This is my random rambling post for the week. After having a bad experience this week in the rejection/revision/acceptance circle that frequents active income sites, I decided to evaluate my writing standards. To make a long story short, I submitted an article for a client's request at an active income site. The editorial team at said site rejected my article for a typo. I quickly corrected my mistake and resubmitted the piece. It was then rejected again for incorrect semicolon placement.....except there was not a single semicolon anywhere in my article. I couldn't seem to make the editor who requested this revision understand that there wasn't a semicolon misplacement because there weren't any semicolons. He/she insisted that "there must be something wrong with the semicolon." What semicolon? There aren't any semicolons....I wanted to pull my hair out. Instead I just pulled my content, licked my wounds and moved on to publish the article elsewhere.
This got me to thinking.... how much is too much when it comes to time spent on revisions when writing for pay per article sites? Passive income articles carry a lifetime of earnings as long as they are available online and are being read so I do not mind taking the extra time to correct any needed revisions, even if it takes more than once to perfect it. But when I am receiving a one time payment for an article, I am taking time away from other income opportunities to revise articles. With this thinking in mind, I decided to give myself a 'guideline' when dealing with revision requests.
For active income sites, I will complete any revisions necessary as long as they do not require complete rewrites or take longer than a half hour. After the first revision, if any further revisions are requested then I will take my article, tweak it for a passive income site and post it there. That way there aren't any frustrations of endless revisions and I can still make money off of the time I spent completing the article. If I complete every necessary revision requested from the first review process then how did more revisions become apparent when I only followed the instructions from the first review? Shouldn't every correction that is needed be completed in one editorial review process instead of rejecting the article again for this and again for that and oh yeah don't forget about this one and that one too................Maybe I am just frustrated with the whole semicolon thing but I just feel that if my article needs that many revisions then I didn't do such a good job at writing about that particular topic.
I think this will help me manage my time and content better. I know that I make mistakes and that my writing style isn't always what is being sought but sometimes it is better to just move on than waste a lot of time on a low pay article.
800 word article at $30....hr of write and edit time = $30/hr
800 word article at $30....hr of write and edit time....hr of revisions = $15/hr
800 word article at $30....hr of write/edit time...hr of revisions....hr looking for semicolons...hr trying to make editor understand there are no semicolons = $7.50/hr
Just not worth it in my humble opinion.
No comments:
Post a Comment