And what about copywriters they offer tutorials about using iPhone and didn't ever hold this phone in their hands. Is it still about their skills or we talk about rewriting articles from someone else to be copyscape passed?
I think it's okay to write reviews for products you don't own (let's face it - most reviews are written as a mechanism to recommend that a customer buys a given product through an affiliate link). Tutorials are more difficult. There's a more obvious 'trustworthiness' factor when a writer recommends a certain approach. When that approach isn't valid - let's say the writer states that you need to follow the wrong series of steps - 'trustworthiness' is seriously reduced. And that has a long term result.
I highly doubt that "most" reviews are written for that purpose at all. Does it happen from those who are less than ethical? Sure, and often no doubt. But that doesn't constitute "most" by a long shot. And there's just as much of a trust factor in reviews - I'd even argue moreso. Why? Because people are really pissed off if you reviewed something, they invested money in it because you said it was great, and it really sucked. You lose all credibility. You not only build more trust with honest reviews from actually using something, but you can earn much more money that way - when people trust you, they'll trust your recommendations and spend more, as long as you don't disappoint by being dishonest just to try to make a quick affiliate buck.
You're quite right! "Most" is an overstatement. Replace that with "many" or "a sizeable number of" and my sentence reads truer. I guess I should qualify what I meant. A lot of sites don't care if they build up a long-term relationship with the readers, so long as they have a shot at selling them a product. As a writer it's something you may well be asked to do. The ethics of the situation are highly debatable. As an example, I write quite a few reviews on dp, but they're always intended to be balanced. You do have to dress up even the worst products with some positive statements, but I would hope that dp readers are smart enough to read between the lines. I don't know whether that holds more widely on the Internet, but I don't change my style drastically elsewhere. Even the best writers do have to consider the ethical implications of what they do. For instance I wouldn't dream of writing assignments for students, but some do (although I guess that's a topic for another debate entirely). The question is where to draw the line. It's a thin one.
Sadly, I must contradict you here. I think the word "mostly" fits perfectly, as quality sites that can afford unbiased reviews from people that actually used the respective products are part of the minority. Even sites with user-created reviews will be abused by marketers looking to promote their products. And nowadays, quick affiliate buck > ethics. Cause you never know what tomorrow brings I'm not saying I endorse the lack of ethics, but given the instability and fast pace of the Internet (and Internet marketing), it's unavoidable.
I still say it doesn't come anywhere close to "most." Saying that is like the folks here saying $5 per article is what "most" clients pay - they're dead wrong, but they think that's the truth, because it's what they're exposed to in this one particular outlet (which far from represents all Web-based publications). You need to consider the vast majority of reviews out there if you want to make a blanket judgment call. Those include (but aren't limited to): 1. User-generated (you mentioned these, but I hardly think you can say the bulk of reviews on a site like Amazon are fake or written by marketers). 2. Online versions of newspapers and magazines (whether a small local newspaper online or a major magazine's online version) have to keep credibility in mind (not saying they always use everything, but that it's not mostly about making an affiliate buck. 3. Blog reviews written by the blog owner - those writing their own reviews (which I imagine far outweigh paid reviews these days, especially with people stopping and even removing old paid reviews because of Google cracking down on them) have to keep credibility in mind. Do they all? No. But with the huge amount of blogs out there, affiliates don't make up the majority (keep in mind that most blogs are still of a personal nature rather than the types of niche blogs you see promoted here, and they very often rely on reviews without any direct affiliate compensation). 4. Just look at entertainment sites if you want to see honest (often harsh) reviews where they're not swayed to post false reviews for affiliate earnings (are there exceptions? Sure. But rarely with the more credible sites, which often happen to be the largest, and therefore the ones with the budgets to hire more reviewers.). To say most reviewers are doing that is just wrong. It's not factoring in all types of reviews and reviewers. The only way you could make that statement true would be to narrow it down - perhaps you'd be closer to the truth saying most affiliate marketers would post those types of reviews (although even there I think it would be a hard case to make as many do purchase products before reviewing because they're smart enough to know that credibility can equal greater affiliate earnings).
Not arguing some, many or most, but I can say that some (if not many) of the reviews are biased. I've been asked in the past to write them. (I declined.)
Oh, I have no doubt that some are - it's the "most" that I take issue with, because it's just nonsensical. Good for you for not accepting that kind of project though. I'm not surprised. It's a shame more writers (and marketers) don't have basic ethics on that front, but fortunately there are plenty of us who do.
Its always not about the topic brother. Sometimes you have to consider how good the other person is on researching topics and writing original articles about things he had never heard of. So basically i think we can write quality articles on any topics, its all about dedication and work spirit. Nothings impossible, wake up and see the world.
Ya, its obviously depends on the writer taht how much he/she researches to make it go smooth. But here is another fact playing. Many writers just take works on everything and then again give it to other writers of respective niches to write on. Thats also bring up the fact that they can write on all niches, as they have writers of different niches in their contact.
Many people can write on any topic, they don't have to know anything about the topic before they begin. All you need to do is the proper research and get involved in the topic enough to be able to communicate to that particular audience. For instance, do you think the top copy writers know about every topic, NO. They are just very good at getting inside the mind of the prospects and being able to do the appropriate research allows you do it. Another example would be creating a content based website or product, I have created several websites, blogs, articles and products without any prior knowledge of the topic and I am now seen as an expert in those fields just because I did the right research. Mike
I agree, it's all about Illusionism Regarding the "I can do all niches people", although I believe we each have our own fields that we excel in, knowing how to research and how to use that information can more than make up for not being an expert on the topic. Let he/she who never wrote out of pure research throw the first stone.
The issue isn't a question of whether someone can write on multiple topics. It's a matter of what the client wants - if they want authority content, an expert in the niche can likely serve that need far better than a generalist, which is precisely why they pay more for specialized writers. For those writers looking to land high-paying gigs (or simply higher-paying than they are now), specializing in an in-demand area is one of the best ways to do that. And for the record, copywriters are specialists. Specialization isn't just about niches - it's also about writing types. Experts in a certain type of writing know how to pull the right information and do more thorough research to reach specific goals with the writing. It's not about them researching a niche. It's about them understanding specific markets (and many copywriters do specialize in certain markets or client types), and the factors that influence those markets. Research is involved in pretty much all writing, whether you're an expert or not in the subject matter - the specialists simply bring more authority to the table (through their direct experience, contacts for interviews, and knowledge about the most trusted research sources in the niche), and therefore they can (and probably always will) command a higher price that many clients are more than happy to pay.
I can cover all niches imaginable. I make $20 per wrinkle/diet article at the moment. $15 per "how to" and anything video game related. $10 for your basic topics. I have an almost photographic memory and enough life experience to hit topics from almost any angle also. If you want articles geared to an audience of 50 year old women, I can do that. If you want something that 14 year olds might read, I can do that too. The best advice I can give about writers is get some samples. You should pay for those samples if that writer doesn't have something to give you immediately.
Jenn, I'm still going to go against the odds and contradict you. If you were a client looking for a writer, would you rather have dull informative articles or well-rounded, but less precise ones? In most cases it's not WHAT you write, it's HOW you write it. Especially since web content is growing to be more and more linkbait-prone, you don't want your average informative fluff on your site, but something that's worth reading, commenting on and ultimately, link to. If you can write that kind of stuff AND be a specialist in the area your client is aiming for, you're golden of course
I'm just telling you how it works in the higher-paying markets - they don't pay you just because you're a "writer." They pay you more because you're bringing a certain type of expertise to the table. You work in almost more of a consulting capacity, simply in a written medium. If we're talking strictly on the content side of things, publications with those bigger budgets have editors who touch things up. Even in smaller companies / sites, many are willing to pay more because of the authority a specialist brings. It is very often about what you write over how it's written - companies looking to become authorities need the best informative articles they can afford, and that's what specialists provide. On top of it, because specialists are able to write from personal experience and not simply from research, how they write is often more personal, conversational, and interesting to the reader (certainly not in all cases I'll admit). I have to say, if anything would constitute "fluff" it's an article regurgitated from easily-found research materials; not information coming from a unique and qualified perspective in the niche. Is there a place for generalists? Sure - you see a lot of it here on DP with certain markets for example. But for those with credentials in a decent niche or style, it would be stupid not to harness that. Specialists are often paid more for a reason, and any smart writer (on the business side of freelancing) is going to earn as much as they can doing as little as they can.
As an writer, I would say to write about any topic requires research, and it depends how deeply you need to go into a given subject. Writing 250 words about a subject you know nothing about, based purely on research is relatively easy. Writing a 1000 words would be near impossible without days or weeks of research and study, maureen
why its impossible?? Some people are good at designing all kind of websites, and some people are excellent at witting about anything. in fact writer's job is to research on any topic and then write on them. So it all about hard work and passion for writing.
If it takes several days or weeks to write a 1000 word article, you aren't doing very good research. Most people can spend a couple hours of research and be able to write 1000 word articles.