But even when articles are reasonably well-written, they are never authoritative, and that’s (at least in part) what SEs are/ were designed to bubble to the top. IMO G’s increasing reliance on domain authority rather than niche authority or page-specific factors has lead to this situation where eHow and similar sites with strong domain authority rank well even though no human would ever consider their content authoritative. (And that, in turn is driving down the value of truly authoritative content.)

***
Andrew: As for payment, they have both a flat fee (which they don’t specify) and a rev. share model. They give only select freelancer the shot at rev. share. They also allow writers to direct traffic to their particular articles, thus helping the PPC for Demand Media, which helps the writer who is working under rev. share. (At least that’s my understanding, based on an initial read of the “deeper” part of their site.

RE: Payment, they are on a “work for hire” model, so the company gets perpetual rev. from ads — and the writer who’s under a flat fee is paid, but derives no further $$ from his work.

NOTE: Here’s an interesting article, that discusses the different freelance pay structures: http://freelancewriting.suite101.com/article.cfm/how_do_freelance_writers_get_paid

Ultimately, it is up to the writer to know what he/she will accept and the time the job will take, and the value of the work.

An interesting point in the above article is the “online” pubs that take “limited” rights vs. print that takes “work for hire.” Demand seems to have this very well buttoned up in their biz model, with the online getting “work for hire.” As I read through the legal stuff for contract issues, they certainly have their stuff in one sock.

***
Mark: While I agree that you could consider these writers “marginalized” — compared with the opportunities to be syndicated via the expansive network of sites that Demand runs, even if a writer only gets the flat fee, this can: a) help him/her with getting some “professional credits” which may lead to exposure in other areas and b) in the rev. share model, can create a growing income, albeit modest at the start. The writer who proves him/herself on flat fee jobs likely also has a better shot at the share gigs.

***
Bernard: Interesting perspective. With the demand model, I think one has to consider the labor market; the talent pool; the “grit” of those who wish to undertake such work; etc.

Let’s say that the rate is appx. $25/piece (And I can’t confirm the rates, which seem to be based on particular assgt.) If a writer can do two articles a day (4 hrs./per) — my math gives me an annual of $13K. If he/she is better and faster and can do 4/day (2/hr.) that give me 26K. And if the writer is on a rev share for any of the work, that brings in residual income.

***
Mark: “For demand, it’s not about quality content it’s about response.” — This can work both ways: If I were to write a piece for Demand, and sell as WFH, I can still take the research I put into the project, if I’m industrious, and re-work it into a different, even significantly different piece.

In addition, if you take a look at the writer guide, Demand provides an advantage of listing articles that they have already determined have reader “demand” — and seem to provide — at least indirectly — some idea of the keywords (and I assume that these KW’s are more lucrative than others, even ones a writer may try to dig up) — so, there is benefit on a secondary level.

Ideally, if we see this company as a “launching pad” — vs. a steady gig — it may not seem so bad, esp. if our names are not doing so well — parked or otherwise.

***
Alex: Not so sure I agree with you, based on all of the above.

***
Bill: Good idea! Charge it off to inflation.

Good authors will always be rewarded richly. I think the best journalists are making more than they made five years ago.

Also curious how you justify invoicing and Net 60 terms as deserving $1.00 per word for a magazine writer and a “Demand” writer not getting a fair rate because they can get paid by PayPal at a faster rate.

I gotta tell you Andrew, as a writer and someone married to a writer, I am surprised at your opinion on this.

Demand is no doubt marginalizing the value of writers and content. For demand, it’s not about quality content it’s about response.

Sad.