A writer, we’ll call her “X,” was frustrated with what she felt was a lack of editorial oversight on Examiner.com, the Denver-based content aggregator.
So she gamed the system.
X, who has clips from big name publications like the Los Angeles Times, LA Weekly and Sunset magazine, wrote a series of Examiner.com pieces that she admits included exaggerations and half-truths, including one about the dangers of playing tag.
Nothing happened. No phone calls from fact checkers. No emails from editors questioning her sources. Nothing, that is, until X went a little too far and wrote an autism-related story about Jenny McCarthy the actress and alternative treatment advocate noticed and had her lawyers follow up.
In no time, Examiner pulled the stories and fired X, although she argues since she hadn’t gotten a dime from the site it wasn’t really getting fired.
X says she wrote the stories as an experiment to call out the shortcomings of content aggregators, Examiner.com in particular. In a comment on the Fishbowl LA site, which wrote about the issue, Examiner.com’s editorial director Travis Henry says the site has a growing editorial staff that works with writers, providing them with coaching and daily training sessions.
Here at WordCount, there’s been a similar exchange of opinions on the value of writing for content aggregators recently. In a post and multiple follow up comments, a Helium representative explained the site’s editorial process and how much money writers can make. Several freelancers countered her with arguments explaining why they won’t write for content aggregators or why they did and wouldn’t again. I even chimed in with my own advice to write for a hyperlocal news site instead.
While newspapers and magazines figure out how to transform themselves into fiscally sound Internet businesses, the pay-per-click business model that content aggregators – my friend and fellow freelancer Heather Boerner calls them content aggravators – use to compensate writers citizen journalists isn’t going away. Whether it will become the predominant online publishing business model in the future is hard to say. But it’s safe to assume the arguments over the merits of working for content aggregators will continue.
I know people write for sites like Examiner and Helium, but does anyone actually read them? I consume a crazy amount of media, as do most people I know, and I’ve never had a “Hey, did you see this great thing on Examiner?” conversation. I just can’t imagine I ever will.
It’s a small data point, but I know of one Examiner writer who uses his gig as a “restaurant reviewer” there to promote the clients of his and his wife’s own PR business.
Nobody is editing or checking facts on the thousands of articles written each day at Examiner.com.
The Internet has become the shout-box for anyone willing to listen, and now it takes 5 times as long to weed through all the junk put out by the “self appointed experts”.
Actually, I read the Examiner. And I think they have done a good job in helping people. I am frineds of one writer already and she uses examiner as a way to promote her business. I also think that most writers on Examiner are very professional.
Examiner.com is a snow job.
Examiner.com is paying ‘writers’ pennies for their articles – what a scam, and it’s a prime example of corporations taking for granted the very content they’re in the business of providing – it happened to radio – as automation systems became available in the 80s and 90s and away went any kind of personality – and now they want to complain because no one’s listening!!
According to Alexa.com – Examiner.com is ranked in the top 175 sites – that is quite an accomplishment. One has to wonder though, how much of that traffic – is contributors, and how much is readers??
Wonder what kind of money they (Examiner.com) are pulling down as compared to what they’re paying the people actually doing the work!
Kudos from one braniac to another. 🙂
Well, as a new Examiner for Chicago Online Marketing, I have to say I’ve never recited any content I’ve stumbled across on this site, that’s for sure.
As long as there are writers, there will be plagiarism. Though unfortunate, it is what it is. It sucks to have individuals deficient in creativity use my research and snarky/playful wit as their own, but what can I do?
Sooner or later, everything “done in the dark” will be exposed. Believe that.
This Examiner.com writer wasn’t copying anyone, she made up facts in order to expose what she felt were substantial flaws in Examiner.com’s story vetting process.
Michelle R.