David Phillips writes:

As well as focusing on a tight niche, and avoiding too broad a theme, I think another force is the power of “currency” or “topicality”.

There may well be articles on say nuclear energy, but if let’s say, you weave into your article a piece of information just released, then you
have the advantage of a freshness and immediacy.

So bringing a newsworthy angle into the more substantive part of the article reduces the likelihood of saturation
because you will be first.

Just a thought of mine.

[Reply]

Ed Howes writes:

Preparation: Begin with reading multiple authors in your primary areas of interest. When you believe you can write a good article which will compare favorably with those you have been reading, write it and publish. Continue reading withinn your primary areas of interests and continue writing.

Move to your secondary interests. By scanning categories at article submission sites, you will be surprised how your interests will shift with mood and personal cycles. This broadens your fields of interests as it increases your knowledge in new subjects. Now you can write in new areas only to share what you are learning.

You will develop a writing style or voice some will find attractive and others will not. But it will be all yours, even if it resembles someone else’s.

Use anything you like for a working title on a fresh article, then try to include the kind of hook that would attract you. Your title is your main advertising. Currently, search engines like longer titles with keywords in the front part. This can change over time so focus on the hook first.

Try to include at least one more hook in your introduction. Something which would build your anticipation about what the article has to offer.

Once you are publishing in multiple categories, check your article reports on a regular basis. Your page view counts will give you an idea of your popularity on a given submission site. Watch your publisher pick ups on the sites which provide that information. This tells you how popular your articles are with publishers providing you the opportunity to reach a wider audience and increase your popularity.

Category popularity and on site reader popularity will shift over the course of the year. If you are attentive to the stats on fresh content in particular, you can target your articles to the shifting interests of readers. From time to time test other submission sites you have seen recommended and follow your stats for a month or so. Never assume ten times as many sites will get you ten times the readers but some will provide very pleasant surprises, exceeding your expectations.

[Reply]

Susan Scharfman writes:

Yes Chris. And David Phillips makes an excellent point about immediacy (which I do not always follow myself). Thanks to you both. suschar

[Reply]

Dave Saunders writes:

I enjoy focusing on a few categories. Being able to strive for the next slot in author rankings is a great incentive to not only write more, but to also maintain a high level of quality in what I produce.

-Dave

[Reply]

Dina at Wordfeeder.com writes:

I’m only going to say this once. The secret is BRANDING.

[Reply]

Edward Weiss writes:

My answer is specialize. I’m a perfect example of this.

I teach piano online. But not just any style. I specialize in New Age piano improvisation. It completely sets me apart from the competition and positions me as the expert in the field (and with over 200 articles on the topic, I pretty much am).

When people find my site through my articles, they know what to expect thanks to my bio. So make sure your bio positions you differently in the market.

There’s room for most of us. You just have to get savvy. Sabe?

[Reply]

David Phillips writes:

The Long Tail is very much alive. With so many niches out there, you can meet the needs of readers by focusing on your areas of expertise in the Long Tail.

[Reply]

Lance Winslow writes:

For most of my life I have had a complete disdain for writers and their persnickety attitudes. In fact I use to say; Those Who Can’t Do It, Write About It!

The funny thing is after doing it all my life and in my retirement, now I find myself writing about it, which is rather Ironic. And to that point, I have learned about writers and I feel embarrassed in that I must admit I was wrong. You see I thought all writers were non-performers, complainers and malcontents.

It is not true, sure most are exactly as I had previously observed, there are a few who are indeed pretty good at both doing and writing. There are just too few of us. We need to displace the writers in the economy who just cannot seem to make it happen in the real world, because listening to their dribble, well that is simply a complete travesty.

[Reply]

Lance Winslow writes:

Why won’t the non-performing persnickety commi-socialist writer stick up for themselves? If no one comments I will assume and commit to memory these observations, experience and knowledge as truth. – Lance

[Reply]

Christopher M. Knight writes:

Lance,

When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at changes. (Wayne Dyer-ism)

I choose to view Damola as a writer wannabe who simply is missing some tactical strategies to figure out why he or she should get into action, writing articles.

Are you really going to call Damola a “non-performing persnickety commi-socialist writer”? If so, doesn’t seem based in any truth as neither of us really know the truth about his or her real situation.

[Reply]

Susan Scharfman writes:

Chris:

Don’t be conned by Wayne Dyerisms. Most of his one-liners are from centuries-old monks. This is fine, since he doesn’t claim pride in authorship. But his charisma in delivering the message orally, as well as his gift for writing, can be misleading. BTW: It’s “When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change.” No “s” I think the monk is Lao Tse, but who can prove me wrong?

Cheers!

[Reply]

Christopher M. Knight writes:

Susan,

I’ll be conned if I want to be conned, fine thank you. :)

If what Wayne has been doing is misleading me, then it’s been a fine trip and works for me.

I don’t buy all of his arguments or follow him blindly, but I’ve enjoyed both studying him (he’s a brilliant marketer and book seller) and his messages (can you really argue with any of them?).

[Reply]

Susan Scharfman writes:

Chris:

Yes he’s a brilliant marketer and book seller. Yes his message has worked for me too over many years because his message is the “truth.” My point was (is) that affirmations should accompany such profound quotes; even if they’re quick asides.

The comment was meant to be helpful, not as a barb.

[Reply]

Ed Howes writes:

I am pleased to see Chris participating on a more personal level here on this blog, down in the threads. Maybe Dr. Wayne gave him the idea. I like to catch the good doctor on the PBS pledge drives. My favorite bit comes from the opening of “Your Sacred Self”. The ego – spirit twins in utero debating the existance of mother. Possibly the last civil dialog the two have prior to spiritual awakening. :-)

[Reply]

Lance Winslow writes:

Who is Damola?

[Reply]

Christopher M. Knight writes:

The person who asked the question that began this blog entry.

You’ll find Damola’s name near the very top of this blog entry.

[Reply]

Lance Winslow writes:

Oh, well obviously my comments are not directed towards Damola. More I like to trash on NYT writers and such. A new writer starting out has probably not written enough to be a persnickety commi-Socialist yet! It takes practice for them to slip those mean-spirited jabs sneakily into their articles. So, Damola is a good writer of course.

[Reply]

Lance Winslow writes:

My point being we need more good writers and more new writers like Damola to turn the tide and bring writing back into a reality check. So if one is worried about the number of writers out there; Don’t Be. WE NEED YOU !

[Reply]

Susan Scharfman writes:

Oh my. I meant to say “attributions” should accompany profound quotes. Not affirmations. But that has been typical of my day today. Couldn’t get anything right. Except when I return to work on my Love EzineArticles, the endorphins get moving again. Think I’ll stick to this theme for awhile.

Lance, I too forgot who Donola was. Had to reread. There’s too much to read and do. Better for me to just shut up and write. Cheers!

suschar

[Reply]