Thursday, February 08, 2007
"There is a paradox in pride - it makes some men ridiculous, but prevents others from becoming so."
Either stemming from conviction or 'call of duty,' I would like to address the issue of content. For a site to reach the heights of great optimization, the presence of great content is inextricable. It seems at present there is a dichotomy in meeting the standards of optimal content. A site can adopt the skills of a content writer; directing him on what to write, when to write, and for whom to write. A site can also 'scan' the net or hire a 'hack' to adorn their site with words in order for it to seem more reputable.
There are good writers who do 'freelance' their skills and take on a project for sites they do not necessarily work for on a regular basis. I do not mean to intend a lack of respect for their skills; however, I do have some ethical reservations about how some may exercise their skills (the jester scribblers). I also do not appreciate the sites who quickly look to post content in order to quickly raise their legitimacy(the compromised castles).
I find it sad to find myself in a time where writing is 'used' and 'abused' rather than 'appreciated.' For those who share my ineffable respect for writing, perhaps you can see a comparison between the 'hacks' and the 'jester scribblers.' The concept of quantity vs. quality is not something that originated with the inauguration of the web. The hacks have been around since printing on paper for sale was conceptualized. It has evolved now into printing on the web for sales; same game - new name.
'Pop' genres that could be pumped out with alacrity to make 'quick-change' for publishers such as pulp fiction, romance novels, and true crime can be connected to keyword stuffing, meta tag stuffing, and 'spamdexing' in today's web society. Again, it is the same frame with some new duds.
"Expedients are for the hour, but principle's are for the ages."
True writers will not compromise their skill and talent to make a buck. A legitimate site will not compromise their integrity to fill their pages with 'fluff' in order to make a buck. The only redeeming thought I immediately can think of is that: "You can fool some people sometimes, but you can't fool all the people all the time." Upon visiting compromised castles with jester scribblers people will unmask their facade and will (hopefully) be able to distinguish the true from the untrue.
My connection to my personal vendetta to my service to my public is in this: Businesses take the time and money to hire a real writer and do not compromise your business in order to get a quick fix. A compromised castle made of sand will eventually fall into the sea; I promise you that. For the neo-hacks out there- I thank you twofold: for making yourselves imminently apparent to the public and for fueling the fire of my own passion to take pride in a medium that stems from a long line of legends.
"I have taken as my ruling idea the determination never to write a false line."
Sincerely,
contentmuse
Either stemming from conviction or 'call of duty,' I would like to address the issue of content. For a site to reach the heights of great optimization, the presence of great content is inextricable. It seems at present there is a dichotomy in meeting the standards of optimal content. A site can adopt the skills of a content writer; directing him on what to write, when to write, and for whom to write. A site can also 'scan' the net or hire a 'hack' to adorn their site with words in order for it to seem more reputable.
There are good writers who do 'freelance' their skills and take on a project for sites they do not necessarily work for on a regular basis. I do not mean to intend a lack of respect for their skills; however, I do have some ethical reservations about how some may exercise their skills (the jester scribblers). I also do not appreciate the sites who quickly look to post content in order to quickly raise their legitimacy(the compromised castles).
I find it sad to find myself in a time where writing is 'used' and 'abused' rather than 'appreciated.' For those who share my ineffable respect for writing, perhaps you can see a comparison between the 'hacks' and the 'jester scribblers.' The concept of quantity vs. quality is not something that originated with the inauguration of the web. The hacks have been around since printing on paper for sale was conceptualized. It has evolved now into printing on the web for sales; same game - new name.
'Pop' genres that could be pumped out with alacrity to make 'quick-change' for publishers such as pulp fiction, romance novels, and true crime can be connected to keyword stuffing, meta tag stuffing, and 'spamdexing' in today's web society. Again, it is the same frame with some new duds.
"Expedients are for the hour, but principle's are for the ages."
True writers will not compromise their skill and talent to make a buck. A legitimate site will not compromise their integrity to fill their pages with 'fluff' in order to make a buck. The only redeeming thought I immediately can think of is that: "You can fool some people sometimes, but you can't fool all the people all the time." Upon visiting compromised castles with jester scribblers people will unmask their facade and will (hopefully) be able to distinguish the true from the untrue.
My connection to my personal vendetta to my service to my public is in this: Businesses take the time and money to hire a real writer and do not compromise your business in order to get a quick fix. A compromised castle made of sand will eventually fall into the sea; I promise you that. For the neo-hacks out there- I thank you twofold: for making yourselves imminently apparent to the public and for fueling the fire of my own passion to take pride in a medium that stems from a long line of legends.
"I have taken as my ruling idea the determination never to write a false line."
Sincerely,
contentmuse
