If given the choice would you rather make money now or hope for money later–much later?
The premise of article writing sites in a nutshell is that writers submit content and the site (Triond, Helium et al) shares a fraction of its ad revenue with the writer when enough clicks have been made on the article—something to that effect. I find the whole thing a bit confusing and let’s face it; no article-writing site has been forthcoming as to how much they really make from all our hard work vs. how much they pay out. I’ve done the research and believe me, mum is the word, apparently.
This raises an interesting question: Would you rather be paid up front for an article (for example .01 per word) and let the site do as it pleases with the ad revenue? Or would you rather write and write and write while hoping that in two or three years you might earn enough from the article to actually receive a check?
Naturally if you, as a writer were to be paid for the article up front, it would have to be very well written. No bad grammar, improper punctuation and the English would have to be perfect—something that may not bode well for users who haven’t quite mastered it yet. You would also have to be willing to give up all rights to said article, as you would no longer own it.
But what if you were given the choice on the same site? Let’s say for example that a new site makes the scene. On this article writing site you have two choices: Get paid for a well-written piece up front, or take the shared ad revenue instead. And let’s even go further and make it possible to have this choice with each individual piece that you produce. So, some of your articles are paid for up front and others are not but you share the ad revenue instead.
I think it’s a concept worth exploring and one much more satisfying than the current standard, which is basically to get for nothing the talent and labor of creative people who love to write.