Load of old ....

An open letter for the benefit of a long lost friend, who is now a self-proclaimed “Content writer”, from a self-proclaimed "Ball-point pen technician"

I love reading your articles. I am always pleased to know how you are getting on. From what I have read of your work to-date, here are my constructive criticisms...

Please do not rush to get your articles sent in, just for the sake of “gettin’ ‘em published”. Proof reading is important! Do not do it on the day of writing. Leave it for a few days and you will be amazed how many errors leap off the page, especially if you print it off to read rather than reading it on screen… which can have you hallucinating. Having said that...

Do not overread your work, because otherwise you will never be satisfied with the result. There comes a point, like when writing your essays, you have got to let go of it. Your brain may start reading what you think is there and filling in the gaps you missed.

As an administrator I was told, in the ideal world, you should not check your own typing. If you cannot cope with "reading out loud", copy and paste your content into Word and use the Read Aloud facility. If your software is not that up-to-date – mine is, but it is University supplied – get your wife or children to read it. Do not forget, you can copy and paste text over to Vocal, but not with bold, italic and underline formatting.

For your own credibility, you need to submit what many gurus describe as “good content”. I am not saying anything you have written is complete rubbish. But, “Stream of consciousness” is not good article writing. Additionally...

It must have been drummed into you somewhere “Write in your own words”. Some of your content reads like textbook content, some of it sounding like a direct cut and paste. If you must make direct quotes, which is not good practice, you must identify your sources. Otherwise, you are open to being questioned “is this your opinion (or material) or somebody else’s?”

To avoid potentially being sued, as you go further with your writing career, you do not want to get accused of plagiarism. Even academics must acknowledge reference to their own published work. It is still plagiarism of their own material if they do not.

Never quote song lyrics! You are only permitted to use a song title. If the person acknowledged on the writing credits identifies your quotation, you run the risk of them coming after you. Especially if your work nets you a fortune. Alternatively, they might just “watch and wait” for your success and then come after you. So never assume “last time I got away with it”. You might not have done. However...

The exception is 70 years after the writer’s death… and your favourite popstar is nowhere near being dead. (https://www.gov.uk/copyright/how-long-copyright-lasts)

Be careful with formatting. The best policy to adopt is:

• Be consistent.
• For main headings use bold and underline. They can be in capitals but may look “SHOUTY!”
• Sub-headings go in sentence case and underline only.
• Do not use bold and underline typeface in your article. It is not good practice and is painful on the readers eyes.
• Italics are used to emphasise certain words, as you might emphasise in speech. “You do know that don’t you?” Be careful not to overdo it. I emboldened the italics on Vocal because I thought italics were not showing clearly. But...
• Seeing the result, I do not recommend it. The subtleties you should leave for the reader to spot.

Overall, watch your spelling and grammar. Particularly punctuating quotes within quotes correctly, like in my song lyric below. Do not write factual articles using colloquialisms, only do this in fiction. Then you can legitimately say, “and the cockney bird said ‘doo wot?’”

Avoid contractions: it’s=it is; don’t=do not; can’t=cannot; you’re=you are; wouldn’t=would not; didn’t=did not… “nuff said”.

With Vocal+ you can instantly edit errors. For me, errors inevitably jump out after publication. Therefore, being able to correct minor errors is good. As a free member you can ask Vocal to revert your article back to Draft status, for your re-editing, if you spot the errors afterwards.

Watch out for the benefits of so called “content mills”, especially if they require subscriptions. In some services it is questionable “Was your content subject to any scrutiny?” v “Will they just publish any old rubbish?” Therefore, the onus is on you to ensure you write “great content” v “content for content’s sake”. Other people may be "watching", so they need to see your best writing.

Ensure you understand the difference between vanity publishing and self-publishing.

I hope the above helps