Publisher or Authors Responsibility?

Jill (a Publisher) writes:

Have a situation with an author who accused us of not including his link (when article posted to our blog, link was not clickable so my assistant tried to fix it and the author implied that we purposely removed his link)

If an author submits an article and in their author paragraph chooses to use html instead of a straight “http://www.xxx.com” link and then when someone cuts and pastes the article, the html does not translate to the blog and the link is no longer clickable or even distinguishable, is the person who uses the article responsible to go back and fix the link for the author to make it clickable?

(certain html links lose their clickability when transferred into an email too)

Chris Knight Responds:

  1. It’s your responsibility Jill as the publisher to respect the Publisher TOS and make all links active, regardless as to whether they are anchored text links or regular http:// full URL’s.
  2. We’ve already made this easy for Publishers by the fact that we provide an HTML version of every article in the EzinePublisher section of the Article Tools found in the upper right corner of every article.
  3. To Authors who only include anchored text links: What are you thinking? Stop that. Include one full http://Your-Company-Name.com/ and optionally one anchored text link. To only include anchored text links is not wise at all.
  4. To Publishers of ASCII TEXT email newsletters who reprint EzineArticles content: We’d appreciate it if you’d respect our members content by including the full http:// URL next to the words they anchored up. You know it’s the right thing to do so please do it.

Anyone else have comments?

Your EzineArticles Inbox

We’re only 3 days away from the launch of our newest feature, the EzineArticles Inbox.

Quite possibly, I think we’ll be the first site of our kind to offer its members the ability to email each other, collaborate on various opportunities together, connecting authors & publishers together and creating the framework for an even bigger project we have planned for later this year.

The service will be integrated within your membership account and the idea is to improve communication between our members and ourselves first. It happens daily that a member will ask the same question over and over again because they didn’t receive our reply for whatever reason or we’ll send messages that bounce back undeliverable. This new system will solve that.

We built the entire system from scratch and you’ll be able to send emails to us and other members, view your sent emails, view your trash (auto dumps every 30 days), mark emails as spam (that will notify us to investigate), create a blocked list of people you don’t want to receive emails from, create your own contact address book and more.

One large goal with this new system is to unlock the value trapped within our membership database. We can create significant economic value when we can help our members communicate with each other and this in turn makes us more valuable to our members (we hope).

I’m pretty certain that we won’t give the ability to email externally to non-members as this tool is being created to fascilitate member to member and service provider (us) to member communications.

One question to ask of you at this time:

(Continue Reading…)

20 Things I Learned In 2006

Thanks to an idea from EzineArticles expert author Benjamin Yoskovitz‘s Instagator blog where he proposed a group writing project to answer the question, “What I Learned In 2006”…here are my answers:

(Continue Reading…)

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?

Add EzineArticles Search To Your Browser

This has got to be the COOLEST functionality that we added in a long time:

You can now search EzineArticles.com WITHOUT having to visit our site first and you can do this from the comfort of your browser search box (works best with FireFox 2/newer or IE7).

[CLICK HERE FOR A QUICK TUTORIAL ON HOW TO SET IT UP]

Essentially, EzineArticles.com is now a “Specialty Search Provider” and you can search for content from your browser to speed up your ability to find what you’re looking for…FAST! Cool, eh?

Impact of Microsoft IE7 browser

Microsoft Internet Explorer had lost me more than 2 years ago (or whenever the FireFox browser first came out)… but today, I upgraded my MSIE 6.xx browser to the new IE 7.

You might ask, Why bother with Microsoft IE 7 if we’re perfectly happy with Mozilla FireFox?

The first reason is the same one you should have if you don’t have it already: To see how our/your websites look like in the new browser and review any visual oddities that may need some HTML code adjustments just in case IE7 becomes the world browser standard.

I’m excited about IE7 for quite a few reasons, none of which have to do with me switching back to IE instead of FireFox (because that ain’t gonna happen just yet).

1) First, did you notice that IE7 looks nearly identical to FireFox? This is a good thing because it means the IE7 dev team was probably using FireFox when they developed their version of it. (Shhh, it’ll be our little secret.)
2) I expect IE7 to give Microsoft’s LIVE and/or MSN portal an off-the-scale boost in traffic (look at the charts for the past year) because it’ll be the default search engine in IE7. Yes, I already changed my IE7 to Google for the default SE (duh :-) and added Yahoo and a few others to it, but I’m not confident the masses will care to improve the quality of their IE7 browser to include a better quality search engine (Sorry MSFT). This will give Microsoft’s search engine a rise in query volume by critical masses who will default with it…and thus, elevate their importance.

I have not seen Googles marketing yet to help educate IE7 users to add them to the search defaults, but I’ve seen Yahoo doing a lot of direct-to-member marketing to convert to a Yahoo branded IE7.

3) EzineArticles expert author Matt Ambrose summed up my feelings on the gigantinormic impact (that’s a word I just made up) of how IE7 is going to move RSS forward into the mainstream. Read Matt’s article: Internet Explorer 7 = RSS Consumption Explosion

Our tens of thousands of EzineArticles RSS feeds are single handedly responsible for MILLIONS of page views of annual traffic already… and the best part: The traffic is HIGHLY pre-qualified! Read this paragraph a few times and then go make sure you have your own RSS feeds available on your site. This is huge people! :-)

(Continue Reading…)

EzineArticles Direct Advertising

Currently, we are not accepting new advertisers directly and have been referring all inquires to Google Adwords and to select “Site Targeting: EzineArticles.com” to get your ads on our site.

In the near future, we’ve been working on plans to open up EzineArticles.com for direct targeting of text ads (with nofollow rel tags to ensure you’re investing in advertising for qualified leads and targeted traffic) in each of our 301 categories. For those who wish to advertise on EzineArticles.com, we’ve setup a pre-launch list that you can subscribe to today to be notified in advance of our public launch: [Click Here To Subscribe To Our Advertise on EzineArticles.com Alert List]

Politics of 3rd Party Article Submissions

We are often asked, “Do you accept automatic article submissions from so and so?”

To which we respond, “We do accept automatic article submissions from a select small list of 3rd party article submission service providers, but we have never disclosed and had no plans to disclose who the approved 3rd party article submission service providers are to prevent implied endorsements.”

Here are some of the politics behind our reasons for the above policy and many insights into our thinking on 3rd party article submission providers:

(Continue Reading…)

Jason and Alan Face Off

Recently Alan Meckler and Jason Calacanis faced off in a WSJ article on whether or not bloggers can make any money with blogging.

Jason contends with an RPM (Revenue Per Thousand page views) of $3-$10 (same as eCPM (Effective Cost Per Thousand page views), a blogger with half a million monthly PV’s (Page Views) could bring in $1000-$5000 USD per month without having to hire an ad sales rep. Alan disagreed with Jason that the average blogger doesn’t know how to or can’t attract half a million monthly page views. BUT!!!
(Continue Reading…)

Web Content Mix Strategy

Budding web publishers have been asking me about what they should use as a guideline for their web content mix. Here’s my current thinking:

1) Original content that you have the exclusive rights to should be a min. of 25% of your content. Ride the long tail including sub-tails and you’ll never run out of content generation ideas. This can also include ghostwritten content that you have the exclusive rights to. Lastly, before anyone complains that they don’t have the time to write a few thousand articles this year: Well, then get your writing team to do it for you and just be certain it’s original works and that you have an exclusive right to the content.

2) Original content that you distribute/syndicate in exchange for a link back to your website should be another 25% of your content. Some publishers syndicate 100% of their original content. I’m not saying this is bad or wrong, but if you have hopes to grow your own web traffic, you’ll need to lean heavily on #3 below to create enough ‘uniqueness’ to your website to create market trust.

3) User generated content should represent at least 10% if not more of your total content mix.
Often times user generated content is original, but not guaranteed to be original. This can be in the form of blog comments, forum posts, submissions, votes in polls or online quiz’s, etc.

4) Syndicated content – ie: Content that is non-exclusive to you should never be more than 40-50% of your total content. I especially like this strategy when you can use it to go very vertical in a specific market niche. You can get syndicated content from sites like ours (25 reprint limit per site per year), our competitors, and especially from blogs or other RSS-aware sites that allow their content to be syndicated via XML feeds. Be sure to ask permission before using this type of content and always be a good netcitizen by reading and adhering to the TOS setup by the publisher of the feeds.

Notice that Private Label Rights (PLR) content didn’t even get added to the list. Garbage I say and not worth the headaches or liabilities.

One other web content type that I didn’t include is public domain content. There are very few that can use this type of content right and therefore I don’t advocate adding public domain content in your web content mix strategy.

Your thoughts about my content mix recommendations?

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7