Question for People Writing Content

[potentialeight]

Quick question for anyone writing content (whether you do it for your own sites or for other people): On a topic you aren't familiar with and need to do cursory research on, what would you estimate is your words per hour, or how long do you think it would take you to write 1,000 words? An estimate or range is fine. I'm just trying to get an idea for a project I'm working on.

 

[kyescontent]

That totally depends. If great resources are readily available and I intuitively grasp it, half an hour. If resources are spotty or I need to dig deep for academic sources, and/or the concepts are not intuitive to me, could be a couple of hours.

 

[avatar33]

^half an hour for a 1,000 word article on a topic you're unfamiliar with? Hmmm... remind me to never buy from you.

Good luck bro

 

[kyescontent]

^half an hour for a 1,000 word article on a topic you're unfamiliar with? Hmmm... remind me to never buy from you.

Good luck bro

Well, there's a big difference between say ... learning a new method for home organization ... and writing an academically researched, in-depth article on biology. The latter would take me hours. The former? Some things you can pick up on the fly. As a chemistry teacher once said, "It isn't hard; it's just new." Sometimes, she was right

 

[kyescontent]

I might add that if it's a new niche, not just a new topic, it's generally going to take me a lot longer.

 

[fixie]

It takes me about 8 hours of non-stop, focused work to write 1500-2000 words in English since it's not my native language. I've also never written more than 5000 words in one week so I guess that is my limit that I never tried to actually break.

God forbid if I try to design something. It takes me more than 2-3 days to come up with a simple shitty design even with my great (I think) technical knowledge of Photoshop.

 

[love2spellcheck]

Distractions aside (like the images above):

1. gather resources
2. weed out info
3. write a plan
4. write
5. sleep/brake
6. proofread

The amount of time will depend on your level of... well, everything (researching, writing, proofreading and how you manage distractions)

Last 300-word text: around 4 hours and a happy client.

Beware:

or even

 

[ComradeWolf]

Around 3 hours on average: 2 hours to research the topic and write the article and then about an hour to edit it.

 

[kyescontent]

Out of curiosity, anyone want to share your WPM? The actual typing part for me is very fast, so most of the time is spent pooling resources, reading, and outlining.

 

[CPR_dummy]

Relevant article:

True confessions: I wrote for an Internet content mill | Ars Technica

 

[potentialeight]

Well that escalated quickly, but thanks for the replies.

I've been playing with this idea of building a resource for content writers to step up their game, specialize, stop sucking ass at being reliable, etc. I'm not interested in the buying/selling marketplace side, but more along the line of showing people how to get into the content slangin game, how to get organized and handle themselves in a professional way.

Now mind you that I haven't taken the first step at all towards this just yet, and I'm still figuring out monetization, etc. I just get emails every month from content writers asking for advice or if I can sub out work to them (which I never have and don't plan to).

If I was to do this, I think I would approach some of it from a "work from home/be your own boss" type angle to draw new eyes, and I think the general plan would be to get their foot in the door at the upper-end content mills and then specialize and build themselves as an authority in one particular industry. This specialization is largely because of the money involved since it would increase someone's asking price while simultaneously increasing their average words/hour.

Anyway, I've rambled on enough.

 

[Muad'dib]

^half an hour for a 1,000 word article on a topic you're unfamiliar with? Hmmm... remind me to never buy from you.

Good luck bro

I see nothing wrong with this, when I was in forensic debate I could take a new source and bullshit 5-7 minutes of speaking and easily write 2 pages based off the resource in 15 minutes if I needed to. The major emphasized is more important than you think:

If great resources are readily available and I intuitively grasp it, half an hour.

 

[potentialeight]

I see nothing wrong with this, when I was in forensic debate I could take a new source and bullshit 5-7 minutes of speaking and easily write 2 pages based off the resource in 15 minutes if I needed to. The major emphasized is more important than you think:

Not talking about you or anyone else specifically, but I think the bold is the issue that some people could be concerned about.

This is largely the source of what I was talking about in my previous post as well. There's a major difference between fluffing something up like you're trying to meet a certain word count requirement for a high school English paper and providing actual analysis that has value from the perspective of a person who is knowledgeable about a particular industry.

For example, I'm often asked to write an analysis of a certain piece of news in my industry. The news item itself can be less than 100 words at times, but I'm expected to make that into something of value in the 400-500 word range (and often longer). The key to doing this without just fluffing it up with bullshit is to either put a lot of time into research or to actually have a relevant and up-to-date base of knowledge of what you're dealing with. Here are two examples of things this knowledge would allow you to do:

1. Provide context for what's happening how based on what's happened before (ie: historical context), and use this to explain and analyze the importance behind what's going on, even if it's something seemingly unimportant like a new, limited-time promotion.

2. Understand the overall strategy of the companies involved and explain where this single piece of news fits into that overall strategy.

These are just two examples, but the point is that added content should mean added value. If something is plentiful and easy to come by, like skimming a few sources and rambling off 1,000 words on something you don't really know about, then it's generally going to have a low value. I recommend that people focus on becoming an authority in a single area because it allows you to add analysis in a way that isn't very easy to come by, and that means you're adding something that has a higher value.

/rambling

 

[kyescontent]

Not talking about you or anyone else specifically, but I think the bold is the issue that some people could be concerned about.

This is largely the source of what I was talking about in my previous post as well. There's a major difference between fluffing something up like you're trying to meet a certain word count requirement for a high school English paper and providing actual analysis that has value from the perspective of a person who is knowledgeable about a particular industry.

For example, I'm often asked to write an analysis of a certain piece of news in my industry. The news item itself can be less than 100 words at times, but I'm expected to make that into something of value in the 400-500 word range (and often longer). The key to doing this without just fluffing it up with bullshit is to either put a lot of time into research or to actually have a relevant and up-to-date base of knowledge of what you're dealing with. Here are two examples of things this knowledge would allow you to do:

1. Provide context for what's happening how based on what's happened before (ie: historical context), and use this to explain and analyze the importance behind what's going on, even if it's something seemingly unimportant like a new, limited-time promotion.

2. Understand the overall strategy of the companies involved and explain where this single piece of news fits into that overall strategy.

These are just two examples, but the point is that added content should mean added value. If something is plentiful and easy to come by, like skimming a few sources and rambling off 1,000 words on something you don't really know about, then it's generally going to have a low value. I recommend that people focus on becoming an authority in a single area because it allows you to add analysis in a way that isn't very easy to come by, and that means you're adding something that has a higher value.

/rambling

Best thing about everything you just said is this post, which is a sterling example of SOLID content providing value in a field where you hear a lot of people slinging generalities around. I dig your specific examples, and I think your project sounds awesome.

 

[Meatytreats]

I've worked with Kyes and her content is damn good... So, anyone saying that it isn't or not to buy from her doesn't know shit...

Some people are just better and more skilled at certain things than others. That's as simple as it gets.

 

[avatar33]

I see nothing wrong with this, when I was in forensic debate I could take a new source and bullshit 5-7 minutes of speaking and easily write 2 pages based off the resource in 15 minutes if I needed to. The major emphasized is more important than you think:

I'm sure you can, but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't post that 15-minute content on any of my "serious" websites.

Sorry but A grade content with a unique angle that includes statistics, links, charts, facts, annotations, etc... takes more than 15-30 minutes to produce, even when you KNOW your topic. I've hired multiple content writers on WF and other forums, and frankly the content was good at best, never fantastic.

I learned my lesson and now I work exclusively with experts in their fields, mostly Masters/PhD writers that I hire off Odesk/Upwork. For example I have this lady writing for one of my finance sites who has a PhD in Economics from USF. It takes her 3-5 hours to produce a 1,000 word article, and I pay her between $100 and $150 for each piece because I can see just by reading the first paragraph that it's revolutionary shit, not a re-hash of something that already exists. To be honest I feel like I should be paying her much more. Her content is so amazing that since she started writing for me in February, I got natural mentions/links from Seeking Alpha, Zero Hedge, Benzinga and just last week a major Canadian newspaper.

Without any disrespect, a lot of you guys are "SEO writers", and the proof is that the first thing you ask when someone places an order from you is "What Keyword?". Again please don't take it as an insult because there is a real market for "fast food content" especially on IM forums... the other problem you face is that you're in a field where most clients don't want to pay more than $30 for an article, so you have to work fast and take on multiple orders a day. No way you can produce a high quality piece in these conditions.

Let the flaming begin...

 

[Muad'dib]

I'm sure you can, but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't post that 15-minute content on any of my "serious" websites.

Nor would I expect you to do so! Context is important here, if you're coming to me wanting $30 for a 1k word article you can't expect much vis-a-vis offering $100.

Sorry but A grade content with a unique angle that includes statistics, links, charts, facts, annotations, etc... takes more than 15-30 minutes to produce, even when you KNOW your topic. I've hired multiple content writers on WF and other forums, and frankly the content was good at best, never fantastic.

In total agreement that you need charts and statistics for the best content, I've only ever written my own content and done some for other people so I can't comment on the quality of WF.

Without any disrespect, a lot of you guys are "SEO writers", and the proof is that the first thing you ask when someone places an order from you is "What Keyword?". Again please don't take it as an insult because there is a real market for "fast food content" especially on IM forums... the other problem you face is that you're in a field where most clients don't want to pay more than $30 for an article, so you have to work fast and take on multiple orders a day. No way you can produce a high quality piece in these conditions.

Let the flaming begin...

Should probably back up and say that I don't do "SEO" writing, the only reason I gave my particular example was to say that yes, you can write content extremely quickly depending on how fast you write and how quickly you can come up with ideas for something that you already understand, if even at a basic level.

The only content writing gigs I've done are special for friends/people I know and are a one-use-only sort of deal with zero templates and are very well researched.

No insults taken - it all comes down to your chosen industry but that goes without saying. You want a cheap pizza you go to little caesars and don't complain because that's what you wanted. I'm glad that you found that the valuable content route is much better, and in agreement with you there. Would much rather pay $150 for a single legit article than 5 poverty articles everytime.

 

[JakeStratham]

Quality is subjective.

Price isn't a reliable gauge. I know writers who get paid $1/word and more. They'll be the first to tell you they haven't written anything revolutionary or earth-shattering in years.

Time spent isn't a reliable gauge. Some writers are inefficient.

The presence of charts and data isn't a reliable gauge. They look nice, but can be interpreted poorly by the writer.

The only thing that matters is whether a piece of content does its job.

How does it affect conversions?

Does it get adequate social engagement?

Does it boost readership?

How well does it drive opt-ins?

Only data can answer those questions.

Implying a 1,000-word article that cost $150 and took 3 hours to write is always better than an article that cost $30 and took 30 minutes to write is missing the point.

 

[potentialeight]

The only thing that matters is whether a piece of content does its job.

To elaborate on this point, I'd say that at least 50 percent of the people who have approached me wanting to be a client have absolutely no idea what they want their content to accomplish. It's like the client side of the line of thought as what avatar33 said about a lot of people just being like "What keyword?"

Of the remaining 50 percent, almost every single one of them just want something readable that they can play the SEO game with. It's boring, and I don't like really it, but the demand is what it is.

I have a few clients who pay me significantly more than my regular rates because they want actual content and not text wall filler. These are my favorite clients to work for because I actually care about what I'm doing and like the industry that I'm working in, and that allows me the freedom to actually create something.

I might get instructions from one of these clients like, "Write me something in the range of 1200-1600 words to piss US players off about PokerStars getting into daily fantasy sports."

Now compare that to something like, "I need 35 reviews of online casinos 400 words each, and can I get a bulk discount?" I can do most of them off of the top of my head without much research because I just know the brands so well at this point, and I don't mind the grind a bit, but it's some real soul-crushing shit.

 

[potentialeight]

Out of curiosity, anyone want to share your WPM? The actual typing part for me is very fast, so most of the time is spent pooling resources, reading, and outlining.

I did the test at Online Typing Test - CPM, WPM and percentile (first Google result) for 117 wpm with no mistakes. It's a little atypical compared to tests I've done before.