Checking Up on Examiner.com

by Anne Wayman

reviewsLike you, I’ve seen ads for writers at Examiner.com off and on for a couple of years give or take. My impression has been that they pay writers a small amount and I’ve tended to post the ads and move on.

Today I got an email from someone asking if I’d post an ad for Examiner writers. Since we already pick the ads up I wondered and asked about his relationship with the site. The answer was unclear so I started poking around at the link he sent me. It’s a pitch for writers. Down toward the end is a statement that indicates Examiner.com pays per page views.

I went to google and asked: how much do writers get paid at examiner.com

I love google because it will take natural language queries (there’s that word again.) Sure enough it led me to Angela Hoy’s Writer’s Weekly and an article she wrote last May called How Much Are Examiner.com Writers Really Earning? There she’s collected reports from writers about their experience with Examiner.com and, in terms of pay, it isn’t pretty.

I’m not as opposed to pay-per-click sites as some, provided you understand exactly how you’ll get paid and that it’s highly unlikely you’ll make much money. You also need to be clear on what rights you’re selling – usually all or first rights. With that information you can decide if the potential visibility provided by such sites is worth it to you.

My personal take is that Associated Content, Triond, and/or Helium might be a better deal because, unlike Examiner, they don’t require x number of articles a week.

You might be interested in the series that began with: Anne To Try Triond, Helium and Associated Content

Have you written for Examiner or other per-per-click site? Tell us about it.

[sig]

Image from http://www.sxc.hu

{ 48 comments… read them below or add one }

Al Ritter February 5, 2013 at 9:41 am
annew February 7, 2013 at 8:43 am

Al, although our political views couldn’t be more different, your experience with Examiner is quite similar to mine with about.com. I don’t see any ads on your site, does that mean you’re now not making any money with your blog? Not that it’s any of my business.

Reply

Al Ritter February 7, 2013 at 9:10 am

Annew,
Money is of little consequence to me, but truth is. I find many ways to make money, one of which is the ability to write books. It makes no difference to me that your political views are different from mine, the point that I wrote about was the question of censorship. I was hired to write for the examiner to do one thing and then they changed that midstream and didn’t like what I was writing about. My blogsite has many RSS feeds so income does appear…..is it what I was making with the examiner?…….It is about the same but now I have no censorship and no I have attracted other likeminded writers that have enabled us to garner awards based on merit rather than shortsighted monetary gains
Al Ritter recently posted..Ron Investigates the Idea of Taxes – An Oppressive FactorMy Profile

Reply

annew February 7, 2013 at 9:24 am

Yeah, Al… censorship at the end of a relationship that treated you and other poorly. Content mills tend to change agreements in mid-stream and often without notice. Glad you’re okay money-wise.

Reply

Robert Ellsworth February 1, 2013 at 12:50 pm

I’ve written for them for four years and only made about ten bucks. I just post to keep my name relevant. I’d stay clear of them if you are looking to be paid anything.

http://www.examiner.com/longevity-in-national/robert-ellsworth

Reply

annew February 5, 2013 at 9:26 am

Robert, isn’t there a more profitable way to keep your name current?

Reply

Shona November 18, 2012 at 4:43 am

Hi, Neat post. There’s a problem with your site in web explorer, would test this? IE still is the market leader and a huge section of folks will leave out your wonderful writing due to this problem.
Shona recently posted..ShonaMy Profile

Reply

annew November 21, 2012 at 8:26 am

What problem are you seeing, Shona. When I test in ie, which I do from time to time, I don’t see it. And I just looked now and it seems fine. What am I missing?

Reply

Mr.Choice September 12, 2010 at 12:20 am

Wow, I did not realize Examiner.com was so superb. Many of you are making enough money on it already.

Reply

annew September 13, 2010 at 10:08 am

Mr. Choice – many feel Examiner is more of a content mill than anything else and therefore not a great place to work

Reply

Al Ritter Baltimore Conservative Examiner February 3, 2010 at 11:28 am

To those considering writing for the Examiner.com, read this first!

To those considering writing for the Examiner.com
Al Ritter

Financial incentives

When I first signed on to write for the Examiner.com they hinted at 1 cent per page view, which to be honest, at the time didn’t exactly impress me, but it was more than I receive for page views on my blog. This amount neither convinced me nor turned me away from writing for what I considered to a conservative leaning publication. From February 2009 to the summer of 2009 I did in fact receive 1 cent a page view and my ability to reach larger audiences with my opinions and views had outweighed the pay I was receiving. In the summer of 2009 the Examiner.com came up with a new formulation to compute page hits. This formula was NOT shared with the writers, claiming that it was similar to the formula that Ad Sense uses. They did say that it had to do with average time per view, and how many of your past articles were viewed in addition to your new one. This amount ranged between 10 and 20% less than the original 1 cent per view. This amount continued until mid December when the pay per page view dropped to approximately ½ cent per page view.

Background checks and liability

When I first applied to write for the Examiner.com I filled out an online application. I was informed after qualifying to become a writer that the Examiner.com would need to perform a criminal background check on me. This puzzled me……what exactly did that have to do with writing an interesting, informative article? Would G. Gordon Liddy be denied a writing job because of his criminal background? Finally I was cleared to write but was required to read a “terms of agreement” which foolishly I never copied for later proof against ever changing claims by management. Each writer was required to write 4 to 5 articles a week, save any and all resources, and all original articles used for publication. The writer is also responsible for all liability pertaining to each article written.

Writer support

Any company is only as good as the support they give to employees, and the Examiner.com is no different. The only way to find out how much your boss supports you is through experience and need. Each writer is given a contact or handler. My contact only answered my emails 50% of the time, and only then when the Examiner.com could possibly lose money. On the other hand my contact expected me to reply to HIS emails to me immediately, marking all his emails with “priority.” The website has a support area to fill out a form on complaints or problems. I had filled out so many of these forms having to do with publishing and site problems, I had lost count. Readership had dropped in early fall 2009 because of problems they were having getting articles into the Google search engines, nobody can find articles unless they show up there, either in the news section or the normal search. In the beginning I would get little emails regarding errors I had made, from the “editor guru.” These errors were merely oversights and could have easily been caught by spell check, which I used Word later on as my writing tool, to later cut and paste as my article.

Publishing tools

The publishing tools the Examiner.com uses are difficult to learn, and up until recently didn’t really jive with Microsoft Word! I don’t know what they expected you to use as a tool to edit your work with before publication, but it wasn’t Word! I have the advantage of judging one publisher to another as I have a blogsite also. My blog is through “blogspot” a site owned and operated by Google. Articles on blogspot are extremely easy and take less than 30 seconds to post. The Examiner.com articles are difficult and the tools that are required are clunky and don’t always work the first time. Each article takes approximately 15 to 20 minutes. Any pictures you use in any of your articles have to be pics taken by you, previously published pics from AP photographers on the Examiner.com, or freedom of use articles on the internet such as Wikipedia, etc.

Thinly veiled censorship
As with most credit card companies and banks your terms of agreement change, and so does the direction of the Examiner.com. I agreed to write for the Examiner as a conservative view from the Baltimore MD area. No demands were made of me to write on just local area politics; in fact I wrote some 250 commentary based articles on the national scene. To now supplement the amount of pay per views the Examiner has instituted, “Rules of the Road,” to pay you an additional bounty based on what THEY want you to write.

1) Topical
Articles are written in a manner that is knowledgeable about their assigned subject matter, and provide useful, relevant information to readers who might share a passion about it.
2) Local
If it’s not locally relevant, it’s not a local article. The combination of your topic and your city is the most important aspect of your Examiner contributions.
3) Length
Articles should be 200-400 words on average, and no less than 150 words. Use Who? What? Where? When? Why? How? as a guide.
4) Credibility
Use external sources whenever appropriate; quote and reference them when you do. Tip: Build real relationships within the community to use as ongoing source material; their credibility will build and strengthen yours.

Comment moderation

Comment moderation on the internet is handled differently by different companies, but the Examiner .com’s policy on comment moderation is sorely lacking, in fact it is nonexistent. Any moderation has to be done by the writer, except for profanities, which the Examiner will remove, but only after a complaint. You make think this is a pretty good policy at first, and it would be until you get an online troll stalker. In the summer of 2009 a particular person who didn’t agree with me wanted to make my life a living hell. The Examiner.com wouldn’t ban his ISP number, so I was stuck babysitting my articles every day. In one day in the summer this person was posting nasty, profane, and sometime threatening comments at the rate of 3 per minute! The Examiner was useless in stopping it. Comment moderation on other sites is by approval, and that has proved to be a very effective tool to combat situations like this, as well as spam. It’s funny how spam never seems to be posted on the Examiner but hateful comments can be. Below you can see but a few of the thousands of hateful things posted on my articles since February 2009.

Entry: Is Obama playing the name game?
Posted/Updated: 09/20/2009 08:19 PM
Xenu – Another crappy article from a crappy writer.

Entry: Is a second stimulus to seniors a payoff?
Posted/Updated: 10/15/2009 12:15 PM
More stupidity from this blog – Idoiots. The payoff is to counter the lack of a Social Secuirty COLA for the first time in 30 years. Inflation has not caused an icrease in consumer prices, so their is no need for a COLA. The payment is unneccesary and is being given to seniors who claim (falsely) that expenses have gone up. In fact, these are the same seniors who were too stupid to save for any retirmenet other than Social Security, which was NEVEr meant to be a sole source of retiremnet income. Does the author ever research facts or do you and the posters just run off at the mouth like jackasses?

Entry: Attacks and violations of decorum
Posted/Updated: 10/13/2009 12:30 PM
… – Glad to see you people are still on the extreme fringes of rational thought and still have notihng of value to contribute. It’s just all ignorance and conspiracies for you people. Good luck in the elections suckers! Sore ass losers!

Entry: Doctors leaving their practices
Posted/Updated: 12/30/2009 03:50 PM
Dianna Sellers – Old people like you should be put out to pasture. You should read the book “Logan’s Run” because it’s a classic! You and ol’ Yeller are suffering from senility and rabies, respectively. The gov’t should put ya out of your misery!

Entry: Don’t Cry for me Nigeria!
Posted/Updated: 01/05/2010 11:31 PM
Crappy Indep – Hey Sellers, this article isn’t racist, it’s just stupid and poorly written. Typical grandpa

Entry: MTA Light Rail, a crowning glory or failed policy?
Posted/Updated: 01/14/2010 10:46 AM
Dianna Sellers – Al, don’t start deleting my comments again. Please act your age – which is what, 86?

Entry: One man’s ascension to power
Posted/Updated: 01/24/2010 02:31 AM
i h8 neo cons – neo cons like you need to be put to sleep. how dare you link Obama to Hitler. yet you voted for george bush – you hypocrite!!!

Conclusion
As you can see the benefits are hardly worth the hassle to me, you might think that “getting your word out” is worth all the problems that the Examiner causes. You may think that maybe I am merely a malcontent marginal writer bent on painting the Examiner in a bad light. Since June 2009 I have been the most read political writer in the Baltimore area. My articles had 141,000 hits last year, my highest month was 30,000 hits, I have written over 600 articles in an 24 month period, I wasn’t a fluke or a flash in the pan, my history was simple and easily proven. I have a fan base of loyal readers, they don’t make any comments on the Examiner anymore because they don’t like to be bashed by the stalker, this is sad. I liked appealing to a large readership, but I refuse to bend to something I’m not. I will continue my high standards of research, and publishing the very articles my readers can use as definitive proof of claims of their position to others.
If you would like to follow my work you may do so at http://alspoliticalview.blogspot.com/

Reply

Meg November 5, 2009 at 7:16 pm

Allena’s not the first editor I’d heard saying they don’t take clips from Examiner.com seriously. I’d be really cautious about adding those links to a portfolio or sending them with an application.

I think there is money to be made from pageview-based sites, if you write well, choose evergreen topics, aggressively promote your pieces, and bring your own traffic. But if you’re going to do that, why would you want to split the profits with a content site? And why would you want to put your hard work up next to other “articles” with massive spelling, grammar and factual errors?
.-= Meg´s last blog ..Still Lost In Blue =-.

Reply

Edna November 5, 2009 at 6:43 pm

Eric,
Thanks for a more positive take on Examiner. I hesitated writing for them because of mixed reviews but I’ll get started…hopefully today with my first article.
.-= Edna´s last blog ..Steve Stevanovich, University of Chicago and applied mathematics =-.

Reply

jorgekafkazar November 5, 2009 at 5:01 pm

Anne, I once prepared a technical report at an aerospace company, the summation of six months of painstaking experimental work. My boss and I re-read the text and revised it many, many times, wanting to get the report absolutely perfect. We didn’t release it for in-house publication until we were certain there were no errors in it. When the 200 copies were delivered, the title on the cover read (in 28-point type):

DETERMINIATION OF THERMAL CONDUCTIVITIES OF REFRACTORY MATERIALS AT ELEVATED TEMPERATURES.

Murphy’s Law says the error that makes it through the filter is always in the biggest print.
.-= jorgekafkazar´s last blog ..Tenirax, Ch V =-.

Reply

Eric November 5, 2009 at 3:14 pm

Quoting Allena: “I know newbies have to start somewhere, but I’d first hire a new writer who gave me a clip from a non-profit that she volunteered for, or a clip that he wrote specifically for my posting, or a memo from a pervious job, or a newsletter they did for their church. Those are, to me, better clips and more indicative of your writing skills then Examiner sites.”

I, myself, prefer to hire writers – managers in particular – who know the difference between “then” and “than”.

Frankly, I am tempted to believe you are trying to dissuade people from joining Examiner.com because you are paid by the competition or you’d prefer them to join your site. You need to stop propagating lies. Examiner.com does not, in fact, take any and every applicant. I know someone who works there and the rejection rate is approximately 40% of applicants. If you don’t believe they reject people, try reading more articles about the website and take a look at the angry comments from “pefessional righters” who need a place to sound off on their “exclusionary tactics”.

Finally, Examiner.com is rated by Quantcast.com as a top 100 website leaving sites like Demand, Suite101, etc in the dust. After being around for just about 18 months or so, I’d say they’re doing a good job. I haven’t joined as I really enjoy the freedom of my own blog, and I make enough money at my real job, but I might consider it in the future.

Reply

Allena November 3, 2009 at 11:38 am

Hey Anne, Don’t know how I missed your invite to blog about this (probably same reason I missed the typos in my original comment).

I got my start in web content with a company called WRG, of which today’s equivalent I suppose would be Demand Studios. New writers always lament that it’s so hard to find outlets for their writing, but sites that pay pennies per view are NOT the solution for them. Sites like WRG and Demand ARE the solution, as they tell you UP FRONT how much you will make. However, I always say, start there but, please MOVE UP.

When I hire writers I want to see an upward arc in credits. Demand is fine, as long as you’re moving on up.

As for print credits: I got my start with a local magazine and, again, worked my way up to national publications in my niche. Took about a year and half of querying to land that first national print byline.

It’s funny, cause anon says it’s so hard to find print outlets, but then says that anyone with the marketing, networking, working ability can succeed at Pennies Per Page VIew Site of the Week.

Well, if you have that ability, why would you use it for Examiner instead of for working the higher paying jobs?
.-= Allena´s last blog ..Writers: 7 Steps to Prepping for the Holidays =-.

Reply

Anne November 4, 2009 at 10:35 am

Allena, you didn’t miss it… just posted it yesterday I think… anyway, thanks! All true… sounds roughly like much of my career.

Reply

Allena November 2, 2009 at 8:20 pm

You average $35 per article? I average $450 for two-hour profles. Why should I “kill” you? Wouldn’t that just mean more Examiner work for you if I bypass?

I don’t need to discredit you, as you’ve done it with your own numbers and anonymity.
.-= Allena´s last blog ..Writers: 7 Steps to Prepping for the Holidays =-.

Reply

Anne November 3, 2009 at 11:08 am

Hi Allena… do you want to tell us how you got started?

Reply

Anonymous November 2, 2009 at 7:06 pm

I think its stupid to discredit earning money on Examiner.com. To Allena, no offense, but not one good writer I know is close-minded. They dont go hand-in-hand. Considering 3 out of every 5 print articles I push these days are rejected due to more in-house writing and economy issues, the Examiner. com has been amazing. I am a Suite 101 writer also, and the only reason I am sticking with it after my experience with the Examiner is because people rave that it is great for the long-term.

My first month writing for Examiner.com, I average about $35+ dollars an article @ 44 articles a month, each article takes me about a 1/2 hour (at the most) to write, giving me a cool $70 an hour for my work with them. I currently average about $45-65 per article/per month.

It takes hard work, ingenuity and networking, but it is totally possible. Writers like Alennawho dismiss something so lucrative kill me…if you are as good as you say, then you would bank, like the rest of the people who have found their examiner.com groove…It is your loss, inevitably.

Reply

Anne November 3, 2009 at 11:27 am

Anon, good job… different strokes for different folks… glad you’ve made this work for you.

Reply

Genevieve October 1, 2009 at 1:58 am

I write for Examiner as well. I have actually had a decent amount of success with it. This is my second full month, and will be receiving over $300 this month. Granted, a good half of that is from one article that went crazy for a few days, but I still average a decent amount for the amount of work I put into it, and it’s growing steadily… even after the Google changes.

However, I also write for Suite101, which I find exponentially more rewarding in many ways, not least of all because the quality of the site itself is much higher. But, if you know how, Examiner can provide more ‘immediate’ returns.

It is the residual income that makes this type of writing worthwhile. Getting $25 for an article once is nice, but many of my articles will make that much in a month or three, and then will continue to earn me a few dollars every month from there on out.

Reply

Anne October 1, 2009 at 9:46 am

Genevieve, interesting that you’re getting better results with Suite 101… I keep forgetting about them. Yes, residual income is the thing for sure.

Reply

Michelle September 30, 2009 at 8:44 pm

I wrote for Examiner. com. It was a bizarre experience to say the least. They hired me to write for a certain topic.

Then, they emailed me to tell me that they were un-hiring me because they were looking for someone with “national” exposure to write for the topic. It was odd because I have written for quite a few venues both nationally and internationally on the topic I had been assigned to write about.

They then told me that they were re-assigning me to another topic. The topic was one which I hadn’t chosen and frankly, didn’t have interest in writing about.

I thought it was odd, and I emailed them back a resignation letter.

:) That was my experience with Examiner.com.

Reply

Anne October 1, 2009 at 9:47 am

Amazing… but I’ve had some strange experiences with online places too… well, and offline as well.

Reply

jorgekafkazar September 30, 2009 at 7:01 pm

Sounds like lowest common denominator work for lowest common denominator pay. I think I’ll go watch ‘em knock down the old Endicott Building, instead. More exciting, and it pays almost the same.
.-= jorgekafkazar´s last blog ..Tenirax, Ch V =-.

Reply

Anne October 1, 2009 at 9:48 am
Mary September 30, 2009 at 4:58 pm

I have been writing for Examiner, but am about to let it go. I am just starting out as a freelance writer and thought it would be a great way to get my work out there. However, I am finding that is not the case. I have been writing for them for about 1 month, have 22 articles published there, and no comments to date. The pay is much, much less than you will get at other sites such as Associated Content. And I feel like noone is reading my work.
Around the same time, I also started posting articles to an investing website, something in my field. Though it pays nothing, the number of comments I get from real people in the industry are what keep me going back again and again. And people that see my work there I actually feel that with this site my writing is actually getting noticed.
So I would recommend to anyone starting out don’t focus so much on the money at first. Focus on the feedback.

Reply

Anne October 1, 2009 at 9:49 am

Mary, excellent point – always seems to work better when we work within what we know.

Reply

Mary Ann September 30, 2009 at 4:53 pm

I write for Examiner. I have been writing for them for 4 months. I have made over $300.00. That is not great money, that doesn’t pay the bills but it keeps me writing and I have learned a lot about marketing myself etc.. I have read many very well written articles from other Examiners. Yes, there are some who are not professional, however, you find what you look for. I have been pleased with the experience I have had writing for Examiner.

Reply

Trish September 30, 2009 at 4:11 pm

I write for Examiner.com, and went into this not expecting to make money. In fact, where I’m finding growth is in gaining credibility in my area of expertise. Exposure is wonderful for any writer, and as a seasoned published writer advises, never turn down an opportunity to put your name in a byline. I’ve written since I was a teen and find that money shouldn’t be the sole incentive for doing what we purport to love.

Reply

Edna September 30, 2009 at 2:40 pm

Hi, I’ve gotten a gig with Examiner to write about the EPA on a national level. I knew Examiner wasn’t going to pay much but I didn’t think it’d be this low or that Google wouldn’t help out with the page views. I thought it’d provide some good clips for me on the environment which is one of my passions and niches.
I already contribute to Bright Hub’s env’l channel so maybe I ought to just right for them and not start with the Examiner. I’m not just starting out as a writer but I am trying to get some kind of web presence in addition to BH, my blog and print samples. Any feedback is welcome….thanks for the article!
.-= Edna´s last blog ..K-Designers leads home remodeling =-.

Reply

Lauren Carter September 30, 2009 at 2:07 pm

I freelance primarily for newspapers, magazines, corporate clients and musicians. I don’t have any experience with Examiner.com, but I joined Associated Content in 2005 and since then have written about 70 articles. I do no promotion of my articles but have averaged very high page views due to high search engine rankings and links from forums and popular websites. I usually write for them when I have an idea I don’t think will fit any of the publications I normally write for, or I think of something I can churn out fairly quickly. Sometimes they have calls for content that pay a specified amount up front in addition to residual income earned from page views. The upfront pay usually averages between $4 and $10. The most I’ve ever made up front is $12. It’s by no means a way to make a living, at least not for me, but the residual income (about $50 per month) is nice.

I think that for new writers, it’s helpful to have writing samples online, especially if they’re of good quality, and a little extra cash probably doesn’t hurt either.

Reply

Meg September 30, 2009 at 12:21 pm

My problem with Examiner comes from just what you’ve described: People in ambiguous roles promoting Examiner. I’m often responding to job ads fo my niche only to find out that they’re really Examiner pennies in disguise.

I know that many new writers are willing to take low-paying and volunteer gigs for the experience, but I think you’re better off with a personal domain. Allena is not the first editor I’ve heard admitting she avoids Examiner clips!

Besides, for terms like writing an article a day for 30 cents a day (like Greg says) , and promoting your own content, we may as well write on our own blogs.
.-= Meg´s last blog ..Severed Heads =-.

Reply

Regina Morrison September 30, 2009 at 12:20 pm

Allena- Thanks for the advice! I will keep that in mind.
.-= Regina Morrison´s last blog ..Flat Iron Steak and Grilled Onions and Peppers =-.

Reply

Carrie September 30, 2009 at 12:20 pm

I think some of the misleading ads are a result of Examiner.com offering incentives to their existing writers if they bring in new ones. Plans like that are great for the writers themselves (sometimes), but they’re a pain in the you-know-where when the ads start popping up everywhere to get strangers to sign up.

My opinion on pay-per-click is the same as yours, Anne. It’s fine for those who know exactly what to expect, and heck, some writers have found ways to make it really pay off. I don’t think you can depend on sites like these for a long-term money maker though.
.-= Carrie´s last blog ..Perfect 10, a Game Show About Housework =-.

Reply

Omar September 30, 2009 at 10:59 am

I filled out an application for Examiner but I never followed through. I was kinda leery of the site.

Reply

allena September 30, 2009 at 10:46 am

Some thoughts from me:

“I am just starting out as a freelance writer and it is helpful to have a site to put on applications.”
I hire many writers, editors and proofreaders through my personal writing business for overflow work, big projects, etc, or to proofread my own stuff. Since I know that Examiner takes anyone and everyone, I will pass on applications from Examiner people. I know newbies have to start somewhere, but I’d first hire a new writer who gave me a clip from a non-profit that she volunteered for, or a clip that he wrote specifically for my posting, or a memo from a pervious job, or a newsletter they did for their church. Those are, to me, better clips and more indicative of your writing skills then Examiner sites.

“the writing tool and Google requirements changed to where now, many of our articles don’t pick up in Google searches, reducing my articles from four hundred hits a day to say forty.”

I’m not an seo expert so much, other than what about.com has taught me, but I do know that Google changes its algorithm and takes quality into account. Google prbably maybe ? got clued into the fact that this may not be quality content (I mean, if you hire anyone off craigslist for your channel, your bound to get some crappy content), and so Google has adjusted it’s algorithm. Just a guess, but if that’s true, then Examnier writers are out PVs.

Reply

Anne September 30, 2009 at 10:55 am

Allena, if you ever want to write an article for me along these lines I’d love it… or if you do it for your own site, let me know and I’ll link.

Reply

Greg Stephens September 30, 2009 at 9:56 am

I currently write for Examiner. No, it doesn’t pay much. That’s not the biggest issue, however. I write on an NFL team, so there were articles I’d write that would actually earn me six or seven bucks (not great, but still). Then, like overnight, the writing tool and Google requirements changed to where now, many of our articles don’t pick up in Google searches, reducing my articles from four hundred hits a day to say forty. That is frustrating and no one knows how to fix it. You are expected, but not required, to write about an article a day to maintain readership, but for thirty cents a day, I’d encourage you to keep looking for other work.

Reply

Anne September 30, 2009 at 10:59 am

Greg, when google changes it’s algorithm some win, others loose. With solid experience writing about the nfl you should be able to find additional markets I would think.

Reply

Dan Rafter September 30, 2009 at 9:55 am

Thanks for the post, Anne. Unfortunately, I’ve encountered many misleading craigslist freelance-writing ads that, once you respond to them, send you to Examiner.com’s sign-up page. Nowhere in the original ads does it say that the “writing job” is actually an Examiner.com position. This I find to be more annoying than the fact that Examiner barely pays its writers. I hate being tricked into wasting my time in this way.

Dan
.-= Dan Rafter´s last blog ..Sometimes you have to give up a content-writing gig =-.

Reply

Anne September 30, 2009 at 11:00 am

Yeah, Dan, I wish they’d say up front who they are… and as you point out, there’s no way to tell. It helps a bit I think when a writer reports such things here and elsewhere.

Reply

Jonathan Cohen September 29, 2009 at 10:27 pm

Unfortunately I’ve been seeing a lot of article spam from Examiner.com on LinkedIn, too. The ‘discussion’ link appears to have been posted by an impartial group member, but on following it you realize they wrote the piece, and they’re counting on click-throughs to raise their pay.

Reply

Autumn September 29, 2009 at 2:59 pm

Yeah, my impression is that you write for them for free and hope to make a few bucks months down the road, that is, if you market your articles. Not worth my time. In fact, I’d rather write batches of low-paying articles, because at least you’re guaranteed a certain amount of money whether people read them or not.
.-= Autumn´s last blog ..Take Your Writing Destiny into Your Own Hands During Downtime =-.

Reply

Regina Morrison September 29, 2009 at 1:39 pm

I have been writing for Examiner.com (the San Diego site) for about a month. They were upfront that the pay would be minimal, and it is! However, I am just starting out as a freelance writer and it is helpful to have a site to put on applications. The articles I write for the site are simple, yet I do think they are helpful to display my work. Additionally, Examiner.com does not require a certain number of articles per week. They “suggest” 3-5 articles per week, but there is no consequence for not delivering this number.

I have also been writing for Suite101.com…another site that allows me to display examples of my work. Per my month long experience, Suite101 pays better because they have more traffic on their site. Writing for these types of sites is not something I plan on doing once I have a steady income coming in; however, it has been a good place to start.
.-= Regina Morrison´s last blog ..Super Moist Turker Burgers =-.

Reply

Anne November 5, 2009 at 3:22 pm

Watch your headline on your blog, Regina… Jorge busted me on one of mine…

Reply

Devon Ellington September 29, 2009 at 12:34 pm

In my opinion, none of those sites pay use what we’re worth, and one can’t make a solid, sustained, pay-all-your-bills-with-some-left-for-savings, so none of them are worth it.

My clients actually pay me a living wage. And I’m worth every penny! ;)
.-= Devon Ellington´s last blog ..September 29, 2009 =-.

Reply

Leave a Comment

CommentLuv badge

Previous post:

Next post: