How Demand Media Produces 4,000 Pieces of Content a Day
In August we reviewed Demand Media, one of the largest producers of content on the Web
today. Wired Magazine recently compared Demand Media's content business to Henry Ford's production line for cars. Demand Media currently produces 4,000 new pieces of content a day. What's more, it's increasingly syndicating this content to media sites outside of its own network of vertical websites. In other words, Demand Media is becoming a very large content production factory for third party sites such as Yahoo.
In this follow-up post, we dive deeper into Demand Media's content production model - and ask questions about the quality of the output.
This article is based on an interview I conducted with several Demand Media executives, including founder Richard Rosenblatt, at the Web 2.0 Summit in September.
Will Demand Media Soon be a Household Name?
In our previous posts, we've noted that Demand Media is rapidly rising up the comScore list of the top 50 web properties in the U.S. - in July it was #24, in September it was #15. At this rate, Demand Media will soon be one of the top 10 Web properties in the U.S. - right up there with Amazon, eBay, Apple.
Think about that: how many of you had heard of Demand Media before this year? Amazon, eBay and Apple are all household names. Demand Media (along with another fast-growing mega content site, Answers.com) could be a household name soon too, if its current growth rate continues.
Behind this remarkable growth is a very large output of content each and every day, fueled by thousands of freelance writers and content creators.
So how does Demand Media produce so much content every day? 4,000 new articles a day is a quantum leap above the 20-30 new posts a day that the most feverish of professional blogs pump out.
About Demand Studios
Demand Media produces so much content with a system it calls Demand Studios. It's a proprietary editorial system which is part human-processed and part automated.
The system starts with an automated process, crunching data and running it through an algorithm to identify story ideas that have the best chance of success. The algorithm factors in audience type, ability to attract advertising and potential for traffic.
For a written piece of content, human editors will then check the top story contenders. Potential titles are placed into a pool for writer selection. Once a writer picks up a story, it gets written up, goes through a fact checking and copy editing process (including a plagiarism check), and finally the editorial team approves the completed article. The article is eventually published and the writer gets paid.
This is a simplification of the Demand Studios process, which happens 4,000 times every day! The system appears to be an efficient mix of automation and human labor. As we'll see on Page 2 of this post, the editorial process isn't foolproof. But even so, the scale of this system is impressive.
As at the end of October, Demand Studios had created more than one million original pieces of content, both text articles and videos. There are more than 6,000 active Demand Studios freelance creators - including writers, filmmakers, title proofers, copy editors.
In my meeting with Demand Media executives at the recent Web 2.0 Summit, I was told that an average of 11 people - and 15 unique roles - touch a piece of content as it flows through Demand Studios. The company argues that this, along with community rating of content, produces quality content.
But does it, actually?
Next Page: The Quality Question...
Facebook
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
Writing is all about relevance and timing. However, Demand Media seems to be going solely after the Google traffic. This isnt a bad play if you can make back your money on advertising revenues in quick time. This strategy for them currently seems to be working!
MOG is also doing the same thing, but for Music content. However, they are slightly different because they are just about syndicating titles and descriptions, and not actually the full article.
I've considered writing for them, but the pay always seems far too low, and the subject matter is never completely a good fit. Recently they changed their profile policy, and they're forcing writers to put pictures on their profiles. As a person of color who's already lost work for that reason, I'm highly irritated, and I'm thinking of deleting my profile completely. The other irritating thing is that if you exchange emails with four or five Demand Studios editors/employees about profile issues, you get four or five completely different stories. That doesn't really build confidence.
I'm sure that when TV first came out and real writers were conflicted about this type of gig, but new media channels (like the Internet) can't help but affect the content that flows through them. From a strictly business perspective, I think it's an excellent venture (Demand Media). From a journalistic perspective maybe not, but looking at the success of someone like Murdoch (the bain of journalism to many), I wouldn't bet (financially) against Demand Media.
maybe this article should have gone through the demand studios process to cut it down to 1 page & get to the point....demand studios create link bait and seo friendly articles that they make money off by placing google and yahoo ads on (arbitrage??) now they sell these same types articles to newspapers and search portals.
Is it high quality? Well, that depends on how you define quality.
Does it have to be good enough for human consumption (it isn't!) or is fooling the Google bot their criteria for quality?
As it manages to fool Google into sending visitors their way I'm pretty sure that as far as they're concerned it's very high quality content.
Sounds like one of the worst things that ever happened to the Internet. Exploiting the Web to create a virtual sweatshop and mass-spam all media outlets with garbage-quality content, sounds like the start of the end to me. The near-zero prices of this content stand to stifle genuine pro-level content on the Internet.
I run into their content all the time and its easy to spot! As a very successful PR pro I know acceptable content and spot theirs quickly. I usually stop halfway through or finish with my 'fluff' meter pegged off the top of the scale. Make no mistake this is bad for the Web and lets hope its viability is short lived. Automation and assembly line isnt usually a bad thing when done right. In this case however the means seems to hurt the ends
Sounds like Mahalo to me. As a guy who used to frequent yahoo a lot more just to see what news they were linking to, the quality of articles posted to the front page of Yahoo has taken a nasty nose dive, I don't believe anyone proof reads the articles after they are written and many typos and mistakes abound. I guess now I know why.
As a Demand Studios writer, I challenge your assessment. First off, you should understand that the Twitter article you referenced was written by an eHow member, not a Demand Studios contributor. How do I know this? Because the profiles do not look the same. Also, as you pointed out, many people appear to have gained some insight from the article, as is referenced by its rating and comments.
You also point out that Demand Studios articles appear on Yahoo as syndicated content. The article in particular that you bring up is on the swine flu and originated from LiveStrong.com. Perhaps you would care to rephrase that and say Yahoo uses content from LiveStrong? Yes, Demand Studios provides content for many sites, including GolfLink and Trails.com. Does that make them evil? I think not. Web content has always been in demand, and will continue to be even more in demand as new websites desire unique content.
Finally, let's talk about pay. Sure, $15 per article may seem like peanuts to an established author who publishes in print magazines or newspapers. However, in the online world where Demand Studios operates, this is far from the case. There are many content mills out there that produce far worse quality at a much lower payment rate. Another perk of working as a freelance professional with Demand Studios is that they pay weekly (well, twice a week now). I have never been paid late and have actually been paid early when a holiday weekend would interrupt the normal pay schedule.
I find Demand Studios to be a breath of fresh air in the online writer's market, dealing fairly with freelancers and continually striving to improve their quality and substance of their material. Does that mean they are perfect? No, but I find them to be less of a devil than you paint them to be.
You're a little off base in your assessment of Demand Studios. They do strive for quality content. Unlike other content "mills," Demand won't publish any old bit of content. They reject anything that doesn't make the cut. We also have to provide resources and references for all our work. We can't just slap together a piece of content.
The "bad" writing you posted was for eHow but not Demand Studios. eHow didn't have a strict hiring policy before Demand took it over so there are a bunch of clunkers there. They're trying to weed out all the garbage though.
You forgot to mention health care. Demand is soon offering affordable health care options to their writers. They pay more than the average mill and treat us all well. If the Demand Studios writers aren't complaining why should everyone else?
To Jimmy Daniels - All our articles are put through a copyediting process. Some are rejected outright, some are sent back for rewrites and the good stuff is published. Do your research before you begin bashing.
The sample you have posted IS indeed part of Demand Media as a whole, as it has been posted on eHow. However, you can tell by the "User-Submitted Article" under the writer's name that this article was not written by someone within Demand Studios, and therefore did not go through a rigorous editing process. eHow is made up of articles written by people who sign up directly at ehow.com and article written by the professionals who get paid $15 to write such an article with Demand Studios.
The article about Twitter followers is a User Submitted article, not written by a Demand Studios writer.
I'm not sure about the author, but I'd consider "bad" writing to be poorly researched writing that misses a huge detail. For instance, if one were to use a single example to try and make one's point only to find that example was completely faulty and irrelevant. Like if one were trying to make the case that Demand Studios writing is poor by showcasing a piece that wasn't written by a Demand Studios writer. That's bad writing that does a great disservice to the reader. Luckily, Demand Media can't take credit for that gaff. That's on the author.
Add me to the list of those pointing out that the article used as an example is user-submitted content (as indicated by the words "user-submitted article" next to the writer's name - Demand Studios' writers work will bear the words "eHow contributing writer").
I get what you're saying and appreciate the viewpoint, but once again: insulting those trying to make a living and feed their families probably isn't the best way to make your point. Especially when the example you use isn't even a true example of their work.
Just a little bit of research and verifying of your facts would have saved you from this major gaff.
I'm afraid that I can't take this article seriously when it uses an example that wasn't submitted by a Demand Studios writer to demonstrate the poor quality of work produced by Demand Studios.
At DS, we have copy editors to fact-check our articles and make sure that such things don't happen. Perhaps you could use their services? Such an obvious mistake undermines the credibility of your entire post.
(FYI, articles written by Demand Studios writers include "Contributing Writer" in the byline.)
I can only assume that you have an axe to grind with Demand Media. Writers are treated very poorly on the internet but Demand goes out of its way to make sure that we are happy. Sure, the pay could be better but this economy stinks. Gone are the days when we can even get .10 per word when publishers can get horrible content from India for less than 1/2 cent! That's right, you heard me. There are orders out there for 25/500 word articles with perfect grammar and the pay??? $1.50 each!
Demand Studios is supplying a real income for me and I am grateful. It is not easy because the editors are tough but they have to be in order for us to produce the best content on the internet. I am fortunate to have the ability to work in both writing and titling so it is even better. Demand may be a content farm but they are the best and most professional out there.
The next time you decide to trash a company's work I suggest you do your homework and maybe take some research lessons from a Demand Media content creator.
Kim Kirsch
Yet another article about Demand Studios. First, let me say that it is good that Demand Studios is garnering so much attention from website and blog owners. Seems that Demand Studios is staying on the forefront of your minds lately. I just do not understand why all of the backlash concerning the quality or quantity of the content as well as the pay that is offered.
Is the quality top notch? It really depends on what you compare the content against. Demand Studios writers create articles based on pre-selected titles. The articles are then passed on to a copy editor who in turn checks the piece for factual information, grammar, spelling, sentence structure, depth of the research as well as citing of appropriate sources. If the piece passes, the writer is paid. If it fails to pass it is given back to the writer to rewrite. The writer gets one chance to rewrite the article, if it fails to pass the editor on the second attempt the article is rejected and the writer is not paid.
With that in mind, writers research their titles no matter how well they know the subject matter. The writers also make it a point not to create subpar articles just to make a higher hourly wage. Why? Because it does not make much sense to spend 45 minutes to one hour creating an article that you are not going to get paid for writing. So the quality of Demand Studios writers and articles is far better than most of the writing you find on websites and blogs created by those that merely want to sell a product or service quickly.
To add to this discussion, I question why there is all the campaigning against Demand Studios in the first place.
You would have failed any test given by Demand Studios if you had used that piece of "work" for a writing sample. Demand requires its writers to write using the Associated Press Stylebook; SEO guides will trump AP stylebook, but we do follow journalistic standards -- "we" being the writers contracted by Demand to write the articles generated by the computer algorithm and NOT that, ummm, erm, (well s/he definitely is not a writer, given the mistakes in that Twitter piece).
Your research skills, evidenced by the article you pasted in, are less than would be accepted by Demand's staff editors and copy editors. If you had submitted this "article", it would have been sent back for a rewrite based on that issue alone.
Piece of advice for next time: (fact)check everything out and make sure it is accurate, correct and factual.
Aside from the coming health insurance plan, Demand selected 20 top creators and invited them to a creator conference two months ago; Demand also selected 100 top creators and gave them one year's free membership in the Society of Professional Journalists. At least one of those selected has posted here. I was also one of those selected for both honors.
Demand pays much higher than, oh, let's say, Textbroker. They pay about $3.75 for a 400-500 word article. The other sites (Helium, Associated Content, Suite 101 and Triond) pay on page views or ad clicks. Demand also has a revenue sharing option, which, for some, does well.
In short, sir, you did not do all your homework.
Count me as another writer for Demand Studios who strongly objects to the shoddy research you did for this article. Your example of the Twitter piece is a poor one it is not what you purport. As others have pointed out, it was not written by a Demand Studio writer.
You've highlighted the quality of Demand Studios' work by showcasing the poor quality of the writing on this blog. In the future you might try to double check your research before your writing hits your blog.
Cheers.
As per the comments from #9 down, it appears that the example I used wasn't in fact from Demand Studios, but was a "user-submitted article." I have been informed by a Demand Media rep that those articles aren't counted in the 4,000 per day figure. The distinction wasn't obvious, nevertheless I did incorrectly attribute it to Demand Studios - for which I apologize. The post has been updated now.
I should point out that I'm not in any way insulting writers who are paid by Demand Media. The bigger question, which I stand by, is how publishing 4,000 new articles a day to the Web is affecting the long-term quality of Web content.
The long-term quality of web content should be based on relevance of the subject matter to the reader. If you are looking at the AMOUNT of the web content, I would think that 4,000 EDITED articles per day adds to the quality of web content versus the 10,000 unedited, poorly written articles posted everyday.
Obviously, if the content does not provide the reader with the information they seek it is worthless. The Demand Studios process ensures that if you are searching for a subject and come across a Demand Studios written piece, you can be sure that the content in that article is relevant and factual to the subject.
While many Demand writer's are still rightly smarting from a personal attack by a well-known yet so-called writer's advocate recently, I do not see your piece as an attack on the writers.
First other than the user-submitted error, which you have now fixed, you backed up your points with hard numbers and facts--including quotes from Richard himself. Others wishing to label themselves investigative journalists should really take note of how you did this.
As for my impressions. As little as six months ago nearly anything I searched on Google turned up badly written crap or teenage stupidity from places such as Ezinearticles.com and Yahoo answers. While today, a search is likely to have something from Demand Media near the top. This has actually improved the quality in my opinion as those sites and similar get pushed out of the search rankings.
As for the business model itself. Where is the over-saturation point? At some point sites will start vying for original content that is not found elsewhere. At this point Demand must evolve to meet this need. Then will it be any different than a magazine or newspaper assigning writers to separate beats, except in this case the beats will be different sites or publishers?
While I am proud to supplement my income via Demand and have never been treated so well by a client before in ways not purely financial, I am afraid the model will not stay viable in the long term. The real question is--can Demand Media continue to evolve?
When they pay their writers market rate, they'll get quality. When you make more on unemployment than you would researching and writing a 400-word piece for $15, it is hard to justify wasting your time working for them.
J.R.
Responding to your question, "Then will it be any different than a magazine or newspaper assigning writers to separate beats, except in this case the beats will be different sites or publishers?"
To a certain degree Demand Studios is already doing this. Writers do not have access to titles for all the publishers we have titles for now. There are some guidelines in place similar to what you are pointing out. To what degree, I do not know. But I believe it does show that Demand Studios is making moves in the that direction and clearly They will evolve to meet the demands of publishers. By doing this they will continue to offer writer a steady flow of work and income as they do now.
Sad that so many lately are trying so hard to bash Demand Studios for keeping a roof over children's heads and food in their bellies. It seems, as evidenced by this piece, that in an effort to belittle the company and the writers who work for them, people will go so far as to use an "example" of DS work that was written by joe-schmoe off the street which is made quite obvious by the "user-submitted content" title directly under the name. Oh, and let's not forget the name itself and the avatar. DS writers aren't allowed to have "internet" names like that, nor are we allowed to use pictures like that.
I began at Associated Content getting a couple of dollars an article and page views. I was hired at DS and make $15 per title. I'll tell you now that I've yet to find another company hiring web content writers that pay so well, twice a week and offer health insurance. DS is helping to pay my bills, feed my kids and my grandson, as well as my doctor bills. I'm a disabled mother of 4. Before DS, I sat at home wondering how the hell the bills are going to get paid, what will we eat? I've been unable to work for 6 years. Thanks to DS, I have money to pay bills and feed my family. Thanks to DS, I can make $1,000 or more. There is absolutely no limit on the amount a writer can make. How fast can you write? Five articles a day is $450 a week. I know some people who are writing 10 articles or more a day.
I'll repeat what my fellow writers have said, next time do your research, fact check yourself and get it right before you continue bashing DS for enabling those who are disabled, like myself, or are out of work because of job layoffs, to keep a roof over our heads and food in our bellies.
Thank your for correcting your mistake. I didn't see the above posts made until after I finished writing.
"When they pay their writers market rate, they'll get quality. When you make more on unemployment than you would researching and writing a 400-word piece for $15, it is hard to justify wasting your time working for them."
Marna, writing 10 articles per day a Demand Studios provider can earn $1050 per month. If she is providing a second income for her family, she is doing well.If she is the sole breadwinner, she can write more.
She doesn't have to commute; perhaps she is a stay-at-home mother who doesn't have to pay for childcare. No work wardrobe, and she makes her own hours. If she doesn't have insurance, she will have an opportunity to get health insurance through DS. If she does have coverage, so much the better.
She can plan her income and get paid twice weekly. She is self-employed and able to taker all the appropriate deductions which will reduce her tax burden considerably. As a professional writer, I'm sure you know what those are. This is work, and it pays considerably better than unemployment.
When we talk about the "going rate" for freelancer it is better to point out that there are apples and oranges. Sure, DS isn't paying glossy magazine rates, but glossies might not be doing that much longer either.
I am happy for those who still like to chase the glossies or book contracts; I wish them well. I'm also happy for my colleagues at Demand Studios. Apples and oranges, and we're all doing okay.
Cheers.
Marie Louise, thanks for your comment - very well said. I'm very glad that you're making good wages from them.
There are some great comments here and there will be a follow-up post shortly. I think Demand Media is a fascinating company, which is the reason I'm writing so much about them. But I also think it's worth questioning and challenging some aspects of the business model, which is the point of this series.
Thank you, Richard and Mary Louise.
The publishing industry is changing and we're all doing our best to not only keep up with the changes but to thrive as professional writers. Let's keep the conversation going, we all have so much to contribute. :-)
Richard thank you for making the change. It is not at all often that we have this WAH opportunity, have a chance at buying health insurance and can work in this economy so we DON'T need to draw unemployment (which, for me, would have been absolute starvation rates).
Nancy - just a quick correction. Writing 10 articles a day, a DS provider can make $1050 a WEEK. I don't know many writers making that kind of money in this less-than-pecunious industry. $1050 per week, about $4500 per month, $78,000 per year. And a good, experienced writer focused on the job and picking topics wisely can do two articles per hour or more. Makes a damn good job for a mom while the kids are at school.
Instead of setting out to bash yet-another-online-content-mill, I would hope that our esteemed host's next article is an open-minded look at Demand Studio - especially at what makes it different from so many other online venues.
Jamie ... uh, yeah. Posting too late in the day is not such a good idea! Thanks for the catch. :-)
I've been on all sides of the writing game, written books and short stories, edited and taught writing. The changing media scene is fascinating. I agree with you that it would be good if people with an "open mic" can handle it with an open mind.
Why do you still include the user-submitted garbage as an example of Demand Media's writers? There are THOUSANDS of Demand Studio written pieces at EHow. Why aren't you using one of those for your example of poor quality? Is it that you couldn't find an example of poor quality among those samples?
This is so blatantly dishonest. You, sir, should be ashamed of yourself.
TO T.K.
I was referring to the articles posted on Yahoo, read the comment before you start crying.
Well, seeing how print is going down and how wages in print & photography were going down the last 15 years...
Entrepreneurs finding good ways to monetize online work are a rare species and Demand Media seems to have found a hot spot on the net.
Btw, the percentage of quality output found in old school agencies - text & photography - isn't as high as some people might think. Every database research in all of the existing classic old school agencies will show proof; and is available online. Combing through the archives and kicking out the old bad stuff is one of the biggest tasks in the traditional media businesses.
The article and all the comments got me thinking...
Looking at this from an SEO point of view, quantity of unique article will be better than quality, until Google can figure out a way to judge the content of an article by understanding and scoring its quality. Quantity is always better for SEO.
Yes, I know quality articles will generate more backlinks, but medi-core articles can also generate links as well.
So, in the old days there was keyword stuffing, maybe now its simply content bombing?
I have to question the math of #31, especially since the post was meant to be a correction of previous calculations. $1050 a week is $4200 a month not $4500. $4200 x 12 months is around $50K. Similarly, $4,500 x 12 is $54K, and $1050 x 52 weeks is $54,600. And that's assuming you write 10 a day (a sizable task in itself) every day for the entire year without taking a day off. I have no idea where you got $78,000 from.
Sorry for the boring math post, but I think it's important for those defending DS to present realistic figures and not poorly-construed, Kool Aid numbers. Providing properly-calculated, realistic figures is a better way of showing what DS is all about.
I think DS is great, I love writing for them, and hope to make it full time in the next couple of years. My content is good, because I only write about what I know, Which is cars.
I have also had automotive articles published in newspapers, and I am an ASE certified technician and licensed vehicle safety inspector.
I pre write all my articles in microsoft word, then copy and paste into each section.
In my life I have always had to passions, cars and writing about them. I am very grateful for the expirence to write and get paid for it.
So I dont upset the critics, I meant to say "two passions," not "to passions"