if you had, your perspective would be different.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
MarkKL: “Witness the nonexistent R&R quotas, or the idea that the company actively engages in creating friction between writers and editors, when I’ve seen countless directives to the contrary.”
You haven’t heard a word we’ve been saying. Once again, MarkKL: Empirical studies trump your hollow words.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hello Sparkle: I have written for Demand, and I have gone through the appeals process as a writer. Perhaps I should have mentioned that. As for the other assertion, I sent my lead a email that simply read, “Just out of curiosity, I wondered how many of our copy editors are back-up CEs and how many of the mods serve in that role?”
And he replied, “I don’t know what you mean. We don’t have back-up copy editors. No one serves in that capacity.”
Listen, I know there are many fine even brilliant suggestions on this site, and I’ve seen legitimate issues raised. But the volume of misinformation is, in some threads, overwhelming. I’ve seen threads in which Richard and Eve have been castigated for neglecting duties they simply don’t have. In one thread, someone was ripping them for the state of the guidelines when, in fact, they don’t write the guidelines. The company issues those.
I don’t think anyone deliberately misstates the facts. But I think the same thing that happens in most forums happens here. What starts as speculation based on a misperception passes from one “mouth-to-another” until it morphs into fact, when there is little fact involved.
Witness the nonexistent R&R quotas, or the idea that the company actively engages in creating friction between writers and editors, when I’ve seen countless directives to the contrary.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dumb, very dumb – the point was whether she or any mod understood how the appeals system worked. Mark’s implication was that one excluded the other, when anyone who has worked as both a writer and CE knows both sides of the coin. In fact, unless Mark has worked extensively as a writer too, he is not in a good spot to even comment in the first place.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
are you aware that the Mod in question is a part-time CE herself?
The mod in question is not a part-time CE; she is a back up CE. Not the same thing. She has stated on the forum that she has never actually been called upon as a back up, so let’s not exaggerate her influence, k? And no, I’m not her fan, but let’s not fearmonger with hyperbole. She only has power to close forum threads. For all anyone knows, there could be hundreds of back up CEs. Or maybe they just gave her that designation as a self esteem boost.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Mark – are you aware that the Mod in question is a part-time CE herself? Also, at least two of the other mods are full-time CEs.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Thanks, disCONTENTed. I’ll send this tonight.
I should have added to my last post, that it’s entirely possible that “Idea” article appeals go against writers most of the time. I don’t know if that’s so, and I doubt anyone keeps track, but I can’t speak to that without more information. I know those can be tough titles to interpret, so it’s certainly possible. But it doesn’t change the percentage of calls that go in favor of writers on the help desk.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Mods have nothing to do with the appeal process. I doubt they even know how it works. I’ve disagreed with writers over their interpretation of “Idea” titles, only to have the Help Desk manager rule in their favor. You have to put this in context. The company publishes hundreds of thousands of titles a month. There are bound to be bad calls, and it may seem like many bad calls from the outside, particularly if you’re on the receiving end. But compared to the volume, the number is tiny.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
MarkKL you have my permission as well. I’ve been trying to improve things almost since I started writing for DS and realized exactly what writers are up against.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Just the other day, Barbara/Meghan was saying how she wouldn’t touch a title with “Ideas” in it with a ten foot pole. She agrees with the consensus of the writers – if your idea of what “ideas” are is different from that of the CE reviewing the article, you have no hope of appeal and the article is shot.
So right there you had a Community Moderator and someone who is usually very much towing the party line and very much an insider admitting that she avoids a particular title types because if she runs afoul of a CE in writing it, she’s sunk.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Thank you, Julianne, I will.
Oh Mark: You have your experience, and I have mine. Working regularly on the other side, I know those numbers are correct. Believe whatever you want.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You have my permission to use my suggestion. I truly would like to see Demand become a better place for writers.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
That’s an old story. In fact, it’s boilerplate. According to you my experiences and the experiences of every writer and CE I have ever written or spoken to (a three digit number) is worth zilch. Only what your experience matters. That’s bogus on the face of it, and your “facts” are (as you say) plain wrong.
As for numbers, the company spent 2007 to 2009 denying things that they now readily admit. The misinformation is everywhere. What’s the old saying “I was lying yesterday, but today I am telling the truth?” Oh yeah, that sure is trustworthy. You guys must really think we have no memory.
I’ll go outside and look for the porcine creatures with wings and rollerskates now…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hello Julianne and Discontented: I would like your permission to copy your suggestions, without including your community names, so I can send them to Richard today. However, I won’t send without your permission.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Like disCONTENTed, I believe you, Mark. I’m glad to hear that DS has been good to some people (and very glad to hear your son is doing better). Yet for every story like yours, I see (and have experienced) many that are the exact opposite. My question is, how can we make a level playing field so that everyone feels like you do? I know I’m a writer and not near the top of the long list of writers they have, but I would love to have real feedback from the higher ups like you describe with your lead. Writers don’t have anything like that in place. The only communication we have is notes we can leave the CE and the occasional email through the HelpDesk. I would love to see a system in place where we could all have access to real help like you have.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
MarkKL, I’m not going to dispute the veracity of what you say (and I’m also glad your son is on the mend).
Maybe you’re treated with courtesy and respect because you’ve proven yourself and achieved longevity. I find that very encouraging news.
But it doesn’t explain the Wild West atmosphere the rest of us see in dealing with CEs. You say there’s very little turnover in the ranks, yet the regular excuse is always that “there’s a new batch of CEs.”
Why must it ALWAYS be the writers who take it on the chops with crazy rewrites and unfairly low scores?
Maybe DS should consider cutting the most senior and best producers and CEs some slack by pairing them together (I’m not putting myself in this elite category, BTW, I’m a sporadic producer at best).
It seems like it would be the quickest, easiest way to get the highest-quality content to market sooner.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Glad your son is okay, Mark.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
right….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hello “Oh Mark:” With respect, your facts don’t reflect reality. You wrote, “…someone with 1,500 articles published and high scores has a prayer of an appeal…”
I don’t know how you define “prayer of an appeal,” but about 25% of the rewrite appeals made on my articles are decided in favor of the writer. About a month ago, I asked my lead if I was doing something wrong, and he wrote back, “Not at all. I often can see valid points for both sides in these appeals. On average, I rule in favor for the writer about a third of the time.” A third is a good deal more than a prayer. I also asked him how many appeals they get each week. These occur in less than one-quarter of one percent of all the article they publish. It’s a minuscule amount.
And here’s a number you can’t possibly know. I must bring by lead 10 articles a week that are headed for rejection after a second review. He’ll typically save 8 of them by going online and finding some crucial fact or clarify some essential section to make the piece publishable. You don’t know that because you’ve earned an approval, so you don’t have any comments to check, and if you did check the comments, no CE is going to write, “My lead saved this for you.”
As far as CEs who have been on the job for eight or nine days, I bet appeals for their articles go in favor of the writer most of the time. And most of the time a seasoned CE is reviewing your work. The turnover rate among CEs is very low. That’s why the team has grown so large. The company continues to contract CE because the writer pool keeps growing.
Last night I browsed through some threads and read assumptions about CEs and their work. Most of the comments are misinformed. For example, we don’t have to work a certain number of hours in any given week, the production quotas are merely goals and you can go weeks without editing for the company without asking for permission.
Four months ago, my son was hit by a hit-and-run drive while he was bicycling. It was dicey for that first week. I couldn’t even write an email, much less edit. After 10 days, my son was in the clear, and I wrote to my lead, explaining what happened and apologizing for my absence. He replied five minutes later, and I still have the email because it means a lot to me. He wrote, “Family and health come first, my friend. You never need permission to tend either, and you certainly shouldn’t apologize for it. Remember, you’re a freelancer; you can withdraw from working whenever you want. Your schedule is your own. If this kept you from working for a month, six months, a year, whatever, it wouldn’t matter. We would welcome you whenever you were ready to edit. I’ll keep your son in my thoughts. If there’s anything I can do to help, contact me.”
And then he gave me his phone number and three days later he called me to ask how my son was progressing. Not a perfunctory call, either. He spent a good half hour with me.
Maybe now you can understand why I have a slightly different perspective of this company than most of you. It’s not just his gesture, which speaks to his humanity. I simply know the numbers and I read the directives, and they provide ample evidence that some of your assumptions are dead wrong.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Even if what you said were 100% true, you are partially confirming the point anyway.
Lets talk about those hundreds of CEs for a second. There isn’t a writer working for the company who doesn’t feel that someone with 1,500 articles published and high scores has a prayer on appeal with a CE who has been on the job for eight or nine days. The appeals people think this: CEs might be wrong, but writers always are.
Why back people who aren’t actually doing what they are told to the hilt so regularly?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’ve been a copy editor at Demand for three years, and I’ll state it plainly: There is no quota for rejections or rewrites, and there never has been. There isn’t even an implied quota. The company rejects less than 2% of all submissions. I recently received a chance to take on higher-paying projects, and when the Demand lead offered this to me, he wrote, “Your notes frequently save writers from rejections, which should be the goal for all of our editors.” We also have received guidance that directs us to “advise, never admonish”…”write to the writer as if he or she is an esteemed colleague”…”remember that guiding the writer to approval is your primary goal.” My lead spends most of his day working with CEs to save articles from rejection. You wouldn’t know that because no one tells you about the interaction. The idea that the company wants us to reject articles that can be published or to slow production by asking for unnecessary rewrites, or that it wants to create friction between CEs and writers is just a fantasy.
Now, do all CEs comply with those directives that implore us to make the lives of writers easier? No. We have hundreds of CEs and some of them plainly don’t get it. But they don’t last long. Among the guidance we have received is this: “The company has a zero-tolerance policy for editors who abuse or denigrate writers.” And I know of several CEs who, in only the last few weeks, have permanently lost their editing privileges for writing abusive notes. I’m sure you have many substantive issues to debate in these forums. But chattering about this is wasting time on a hallucination.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
FactsATQS, very well said. When writers are complaining of rewrites to add or remove a word or two, answer some simple, obviously trumped-up question, move a comma, or some other picky little task that’s clearly within the CE’s job description, only an idiot wouldn’t think there’s SOME reason CEs feel compelled to generate rewrites. And DS knows full well that the reason would piss off the writers royally if they knew about it.
Personally, I don’t buy the shop-worn excuse that it’s all new CEs who “are learning the ropes.” They’re all supposed to have a min. of 5 years’ experience, yet they don’t know what constitutes basic editing? If so, they never should have made the first cut. So for that excuse to hold water, DS is saying by default that it has no idea how to hire competent editors.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
A word about the quota “scandal:”
Kent Ninomiya, the former golden boy of Demand Studios, was the first to say that Studio insiders had told him that there was an unofficial quota system in the copy editing department. That post is on his DS Secrets blog and anyone can go read it. Given that Kent KNOWS most of these people personally and was hip-deep involved in planning sessions for a long time, I laugh when forum zombies and brown-nosers like RMattesion and Dirk Cable call him a liar.
The next part was when Page1News came out and told it from the CE side – namely that some CEs respond to the demands placed on them by issuing more rewrites for whatever reason they can dig up. The result usually gets them out of trouble for “good gatekeeping” or somesuch thing. You can read her comments here on what happened after that.
Now, when Richard Lally and the forum propagandists came out and attacked all of this stuff, they NEVER addressed the exact issue at hand. Instead, the denied there was an official, fixed quota system. Well, as far as we know that is true: no one has ever alleged that it is DS policy for CEs to send 1 in 5 articles back or whatever. Instead, they spoke of a climate that encouraged arbitrary behavior. In other words, they refuted a statement no one made, leaving the actual allegations unaddressed.
For people who claim to have backgrounds with mainstream journalism, its a very obvious act of deliberate – and amateurish – deception. Only the naive bought into it. Besides, too many people have their own experiences stretching into hundreds or thousands of articles to not know the truth.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
KW. You’re right on that it’s “no different than the oil spill in the gulf.” Except that instead of stomping out sea life, forcing animals to relocate, ruining the food supply, and destroying thousands of living ecosystems, it means we have to take longer to look stuff up.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
congratulations
.. you have just won a new reader 
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Just to inject some accuracy here, what the CE’s are/were “admitting” is that they have a 75 article per week quota (which is no secret anyway). No one there is saying they have a quota for rewrites and rejections, because it isn’t true.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Oh the drama is delicious, this has now spawned several threads. One of them is the one mentioned, “Overwhelming volume of rewrite appeals.” There are also two threads with the same name, but different content, in both the general discussion and feedback/help forums. They’re titled “My experience thus far as a DS CE”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
In Feedback/Suggestions, look for “Overwhelming volume of rewrite appeals.” My eyes are crossed now.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I thought I found it but it was a different one. So, yeah, dish with the name.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hmmm, Yes, I need the name of that thread, too. I haven’t been to the forums in the past few days, so I need to get over there. I’m off to search.
As far as writing and being a writer… I see both sides of the issue. I know people who can barely string words together and I know gifted writers. The umbrella is large enough to cover all kinds…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Never mind. I found it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
What’s the name of the thread? Is it obviously named, like “CE Quotas?”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
John, I just read the saga of CE volume and time quotas by the CE (who came across as very capable) who just basically told DS to shove it. It’s got me wondering who in their right mind would commit to such abject servitude for the chump change they pay. And they have to ASK for time off? WTF?
And now the writers are in a tizzy over a marked increase in frivolous rewrites and rejections, suspecting there’s a conspiracy. And then, suddenly, Lally SWOOPS in, like the Great Oz from the behind the curtain, and tells them not to believe anything they see, it’s all an illusion in their minds. I guess he forgot that they each have a permanent list of rejections and those damned scorecards to remind them they haven’t been hallucinating, unless those are all mirages as well.
It wouldn’t surprise me a bit if the CEs have been told to do some insidious thing while the writers have been kept in the dark. That’s the sick and twisted game DS seems addicted to. Pit the CEs against the writers and make sure to stack the deck so the writers NEVER win. And when the writers cry “Foul!” wring your hands and pretend you’re helpless to change anything.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Is anyone else following the CE quota drama on the forums? I’m done paying attention to them for a while, I can’t take it anymore, but it’s pretty funny at the same time. Maybe just because I know I’m getting away from Demand Stupidity-O’s. Every single CE over there is confirming that they have quotas. The only person saying there aren’t any quotas is Richard Lally. Even the ass kissing zombies are admitting as much, though they will probably find a way to spin it and deny it now that the mighty Lally has spoken and they will all start fearing for their jobs. This has actually caused me to have sympathy for the CEs. Imagine that.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Great post, KW. Love this line about DS: “It’s really no different from the oil spill in the Gulf.” Sadly, so true.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’ve read every word of this blog and its comments, and it’s a much-needed breath of fresh air! I’ve been writing for DS for about a year, off and on, and what I find most offensive (besides the galloping incompetence of most of the CEs, which DS flatly refuses to acknowledge) is that DS is trashing cyberspace with thousands of derivative pieces of crap EVERY DAY. It’s really no different from the oil spill in the Gulf. At some point, DS will have so polluted the Web that you won’t be able to do a Google search and bring up anything but pages and pages of regurgitation these so-called “writers” are churning out.
I think DS has established the abysmal depth we will sink to for a buck when times are tight. And they’re laughing all the way to the bank about it.
I wouldn’t call many of the DS pom-pom shakers writers. They’ve never written for “real” publication, and probably couldn’t pass muster anyway. They don’t know what passive voice is. They don’t know how to use commas. They can’t spell. Don’t get me started on their usage errors.
They find somebody else’s words and string them together in a different way, just like an ape can be taught to string beads. That doesn’t necessarily mean the ape knows or understands what he’s doing. He’s just “aping” the motions, as these hacks do with the idiot-proof templates, while they constantly whine to have every minute point of the process spelled out for them in black and white detail. They need DS to tell them “always” or “never” because “sometimes” is WAY too scary. They might have to actually THINK.
On the other hand, the army of idiot CEs keeps the whole system in a constant state of chaos with their capricious, often irrational, totally unchecked behavior.
And the little DS cheerleaders just wave their pom-poms and thank their lucky stars they have found such a WONDERFUL place to work.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The funny thing about this whole “plagiarism” scandal is that DS does NOT want original material. I’ve only had one original article make it through the CEs and I’ve written nearly 2000 articles. I’ve had shit sent back because I didn’t follow the EXACT same process as my reference. I’ve written articles using my own knowledge and then found references to support some of the statements I make and they come back at me. I even include notes to let them know that I wrote the crap from my own experience using my own process but I found a similar reference to prove that I’m not pulling things out of my ass. Nope, not good enough.
“Your reference says to use blue paint but you say that you can use any color you wish… Which is it?”
It’s a fucking joke. They flat out DEMAND repurposed content with no original anything but then accuse writers of wrongdoing for doing exactly what they demand through their fucked up editing process.
I think it’s just an excuse to fire people they don’t want around. When I was a teenager, I worked at a grocery store where everyone was required to wear those back support belts, even if you were a cashier or just swept the damn floor. Nobody wore them but if someone was being a pain in the ass they would get fired for not wearing that stupid belt. The policy existed to weed out irritating employees.
Demand can fire a writer with good scores, low rejection and rewrite levels by accusing him or her of plagiarism. If the person bitches, they can hang her out to dry as the lowest of the low and her fellow writers will jump all over her for being a disgusting plagiarist. DS comes out smelling fresh as a rose and some poor content writer gets her name trashed. That’s another very good reason to use a pen name.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
DS_Forum_Lurker: Exactly. Most people do NOT like or even WANT to write. And not everyone can “string words together.” I know a lot of smart people with zero writing skills. That someone is writing for Demand doesn’t make them any less of a writer. It’s the quality of their writing (independent of the content) that matters.
There are plenty of housewives who never went to journalism school who can write quite well. And there are plenty of people with journalism degrees who suck balls. For that matter, there are plenty of published authors who aren’t that great either. They’re still writers.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
And, as I said Betty, I find Journalism pretty robotic as well. As far as I’m concerned, Journalists aren’t writers either. They’re just people with decent observation skills who are able to string words together. But, hey, YMMV.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’m not sure where I stand on this “writing” thing or not. I guess I do tend to lean towards it being “writing” than not, because the majority of people I know could not write for Demand Studios. I think it takes dedication and an interest in writing to do this. I’ve tried to introduce so many people to DS and no one applies. When I said they could write articles for $15, they like the $15 part, but mention the word “article” and they freeze up, bringing up memories of writing term papers for 11th grade English class. Most people *don’t* like to write.
I was an English major and I love to write. I write for DS because it pays. I’d rather write for my blog, but it doesn’t pay the bills. As a result from working at DS, my writing is so much tighter and focused…which, in turn, helps me with my fun writing on my blog.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Sorry, I don’t consider stringing together sentences that must conform to an identical robotic “voice” shared by 6,000 other DS faux “writers” on a moronic color-by-numbers template using information that is lifted from other sources to be “writing.” I suppose those who believe elevator “muzak” is the same as “music” might believe DS writers are “as much real writers as the people who write for the NY Times or…make it to the best-seller list.” I sure as hell don’t.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I have to play devil’s advocate with the whole “not writing” thing.
First, I want to preface this by saying that I was a Film and Video major in college, with an emphasis on writing. That said, deep in my dirty little heart of hearts, I don’t consider Demand Studios work writing. Of course, I also don’t consider JOURNALISM writing. My definition of “writing” is fiction–creating new worlds and characters. To me, writing is exaggeration and hyperbole. It’s flights of fancy. It’s capturing what lies deep within the human soul.
Journalism is a dry, perfunctory, rehashing of facts. Journalists don’t write, they just observe and report.
So, after I have offended all the journalists in the house, I’m now gonna say this.
That’s a pretty snobby and exclusionist world view–I admit it and I OWN it. But I also realize that I need to get the hell over myself.
Demand work is writing. The same way that Journalism is writing. It may not win any Pulitzers; it may not require a lot of skill, talent or education; and it’s pretty low on the totem pole, but it is writing.
Do I think that someone should call themselves a “writer” based only on their work for Demand? I don’t know. On the one hand, I think they should at least try other things. On the other, if they put words to paper and get paid, that should be enough to qualify them. Hell, there are plenty of writers who never make it to the “getting paid” part.
People who write for Demand are as much real writers as the people who write for the NY Times or the ones who make it to the best-seller list.
The same way a musician is a musician, even if all he does is write commercial jingles or perform at weddings.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Definitely not journalism, Betty. Yikes. I just graduated with my B.A. in Journalism and write for a couple local publications freelance style. But I cannot keep the lights on on that income alone. It’s not stable. I saw a DS ad on JournalismJobs.com and applied. This is definitely not journalism. It’s not what I studied for four years and it’s not what I’m proud to do. But it’s good enough for now.
I just got a Database down error message and I’m pretty sure I lost what I had just finished. Grrr.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It’s a shame you’re going offline. There’s a scandal a-brewing regarding possible “CE quotas” sending rewrites and rejects as means of improving their reviews. I’d be interested to hear this site’s take on it.
Part of me gets seriously pissed off over the asinine rewrites. The other part of me says eff it, give me my money and get me the hell outta here.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Enjoy the time off! Now, these guest spots that you speak of, would the minimal pay be, say, $15 per post? HAHAHA The irony!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Oh, and I almost forgot — many of the DS forum zombies and pod people actually believe what they’re writing is “journalism.” HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Exactly. DS “writing” is based on regurgitating already existing content from other sites – in other words, plagiarizing. Those who can quickly churn out four $15.00 articles per hour seem to be skilled at quickly transforming other people’s words (jokingly called “references”) into sentences which will slip past the plagiarism detectors, which has nothing to do with genuine writing. It kills me when the DS forum zombies and pod people refer to this as “writing,” and actually believe that working for DS makes them “writers.” Oh, and calling those short pieces of stolen shit “articles” is another huge joke. Fucking kills me! What DS promotes is actually the antithesis of genuine writing — forcing their “creators” to write in the same dumbass template with the identical, monotone HAL 2000 voice, stripped of any originality and uniqueness, which must be backed-up by online references that are obviously plagiarized from other online references.
Yeah, I saw that post. It’s a joke because it’s what everybody on DS does, no matter how much they try and spin it – regurgitate and plagiarize.
It’s not “writing” and they’re not “articles.”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Have a nice break! Looking forward to most posts.
Also, just wanted to ask you & the other commenters here if they read the DS thread where the girl was accused of plagiarism by a CE, when, after she posted what she wrote and the text from the source, it CLEARLY wasn’t plagiarized.
Then, some of the forum zombies jumped in and told her she plagiarized. Some of DS forumites said they couldn’t see why it was plagiarism (and I agree with them) because she took the information and re-wrote it in her own words.
But isn’t that what we *do* in our articles? We basically regurgitate stuff that’s already out there. We take stuff from other sites, rewrite it, and plop it up on eHow or wherever. And isn’t that Demand Media’s purpose? That’s why we have the titles like “How to File for Unemployment in Kansas” — the web searcher *should* go to the official gov. site but DS wants a slice of the pie, which is why these articles are written. So, the DS writer who claims this title is going to use the official website as his resource and rewrite the information. If a CE says that’s plagiarism, well, that’s scary.
Anyone have any thoughts on this? That thread scares me.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0