Blog networks a waste of time for writers?

[dwrite]

For a long time I resisted blogging. The pay rates seemed abysmally low. Then I realized that one of my strengths as a freelance writer is that I write fast. I decided to give blogging a try: It's far easier than real journalism and takes far less time.

I began blogging with b5 Media. I actually enjoyed that. The money was small, but it was something. And I didn't have to spend much time putting together posts. Then b5 changed the way they pay, and the amount of money my blog would generate would be horrendous. So I left.

I tried Today.com next. It wasn't bad. Lousy pay again, of course, but I had two blogs that were fun to write. Then Today.com decided to change the way they paid my blog. Again, the monthly pay would have been too puny to even consider.

My question: Does anyone have a good experience writing for a blog network? I blog for three commercial clients, writing from three to five posts a week for their Web sites. That pays well, is steady and is reliable. Yes, I have to write about industries that maybe I don't care much about. But again, unlike real journalism -- which still supplies the majority of my monthly income -- it's not difficult writing.

I'm wondering, though, if there are any blog networks out there worth a writers' time. What do you all think?

Dan

[speel00]

I'm sure some do work well, but I think that the key is also to find ones that work well with you.

[bsolah]

I just don't think there's that much money in blogging, honestly. Internet advertising revenues are minute unless you're someone like Google that spreads their ads far and wide.

I personally only blog for my own enjoyment because being paid is not worth it, in my opinion.

[dwrite]

I think Bsolah may be on the right track here. Blogging may also be a good way to promote your business or a product, such as an ebook, that you may have. But to rely on blogging networks for money just seems like a waste these days.

Dan

[MargoWest]

From everything I've heard, it's pointless to try to blog for the sole purpose of money because it takes years(if ever) to get to a point where you can earn a fair amount of money. You have to do it because you love it, if you're going to do it that long.

[razibahmed]

Most blog networks pay on the basis of traffic because they also get paid by Advertising companies in terms of page views and unique visitors. This is something that most bloggers forget when they join a blog network. Not only you have to write the content but also you have to find the people to read your entries. So, if you are looking to earn money just by posting some entries every week then yes, blog networks are indeed a waste of time.

[Talia]

There are some bloggers that earn good money but for most it's a labor of love or a way to promote yourself to a wider audience. You could also consider about.com which is a freelance writing gig but with a mimimum monthly pay cheque and I think it uses wordpress. You need to be an expert in your topic. There's a thread on it in freelance writing here at AW

[veinglory]

People can and do blogger professionally, but rarely in a network context. They tend to do it as a small business, or employee.

[TheWritingRunner]

There are some bloggers that earn good money but for most it's a labor of love or a way to promote yourself to a wider audience. You could also consider about.com which is a freelance writing gig but with a mimimum monthly pay cheque and I think it uses wordpress. You need to be an expert in your topic. There's a thread on it in freelance writing here at AW

Yep, this is exactly what I was thinking...!

-- TWR

[JenNipps]

Just a heads-up/FYI, the About.com thread is now also here in SEO/Content/Blog Networks.

[Crystal Lewis]

I'm glad you started this thread because I've been thinking about signing up for a paid blog site or two to see I might be able to turn a buck. I haven't done it because I think I need to focus my efforts on the other projects I've agreed to, but the whole "blog-for-pay" thing has been on my mind for some time. From what I've read here, I think I'm going to reconsider. It may not be worth it.

[SouthernFriedJulie]

People can and do blogger professionally, but rarely in a network context. They tend to do it as a small business, or employee.

Very true. I have blogged for b5, but the pay was far under what I earn for a single site's blog. Static site, blog on the side. The most I've ever earned while blogging was $300 for a month, no revenue share. Just a site launch. One of the blogs I ghost on brings in $40 a day Adsense. Would love to have the same on my personally owned ones. The site is PR4 and was before I ever came along, though.

But, um, I don't see that in my Paypal account. Hard enough to get a little raise for the per month work. :-(

Maybe we all should start a network of AW writers, though I have no idea how to start one.

[princessvessna]

I call dibs on some sort of gardening blog! I could also do family history and all sorts of other neat hobbies I've picked up along the way in life.

[KEllis]

In recent months, b5media has actually changed their pay model quite a bit. I am the Senior Editor there, so I'm biased :) but I think most current bloggers would consider it worth it in the new structure.

However, the blog networks that pay $1 per post or pay only on traffic (but don't promote the blogs), I think you could probably make more on your own personal blogs.

-Kori

[razibahmed]

KEllis,
If you could share some more information (without crossing the red line of revealing company secret) about the new pay structure of B5 Media Network then would be helpful to many of us here.

[KEllis]

Hi,

We switched from an individual blog model to having featured blogs plus also category topics on centralized portal websites.

Since the switch, we now pay bloggers a flat rate per month. The rate is negotiated individually negotiated with each writer based on the opportunity, current traffic level, growth potential and what the blogger brings to the table.

You can check out the portals site here:

http://bizzia.com - Business
http://splendicity.com - Beauty & Style
http://everyjoe.com - Sports, gaming, electronics, technology, etc.
http://blisstree.com - Cooking, living, home and garden, relationships, etc

You will see the featured blogs are subdomains of the sites.

You can email me direct at kori.ellis@b5media.com, if you have specific questions.

Thanks,


Kori

[SouthernFriedJulie]

KEllis, I don't mean to be rude, but someone should check post titles on the front page.

ED Drugs Don't Effect Vision -

Just a heads up. I've had readers bust my chops for such things. Very important to not have contractions in a title, too. That title reads a little, um, ghetto.

[KEllis]

KEllis, I don't mean to be rude, but someone should check post titles on the front page.

ED Drugs Don't Effect Vision -

Just a heads up. I've had readers bust my chops for such things. Very important to not have contractions in a title, too. That title reads a little, um, ghetto.

Why would you say to not have a contraction in a title? Contractions like "Don't" are pretty standard. Same topic:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/hsn/20090414/hl_hsn/impotencedrugsdontharmvisionstudy
http://news.health.com/2009/04/14/impotence-drugs-dont-harm-vision-study/

Thanks,

Kori

[SFLP]

"ED Drugs Don't Effect Vision"

I don't mind the contraction, but "Effect"...um...bothers me quite a bit. :) Though I haven't read the article/seen the page. Perhaps it's about a test to restore vision with Viagra or something?

[KEllis]

"ED Drugs Don't Effect Vision"

I don't mind the contraction, but "Effect"...um...bothers me quite a bit. :) Though I haven't read the article/seen the page. Perhaps it's about a test to restore vision with Viagra or something?

:) Yes, I agree about "Effect." I was just curious about why Julie had mentioned the contraction.

-Kori

[SouthernFriedJulie]

:) Yes, I agree about "Effect." I was just curious about why Julie had mentioned the contraction.

-Kori

I mention it because, even though it is standard, it is not polished or professional. Hey I have done that myself-so don't think I am being high and mighty :-)

Quite some time ago a few readers went off on me during a flame war on one of my blogs. Flame war was over something a previous writer had done, I stepped in to stop it and WHAM- I was burned.


In a title that will appear on the front of a web page, I wouldn't use a contraction that can cause a serious ebonic sound to a sentence. Chatty and at ease is great. Grammar challenged is not.

For example:

ED Drugs Don't Cause Bad Effects

vs

ED Drugs Do Not Cause Unwanted Effects

Or go even further and talk about

Side effects
boners(LOL)
morning erections
priapism (sp?)
Or arthritis.


Really, it is a matter of preference, I just prefer to leave chatty to inside the post/article, not in the title.

[KEllis]

I mention it because, even though it is standard, it is not polished or professional. Hey I have done that myself-so don't think I am being high and mighty :-)
...

I was just curious because I write for a lot of magazines and newspapers (as well as blogs/websites), and they all use contractions in the titles. My magazine editors, prefer it. They won't ever take a title that says "is not" or "do not." So I just curious of your perspective.

Thanks for the input.

[SouthernFriedJulie]

If I hadn't been put down I wouldn't mind it. Readers scare me. :-)

And NO ONE does that !