Proposal- End Free Syndication

Instead: Start Registered Member Syndication Only

This has been on my mind for about a year now and as we reflect this week on what went right in 2006 and what our priorities should be for 2007 (this is my favorite week for 2007 priority planning)… I wanted to float the idea of stopping free syndication and requiring a membership account in order to be granted syndication rights on any content.

By requiring publishers to have a membership account, we could facilitate the communication between authors and publishers that doesn’t exist today. Authors want to know which publisher is using their content. Publishers want to tell Authors what they want more of from them or complain (geez, if I had a dime for every publisher who is upset with an authors spelling, grammar, sentence structure, punctuation, or writing style)… and by doing this, authors would also have the option to deny (or mitigiate) certain publishers from using their works.

It would meet our original charter objective to provide EZINE publishers with supplemental content by inserting only a few extra minutes for true ezine publishers to create a free starter membership account. I would propose that it would be FREE for publishers as it is today so that there would be no barrier to entry for ‘genuine’ publishers.

This new system would also be a serious threat to those who are already harming our site… The idea is to isolate ‘good’ publishers from ‘evil’ ones… through the membership interface barrier…while providing ENHANCED database services to quality publishers that create a win:win:win for all involved in the system.

It wouldn’t be a perfect system, but it would serve more of the aggregate interests that aren’t being served very well today…or at least, not as efficiently as they could be served.

Your thoughts?


Nancy P Redford writes:

I would welcome this new measure as I value your site and wouldn’t have any objections to enrolling as a member.

I sympathize with your dilemma in regards to content distribution.

As with New Year brings on new ideas to help us move forward and make our workload lighter, efficient and bring quality back to publishing.

I look forward to hearing from others on this matter and am eager to keep up to date with your decisions at EzineArticles.

Comment provided December 26, 2006 at 9:49 AM


Lisa Sparks writes:

I like the idea, Chris.

I’ve noticed this year that getting new ezine publishers to pick up on my EzineArticles has been tough because the first point of contact is e-mail. They’re hit with so much spam that it’s almost impossible to make that first introduction no matter how good my article is.

I’m all for something that will give me more access to ezine and Web publishers. That way I can possibly tailor my articles to a particular niche.

Thanks and I look forward to this change.


Comment provided December 26, 2006 at 9:51 AM


Ed Howes writes:

I’m ready for this change, most especially if we will be including publisher tracking. My attempts at getting publisher contact this year was a complete failure. I have been feeling that my publisher partners have been seeing free content as an entitlement and their business was apparently none of my own. As a result I have been feeling I am in a limited partnership with EzineArticles, serving people who cannot be bothered to send a note of appreciation. A membership registration requirement seems a small price to pay for ingratitude.

Comment provided December 26, 2006 at 10:31 AM



I’m definitely interested, Chris, and have trust in you making this effective for everyone. I’d like to hear what others have to say about this.

Comment provided December 26, 2006 at 11:03 AM


Jan Verhoeff writes:

I’m interested in this process, both as a writer and as a publisher. I like using content from in my ezines and publications. I’ve used several items, and would definitely continue.

My question would be, can a publisher have more than one account, for various publications? Or would that be necessary?

I publish newsletters for others, and they need content too. So, it’s simple for me to pull content now, would that be as simple then too?

As for sending a Thank you to the writer of the Content. I’d appreciate that option too. Often, it’s difficult or impossible to find a writer’s email address to send a message.

Jan Verhoeff

Comment provided December 26, 2006 at 11:22 AM



I think it is a great idea. It will definitely hep us building business relationships. I am for it!

Comment provided December 26, 2006 at 11:51 AM


Edward Weiss writes:

It’s a good idea, but then publishers may start hyperlinking keywords in articles to make more money.

I found one of my articles on a site where they turned it into a keyword clicking orgy.

Comment provided December 26, 2006 at 11:56 AM


Jim Gustafson writes:

An excellent and timely evolution. I would genuinely appreciate the information the system would provide.

Comment provided December 26, 2006 at 12:09 PM


Ed Howes writes:


You can thank and comment on any author’s article here at EzineArticles before you decide to take it. Every publisher could and get additional exposure for their own web site. Few do and I think they just might not know what they are doing.

I am 100% with Edward that EzineArticles publisher policy should ban copyright violations by the insertion of advertising hyperlinks in any author’s work. This is especially true since we have very poor tools for tracking where our content goes and who is using it however they see fit. This whole concept of making authors into involuntary and uncompensated affiliate marketers must cease.

Comment provided December 26, 2006 at 12:31 PM


Edward Weiss writes:

Ed Howes writes:

This whole concept of making authors into involuntary and uncompensated affiliate marketers must cease


Well said. This is a problem that has legal ramifications as well.

Comment provided December 26, 2006 at 12:36 PM



Ed & All,

We already ban the additional linking of any keyword or keyphrase by any publisher. See our TOS:

1. n: Agree to not add any active links to any article you reprint from our site. This unethical behavior would lead someone to believe falsely that the author of the article endorses the active link when in fact there is no truth to that.

If you find a publisher that has done that, snap them off an email to remove your article from their site.


A publisher would not be allowed more than one account and we’d create separate profiles for them within their single membership account to manage their affairs in one easy to use interface.

It would probably be clunky to start, but with each passing month, get more finely tuned as we act on user provided feedback.

Comment provided December 26, 2006 at 12:57 PM


Lance Winslow writes:

You know I want what is best for Chris and because in the end I know that is what is best for me. I know from working with that when they do better they implement new things and make my life better.

So, I want to make more money and prosper, because that has a direct benefit to me. and this means fewer Dirt Bags doing grab and go Liquor Store Robberies of content. These are my orginal thoughts on the subject.

Comment provided December 26, 2006 at 7:07 PM


Steve Hill writes:

I think it is a great idea, I have just read on the searchwarp blog how their site has been ruined by dodgy so called article writers.
We certainly do not want EzineArticles to go the same way.

I think that a form of link exchange program would also be good for the true members as we are all in this to gain good quality links and additional traffic.

The true article writers know how to promote a site and I for one would love to exchange homepage links from my pr6 site with other writers who have pr5, pr6 or pr7 sites.

Steve The How To Stop Stammering Centre

Comment provided December 27, 2006 at 6:16 AM


Keith Renninson writes:


Change often comes in ways and at times that are critical for the evolution of a business, a crossroads of sorts. This is one of those times for you and Ezine…I don’t think this can be bypassed if you are to continue to be a leader in the field.

We as writers/publishers will accept the changes and learn to work with the new rules, just as we did when we first started with you, following the rules imposed with our initial usage of the site.

If you don’t implement these types of changes when you feel it is necessary others may do it first and place you in a less than industry leadership role…I’d rather work with people of vision and pride in ownership of their work than those who just follow the trends.

Thanks for being a trendsetter,


Comment provided December 27, 2006 at 10:15 AM




And that’s the risk I took with even posting this blog entry because I knew it would tip off our competition to consider the same strategy.

Thank to you and everyone who commented as it made my meeting today with our dev team much easier to advance the cause without worrying if it’s the wrong move.

Comment provided December 27, 2006 at 10:19 AM


Judith Brandy writes:

Ideamarketers does something similar and it really sparks a dialogue between authors and publishers. I like the idea for EzineArticles. It would also stand you out from the myriad of Ezine knock-offs that are around today.

Just my thoughts.

Comment provided December 27, 2006 at 10:43 AM


Samantha Rangren writes:

As a writer, I’d love to hear from publishers about what more they’d like. As a publisher, I’m all for appreciating the folks who wrote the content.

Would our publisher accounts be separate from our writer accounts?

Comment provided December 27, 2006 at 2:28 PM




One account per human, dual functionality.

If a publisher had more than one niche going on, we’d create separate tracking channels for them.

The only thing I know for certain is that we are not going to get it right the first time, but we’ll innovate like mad until we get it right enough.

Comment provided December 27, 2006 at 2:36 PM


Samantha Rangren writes:

Sounds good. I have multiple channels (personalities????) in writing, and I’ve certainly started publishing more in several channels as well.

Comment provided December 27, 2006 at 2:51 PM




I’m glad you got the feedback needed to move on this immediately with your dev team…

“If you find a publisher that has done that, snap them off an email to remove your article from their site.”

A random check on one particular fluke, out-of-niche article revealed that several sites used it but the content was changed enough to not read well in several places. When I clicked the contact link to ask them to fix or remove, it just took me to a new page as did links from the author bio box….

Your new system should cut down on this type of nonsense and present an opportunity for greater communication between publishers and authors as already noted by several others in previous comments.

Thank you and I join everyone in looking forward to its implementation.

Comment provided December 31, 2006 at 11:38 AM



Sorry, should have clarified this above…:

“but the content was changed enough to not read well in several places.”

I only noticed this on one particular site….


Comment provided December 31, 2006 at 11:40 AM


Timothy Mahar writes:

I have been submitting articles to for about a month, with good results. This morning I was looking for copies of my articles on the Internet. I was very disheartened to see that many of the websites that obtained my articles from were not publishing the articles in their original format. Everything from no active links to my name being completely stripped from the article. I have been contacting the websites one by one, but that is not how I wanted to spend my morning. relies on authors having an incentive to submit their work. From my perpective, improving publisher accountability is good for’s business.

Comment provided December 31, 2006 at 4:25 PM


Jan Verhoeff writes:

After thinking about this since I first read it, I like the idea.

I have learned to pull the content from the html when I upload it to my sites, and it works much better, because I don’t have to hunt down any links.

However, I know how difficult it is to keep all the links “linking” when it’s just pulled off and stuck in a blog. I’ve noticed after the fact, several links aren’t type in the complete format, which makes them non-working, unless the publisher checks the link and goes back to ‘reinstall’ it.

Ed*** I hadn’t thought about using the comment space to comment before I pluck an article. My duh moment? I have those now and then.

Okay – off to work on my new site!


Comment provided December 31, 2006 at 5:24 PM


Daria Black writes:

Please, please, please do this. One of the reasons I hesitate to invest time in article marketing is the fear that my articles will end up on spam sites. A few of them already have. I know it won’t stop spammers/sploggers completely but hopefully it will slow them down.

Comment provided January 2, 2007 at 2:37 AM


Lance Winslow writes:

I try not to let it bother me. However, today I found on a Blog one of my articles without my name on it. It was just posted as if it was their stuff. Now, I know these things happen, but so much for a Happy New Year Courtesy from this Bozo, posting my article that I wrote yesterday on his Blog today? The only reason I caught it was because I have Google Search Alerts for certain key words and then found it that way. So if people have google search alerts for their name and the Blogger steals it and posts it, then the chances of you ever noticing are very low. It just seems kind of unfortunate that if we bar people from taking articles without signing up, then they take them anyway and steal them without giving anyone credit. Is there a way we can purchase a black-helicopter and get some you know devices and storm these Content Stealing Bloggers just before sunrise? I mean just let them have it. I mean although this is rather drastic, it would make all the good bloggers look great and remove the trash from the search engine clutter?

Comment provided January 3, 2007 at 1:22 AM



You can borrow my helicopter anytime:

[This is my dream helicopter that I didn’t buy yet, but hope to someday…]

Comment provided January 3, 2007 at 8:28 AM


Lance Winslow writes:

All Right! Clear the Intake, clear the roto-blades, let’s lock and load and Boggie Smoogie! I am sure we have some “special forces”, “Swat” or high-tech law enforcement article authors here. Let’s go take care of business! Don’t you just wish we could? Yah, that’s what I am talking about. Great helicopter indeed, that will give you a better 3D perspective of the landscape of the ever changing online article submission venue.

Comment provided January 3, 2007 at 5:05 PM


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

Please read our comment policy before commenting.