yepOh Hell No
hell no on both of them
top one looks like a boy
btm one, looks like Michelin Man's side chick
not a white wall, but def over inflated.
yepOh Hell No
There is an upside.yep
hell no on both of them
top one looks like a boy
btm one, looks like Michelin Man's side chick
not a white wall, but def over inflated.
Very right there ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Been a very long time since I subscribed. Like as a teen. Professional sports and social issues. No thanks.
You would be right about my primary industry, not being a writer. But one of my "things" is reading. Which puts me on the other side of the equation. As a client, or a target of a click.
And I am a veracious reader. About 6-9 months ago, I started on the Reacher series. Just got in books 27-29, and am half way through 27. And those aren't the only books I've read during that time. Have read entire Bible commentaries. And at present have about 6 that I go back and forth on, on a weekly basis. And I read ton's of articles every week. Articles that are well written by authors I have come to know and look for, get my click. Author's who cover the same subject, but don't write them up very well, don't. They usually have a bunch of gibberish mixed in to make it a long article. I even read and debate left wing articles. Mostly for knowing where the left is coming from, not in support.
So that is my reason for "write better". As a reader, well written books and articles get my clicks. Most gibberish mix with a few highlights of this or that, don't. And once someone is a good writer whether that's Lee Child, Preston and Child, Mark Twain, Molly Hemingway, Johnathan Turley, or Pepe Escobar, I have a tendency to look for their books and articles.
So from a readers perspective a well written book or article gets more clicks.
While that is about 25% true the other 75% is an excuse.First, "well-written" is highly subjective.
...I'm gonna guess that writing isn't your primary industry.
You can't just "do better" in a field where results are mostly random. Nobody knows in advance what people will click on and what they won't. The whole concept of SEO was an attempt to cheat the system for your own ends. Now everyone's doing it, and with everybody cheating, no one can. The problem is that very few--including those who actually sign the paychecks--have figured that out yet. So SEO is still king of the hill because everyone thinks if they STOP cheating they lose.
Meanwhile, "go somewhere else" doesn't work out real well in a field where a lot of places share the same values. You'd have to completely change fields, and there's only so much compatibility of skills.
Though I do agree with you about SI's plans; personally, I think the problem is one of advertising. You need everyone to agree to go back to the old system, where you sell ads at flat rates based on size. No click-throughs, no trackers, nothing. But you'd need EVERYBODY to agree to that, because whoever leaves in the algorithms and such has a huge advantage. They mean more value for the advertisers, and they won't voluntarily accept less. They have to be forced into it by having no other options.