Mine went horrible. They erased some of my facts, added new (false) ones in, added ugly photos, removed some of my polls, and now I'm going to have to spend my Sunday rewriting all my hubs they ruined. Sure, they helped somewhat but I probably would have been better off if they didn't do anything at all!
I haven't participated, so I am very interested in hearing what people have to say about the program.
Do you have to change everything back manually or can you get it back faster somehow?
Did you have any back and forth communication with your editor?
Would you mind telling us which of your hubs the editor worked on?
Yikes, sorry that you have to go back and redo your hubs. Did you remember to opt out of the HubPro editing program? If not, go here http://hubpages.com/my/profile/profile and check "no" where it asks "My Hubs are eligible to be edited with HubPro:"
That is very discouraging. I hope you get it all worked out. Did you save your original hub?
I opted out because I hate people messing around with my writing. I know a lot of people on HP need the assistance but I think it should be done by advising the writers and not directly to the hubs. There could be a section in the accounts pages where notes/suggestions are made for the hubs in question and the author make the changes themselves.
I obviously don't know which of your Hubs were edited, but if I had to guess two of them were "4 Things You Didn't Know About Natural Blondes" and "Long Hair Vs. Short Hair On Women". Am I right?
The reason why I guessed those two is because the photos used were properly credited. Most of your other Hubs I checked the photos were not properly credited. A number were credited to Google, but most photos found on Google are copyrighted and are not free to use. So one of the main challenges your editor would of had was finding photos that were either Creative Commons or Public Domain. That is why they may have removed and added some photos. But I would be surprised if that wouldn't have been communicated in an email during the editing process. Regardless, if you do make any changes to the photos, I would recommend that you make sure that the photos you use are free to use and are properly credited.
I read the hub on "4 Things You Didn't Know About Natural Blondes" and was surprised at reading your bio that you are a high school student. Also, surprised by your theory on hair coloring and its causes. I am a licensed cosmetologist and we were not taught this theory during training. Do you have a source for your information about blond hair and its reaction to sunlight? I would be interested to read more.
I'm impressed at the number of views you've seen with 59 hubs. Congratulations on being chosen for the editing but sorry your experience was not as hoped.
All the best,
I did actually have a website on there but the editor took it off. I re-did my hubs and it should be there again. For the editing process the editor had a copy where only the author could see. They had words in green where they changed it and red where they took words out completely and they had the original hub. I put it all back together so you should see websites with the blonde hair more explained in detail. I'm not sure why the editor took them out. If you can't find it on there e-mail me!
Thank you for responding. I'll check back and look for your source website on the hub. I'll be working on the bi-annual renewing of my license this week, taking the required training (again), so I'll try to get to it as soon as I can. I look forward to reading the study.
Alright, many of you are asking what happened and such so here's the story. Several weeks ago I got contacted and said this "HubPro" thing was going to help clean up and edit my hubs and that an editor would contact me soon about it. Several weeks after that someone did. They seemed nice and told me which hubs they would be editing and fixing up. I noticed they were hubs with the most amount of traffic I had and thought that was strange, why would they "fix" the ones I already had 1,000's looking at but leave the ones I had under 100?
She didn't leave any contact info with her so I didn't work with her at all. I thought maybe she would add more photos (most of those already had several so I still wasn't sure how that would work) and maybe fix up any grammer mistakes (sometimes those pass by even the best of us).
Friday she contacted me again saying she was done, and gave me the list of things she was allowed to do. It seemed kind of extreme to me but I checked out my "new" hubs with caution. The first one was okay, but she took out some of my pictures and added some really ugly looking ones. I'm a modest person so a picture of someone with spikes on their head and eyes riddled with eye-liner turned me away fast. It also seemed like it had TOO MANY photos in it and it was distracting. I didn't even know that could happen until then. The next one was less okay. It made me sound--lack of a better word-bitchy and she removed several of my facts. The next one was downright horrible and removed several portions of my text and many facts and even ADDED a fact in there. I was ready to cry after reading that one. I couldn't even fully look at my last one. It looked okay, mostly because all of my pictures were still there and didn't remove full texts! They also added stupid poll questions.
I don't recommend this to anyone.
I am sorry it didn't work out for you. I also am surprised by the lack of communication.
I also agree that the editor appears to have took too much liberty with adding photos. As far as deleting, that doesn't surprise me. Checking out your Hubs most of them you are not crediting photos properly. I noticed that a number of your Hubs you are crediting Google as a source but most photos on Google are copyrighted and are not free to use. So I can see why the editor would of removed photos that were copyrighted and try to replace them with creative common or public domain photos. That being said it is disappointing that it wasn't communicated.
For your assistance here is a link from the Learning Center concerning image use:
I'm so sorry you had such a horrible experience. I haven't experienced the program yet but I understood they were supposed to discuss things with you first, before making big changes.
I third the comment about your photos. It is never correct to credit Google for photos - you must always credit the photographer, except for one or two stock photo sites which ask you to credit the site. I have a Hub about using Flickr to find photos, which also explains about photo copyright. It's in the slider on my profile.
It probably turned out that some of your photos were copyright and couldn't be used legally. HubPages won't call you out for it - but it is very risky to use copyright photos, because some of the big photo sites are suing bloggers for using their photos and it's big money.
You're probably right about the copywrited thing, but I also used many of my OWN photos, you know, ones taken by myself with my camera, and gave myself credit for them and they took them off. In most of those I worked hard in order to make sure I myself was angled right and etc.
Thank you for all of your feedbacks. Some of you on here have had great experiences with this but I unfortunately have not.
A small clarification: mere crediting does not confer permission to use - a common misconception. My other favourite is "it's not a commercial site so I can copy your words"
wow, that sounds angry to me too. I would prefer they suggest, or give an example rather than changing them straight away
I got one of my hubs first unpublished and then un-featured and now I can't edit it. For now not the best experience but I'm willing to give it time.
I did get my video thrown from the "align right" position to full width center.
After reading some of the comments, I opted out. According to what I read, they are not doing all of those big changes. That is crap!!
I've been looking forward to having editor help, but this is rather distressing. I'd like to hear more.
This is what they are supposed to do but sounds like a lot more is being done.
HubPages Editors will:
Proofread for spelling and grammar mistakes
Update the information in Hubs
Improve layout and structure
Add supplementary capsules
Obtain high-quality media assets (illustrations)
Remove unrelated links and products
Communicate with Hubbers about the changes made to their Hubs
Provide a document with the before and after changes highlighted
At first I was very anxious about having someone else touch my hubs and was not pleased about some of the initial changes. But once the anxiety had subsided and I looked at the changes made objectively, I could see that my edited hubs were much better than they had been.
It's hard to have our work edited and it can feel like an affront but my advice would be to let the changes sink in. You may come to realise that they are better after all.
That's been my concern all along. I'm pretty controlling regarding my own original content! After hearing this, so happy I opted out. Thanks for sharing!
Yes this is very disturbing. I'm sorry you are having this problem. I've just opted out of the HubPro editing program after having read this.
Yes this is very disturbing. I'm sorry you are having this problem. I've just opted out of the HubPro editing program after having read this.
I am embarrassed to admit that some of my articles were edited a month or two ago, and I cannot bring myself to open them up and look at them. The editor was very nice and emailed me a few times with questions, but I never emailed her back or looked at what she changed. I guess I should check them, but I don't feel like it.
I also have 28 comments stacked up that I have not read or approved. I don't know why but I just don't want to deal with my hubs. I check my stats every day and peruse the forums now and then, but I can't bring myself to look at my articles or write any new ones.
Now I am really afraid to check my edited hubs!
What is wrong with me??? I need a shrink!
I don't suppose anyone who has had their hubs edited has any screencaps, so we could see the "before" and "after" versions of their hubs?
I think seeing exactly what kind of edits are being made - controversial or not - would be helpful for those of us still deciding whether to opt out of HubPro or not.
I don't mind editorial comments, personally, but I would like to see some examples of the changes being made.
After reading all these comments I just switched mine to NO! I may not make perfect hubs but it is my works and I dont like the idea of someone changing anything!
I am sorry to hear about your experience. I was in the beta program, and I had no real issues. The editor I was assigned to was very good at communicating. She would explain any changes before she would make them. She was also good at answering questions. Also, the info I learned is helpful when creating new Hubs. She also wanted to remove one of my polls on one of my Hubs, but I was insistence that I wanted to keep it, so she kept it, no issues.
Also with any capsules that were removed, they were not deleted, they were hidden. So if I wanted to restore them, then that could be done easily enough. So hopefully it is the same with any of your capsules. This will make it a lot easier if you want to restore any of your changes back to the original.
For myself the changes were mostly cosmetic and grammatical. The layout changes mostly involved making it mobile friendly. So this included making all of the capsules full width.
The main benefit which came for me was the communication process. I made sure I understood the reason why certain layout changes were made. Understanding the reasons help me decide whether or not I wanted to make similar edits to my other Hubs. The info attained is also helpful in creating new hubs. So personally I found the experience helpful, but I do feel that for the program to work communication with your editor is important.
I fully agree that communication with your editor is very important. And, if the editor checks with you before making changes, that is the way to do it. It is good that you learned from the experience and can apply it to new hubs.
One of my concerns about HubPro is when making comments on a hub. When I give praise to a hubber for a particular hub, is it because the hubber wrote a good hub or is it because an editor made changes? So, who is getting the praise? And if the hubber gives thanks for comments are they taking credit for what an editor did? I fail to see the sincerity in this.
I am thinking that no hubber will reply to praise by saying, "Thanks, but I must give credit to my editor for this hub.", which would not be cool, for readers would probably lose faith in the hubber whom they thought created a good hub. So, where is the sincerity?
When I read a book, and say "that's a good book," I'm not being less sincere even though I know that most books have editors or outside help as well.
A good editorial job only enhances the writer's original voice and work; it does not detract from it. Indeed, I'd say you can look at the work some extremely popular authors who, after initial success, got too big of an ego and no longer would allow an editor to touch their precious words. Such later novels are usually too long, meandering, full of errors and just read like a pale imitation of what made them so successful in the first place (with good editorial help!) (Prime example: Anne Rice)
Of course, a bad editing job can ruin a work as well. That's why I'd really like to see some before-and-after examples of the HubPro editing work so I can judge for myself about the quality of the editing being done.
Here are two screen shots, the 1st is before and the 2nd is after. It is only a small portion of the Hub, but it will give you an idea of the type of changes that were made. As previously mentioned most of the changes were a few minor grammatical changes and most of the format changes involved making the capsules full width (for mobile optimization).
I understand, because I am kind of on the fence about the full width myself. But the idea for full width is that is how it shows up to those that view it on their mobile devices. If you float the capsule the layout can be messed up when viewed on mobile. That being said there is the mobile preview, so you can check how the floating capsules will look to mobile visitors before publishing and when editing.
Exactly, which is why I still don't understand why HubPro editors only use full-width, and why we're encouraged to do the same.
I think because it is the easy fix. It doesn't require any formatting effort to just stick with full width. But as long as you use the mobile preview and take things into consideration you could use the floating without affecting the mobile user experience. But it does take a little bit more time and effort.
But I'd think a highly qualified HubPro editor would manage it without too much trouble. Hope they come up with a better solution for mobile before not too long.
I agree they should be able to, but I think they also want Hubbers to apply the changes made to their other Hubs. So a editor formatting the Hub perfectly for mobile isn't going to teach you how to do it. But I agree with the better solution. But for now it is the quick and easy fix.
I agree. I like the first layout better.
I think the first layout is more professional looking. I know HubPro wants all capsules full width for better appearance on mobile viewing, but it does take away from a clean professional look of the hub. I have been using full width caps, but I feel my text gets lost among the larger images.
I am inclined to agree with you (even though I can go either way with video). I have started changing all of my hubs to full width because it is recommended (and it doesn't seem to be hurting traffic) but I am still kind of on the fence. If you do decide to still float it would be a good idea to check the mobile preview before you hit publish or edit. That way you will know how it will look to mobile visitors.
I haven't changed mine. It seems pointless to me - HubPages will automatically make everything full-width anyway, so why can't I preserve the original layout for other readers? The only thing to consider is that the half-width capsules open above instead of below - I do wish they'd change that.
I found a solution to that problem. Takes a bit of fiddling around with existing hubs, but is easy to do with your new hubs. With a new hub, make sure you place the photo (full width) beneath the text. Then reduce it, then move it up. With your old hubs, you have to do a bit more shuffling around. In my experience, if you move a photo 'up' instead of 'down', it shows beneath the text in mobile view.
I agree with you. You just have to decide if the full width above is going to have a negative impact on the mobile user experience. If it is just one capsule and the positioning makes sense, probably not. If it is multiple floating capsules then you might have a number of full width capsules appearing before getting into text. Also some of those capsules might not make sense until you read the related text. So whatever someone decides they need to take that into consideration.
Thanks for that. So basically they moved some capsules from half-width to full-width? I don't see huge destruction of your original content and wording in that.
I can't speak for everyone, but in my case most of the changes I would describe as minor and easy to convert back. Also I know I am prone to the odd grammar mistake, so any help there is appreciated. But in my case none of the changes changed my voice. If you read all of my Hubs, I don't think you could easily figure out which 4 were edited.
If the 2nd is AFTER then I'm deeply dissapointed,
The first layout looks much more professional to me.
When you publish articles in real magazines or publish hard copy real books that sell in bookshops and get reviewed, everyone knows that the material has been proofread and edited by the publishing company prior to publication. What's the difference? Credit or blame always goes to the author of course, not the editors.
I opted out to see if I could manage it on my own. I'm doing okay, and am glad I did this myself because I'm learning a lot and I like to update my articles at least once a month anyway.
I am accustomed to having an editor review/tweak my writing. I think in my case I'm reluctant to check out my edited hubs due to a combination of ambivalence about my articles (at the moment), and not wanting to see all the mistakes I made. I am weird about seeing my stuff in print. I guess it is similar to actors who hate to watch themselves on screen. I cringe when I see some of the stuff I have unleashed to the world.
I did not opt into this program.
I think it is terrible that edits and changes are just made without prior communication with the author, so they would have a chance to explain or answer questions about things, particularly sources of facts.
I can understand editing and proofreading; I do proofreading for others myself. I also understand that I probably have some hubs that can stand major re-writes, but I will handle those myself.
If the entire substance and voice of the writing is changed, it becomes that of the editor, and not the original author. I bristle at such tactics.
A creative writing teacher once tried to re-word a poem I'd written, to suit his style. In response, I submitted the following short, harsh and graphic verse:
"I work long and hard to birth my poems; who would edit them, dismembers my children."
The same pretty much goes for all my writing. After reflection, I am capable of re-wording, condensing, and updating as needed. (I just need to get around to it)...
I can't speak for everyone, but with myself the edits and changes were communicated with me. I was fortunate that my editor was good at asking and answering questions. So when the changes went live there was no surprises. That being said I can't speak for everyone. I also understand the apprehension and why someone might choose to opt out.
Thanks for mentioning this. Many of my lenses (now hubs) were nurtured and grown over many months and years. I would hate for someone to drastically change them. I think I'm going to turn HubPro off.
I opted out immediately of course. I agree that being properly edited is a useful thing and might lead to better conversions, traffic - but - I want my voice to remain as it is. And those grammatical errors may well be deliberate.
Same opt-out with Editors choice. Reason being that I like the idea of being in a sub-domain rather than having 'best' hubs split off somewhere else.
I actually think that writing useful stuff and being IN those Editor Things is a good idea - unfortunately my almost wilfully useless pages don't really fit with that.
Just because it isn't a 'must' to accept the changes, I opted in. I wouldn't mind looking at someone else's opinion. I have a tendency to want to show too much in my hubs and showing less is sometimes better.
I have stayed opted-in to this program because I am an educated and trained writer.
If an unprofessional or bad or just plain stupid editing pass is ever done to one of my Hubs, I am going to have a content fiesta the likes of which has never yet been seen. Any editor who touches my Hubs had better be prepared to explain and justify every single alteration or addition with hard factual or logical reasons. And if they are making changes based on data they have which I do not, they are going to have to share their data with me to prove it.
The epic potential given how badly HubPages rolls out anything new is too much to not stay open to it.
Given the amount of confidence you appear to have in your status as an educated and trained writer, relache, I'm surprised you didn't just opt out. And given the fuss you promise, I'll be even more surprised if an editor tries to help you.
I would love to hear about what the HubPages staff would like to change in my hubs. If it's anything that can increase my earnings, I'm all for it. However, they haven't contacted me, so I suppose they aren't interested in editing my hubs at this time.
There were a few people who were invited initially as testers, but now anyone can have their hubs edited. You just have to make sure you have HubPro enabled on your edit profile page (it's enabled by default).
I don't know how HP is selecting hubbers (it seems to be at least partly based on traffic to hubs) so I'm sure they'll get to you soon.
I might possibly have my interest aroused if the arrangement involved me selecting from a panel of possible editors - with a bio and credits for their work - somebody who might be able to offer a perspective that I might value.
However stories of people having their hubs changed beyond recognition without any prior communication does not make this a programme I ever want to be part of.
We really appreciate the feedback and the concerns. Editors work to maintain the voice of the author with the goal of creating a great user experience. I highly recommend Hubbers staying in the program and seeing how a professional editor works with your content - remember, it's not just editors, but illustrators and photographers.
Once Hubs are edited, we are seeing really significant increases in reader satisfaction. This is improving the quality of HubPages significantly. We've all seen what Panda can do. This is a very large investment in the community. One that will set us a part from other UGC sites.
Since so few people get access to the program right now, I think it's really great for people to share their before and afters.
I'm sorry, but I'm not going through that again.
I can understand that, but there is a silver lining. You've learned that you've been (innocently) using illegal photos, so now you'll be able to fix the ones on your other Hubs yourself, before you get sued.
Before the copyright holder can sue, a cease and desist notice must be issued. The copyright holder can only take further legal action if the images are not removed.
And Marisa, I really don't think it's good form to keep picking people up on this issue in public. If you want to correct people, you might consider doing so privately with an email.
Hi Jayne. I actually thought Marisa's comment had a positive tone and was perfectly appropriate given what's already been written on this thread. From where I'm sitting, getting an email with a comment like that would be uncomfortable.
I've always found Marisa's comments to be constructive and appropriate. Can't think of any that I've considered out of line. I often learn from what she says to others.
I didn't perceive the tone as positive, and it's only about a week since she pulled up another hubber on the issue in another thread.
Anyway, that was my thought, and I'm leaving it at that. She and anyone else can take it as they please.
I accept what you said about my post on the earlier thread - but in this case, the issue of her photographs had already been brought up earlier in the thread by other Hubbers, because the OP had complained her photos had been removed. All of those who replied were simply explaining why.
I agree. Also the responses on this thread could potentially benefit everyone. In order for someone to make an informed decision about whether or not to opt in or out it is good to get a complete picture. So Marisa's comment highlights the fact that even if someone isn't 100% happy with the edits they could still learn important lessons which will help with future Hubs. We all benefit from that thought, a benefit which would be lost if it was shared in an email.
Thank you Paul.
I took a good look around the options when I first got moved to HP. My immediate knee-jerk reaction was "no way!" and I opted out. That said, I have considered opting back in when 60 days are up.
I've been writing for most of my 50+ years and I'm comfortable getting suggested edits from friends, critique buddies and editors.
That said, I'm not comfortable being edited with those edits going live before I have a chance to look them over, as seems to have been the case in some situations.
In the print publishing industry we have the opportunity to look over galleys and approve or disapprove changes before they appear in print. That doesn't seem to be the option here.
Also in the print industry, the author usually has an opportunity to get to know their editor (at least via an email or two as well as researching the editor before committing to the sale of their book to a particular publishing house) prior to that editing happening.
Yes, I am very concerned about my work being changed.
I've spent almost as much time in my field of choice as I have in being a writer. I would never say that nobody else has a vaster knowledge of my subject than I do. I would however say that the chance of your having someone on your editing staff with a larger understanding of my subject matter than I do is...very low.
As a hypnotist, some of my word patterns and word choices (and even the photographs I use) are also carefully chosen. I'd hate to see those patterns disrupted.
Nor, as a member of a community which has some alternate spelling patterns (such as "magick" rather than "magic") am I entirely comfy with my alleged typos being addressed. I'm highly concerned with typos, and usually read my pages over a few dozen times to make sure none sneak in. When I make what might LOOK like a typo it is quite often deliberate. (LOL posting on the forums might be an exception and I have no problem with folks pointing out what they THINK might be a typo in my hubs if they catch one.)
So the concerns here are quite valid. At the same time I'd be interested in seeing suggestions from your staff to improve my work.
I would suggest:
1) If possible, the author have a chance to choose the editor they work with.
2) Absolutely no changes go live until they have been approved by the author.
Great experiment and if I hear good things in the next few months, I might be willing to opt in. Thank you for extending this opportunity to your authors.
Paul, once I have a block of time free to devote to my other account, I might try this with the few hubs I have there, just as a test run.
Just because a photo or other images are found online, part of Google images does not mean we can use them.
I have always wondered: How come every image we upload onto the Internet automatically ends up in Google Images? I mean what right does Google have to nick all our images without asking our permission to do so?
Google thinks it owns everything on the web.
They're not nicking them, they're just making them available for search.
What is unfair is that they don't make the copyright warning more prominent, so that people don't assume the image is free for the taking.
Indeed. Legal findings have basically been that low-resolution, preview images like you see in Google search results are fine and not in violation of copyright. It falls pretty much under fair use. (http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2010/04/bg … is-no.html)
HOWEVER, that does NOT give John or Jane Doe Internet Searcher the right to use original, copyright-protected full or high-resolution images willy-nilly on the web--on their websites, on their hubpages articles--without the original image owner or creator's consent!
As an artist and photographer this is a huge personal issue for me. And yes, I've DMCA'd people on Facebook and other websites for using my photographs in a commercial way without my previous agreement. Again, just remember always: because you find something on Google does NOT mean it is free for you to use. Images are no different from our texts and words, and how would you feel if someone copied your entire hub and reposted it somewhere without your consent? Just because they "found it on google"? Visual content is no different than written words in this regard. And if some of us are harping on this point it's because it's such a sore topic for those of us who are visual artists as well as writers and deal with this subject on a daily basis.
I mean really, do you want to be potentially sued for a few million dollars over a photograph and not getting permission or buying the rights to use it first on a commercial platform? (http://petapixel.com/2013/06/29/nytimes … ringement/) Then have at it.
@greeneyedblondie At the end of the day, we are a community - taking steps to help the community over the long term.
The HubPro service is here to help people move from a world where they're the only set of eyes to a team of people with the intent of only assisting their Hubs. The more we can partner with Hubbers to create world class content, the more the entire community benefits. Today, about 5% of total views have been edited. Hubs that are edited by the HubPro team are showing substantial improvements in reader satisfaction.
- fact checking
- professional media
- copy edits
- additional content
Are all things that make a significant difference in how readers view Hubs. One of the challenges is that it can be unnerving to see edits to a Hub, but you are in a unique position to help the community.
As a Hubber with Hubs getting significant traffic, you have some of the most important Hubs to the well being of the community. Outside people are finding and reading your Hubs - This shapes how HubPages is viewed by the outside world.
By working with the HubPro edits, your Hubs are getting improved. This will not only benefit you over the long term, but it will also help your fellow Hubbers because content that readers enjoy ultimately get more traffic. The readers will have a positive experience and it will lead to more readers for the community.
For all the Hubbers, we ask that people give the HubPro service an opportunity. Let us work together for the sole purpose of creating great content that satisfies readers and ultimately leads to a stronger community of great Hubbers that can stand the test of time.
Exactly! We should welcome the opportunity.
I truly appreciate the concern and care that Paul is showing here. It's unusual that a high-up in any business as huge as this would take so much interest and energy in their company to keep us "little folks" informed.
I was shocked by the move to HP but I got sold on the site when I saw how fast Staff responded. Pretty much THE FASTEST Staff response I've ever witnessed in the entire time I've been on the web.
I hope that the Staff will take note of any complaints like this one and the suggestions of the community and make the appropriate changes and adjustments.
Once my (perhaps stupid and knee-jerk) reaction to disallow HubPro is over and I can opt back in, I intend to do so, provided changes may be author approved before they go live. I'm actually starting to hope that they will find my hubs worthy of consideration.
HubPages, I can understand why many of your writers are loyal. I like your style.
Glad I inadvertently found a home here.
Very gracious to tell the OP "you are in a unique position to help the community".
I'm not sure if that was meant as sarcastic or not. Nor do I want anyone to think that was MY response, since threading on these forums doesn't carry from one post to more than the next.
However, yes, I do agree that by sharing an early negative response it does give the OP a unique opportunity to be helpful to all of us..
I absolutely want to find out about what the OP's experience was and how it affected her and her hub. The more detail the better.
No offense meant, but I would kindly appreciate that in future you reply/quote the person who actually said something.
@Lionrhod, it is a very gracious thing to say in light of this whole thread.
My mistake for replying to the wrong comment. I will try to do better in the future. Thank you for bringing that to my attention.
Paul - you're telling us about the FEATURES of the service but not about the BENEFITS that real people have actually experienced as a result of a "makeover".
The reason testimonials are important is people typically won't take accounts of what can be offered and what benefits can be accrued as a result purely on trust.
Then there's the enormous weight of the negative experience:
* As I'm sure you are aware it's standard practice for people to talk more about their negative experiences rather than any positive ones.
* Negative experiences will always have the potential to be far more influential than positive experiences.
* Hence negative experiences always need to be avoided in terms of who delivers the service and how that service is communicated.
In order to get more people to take advantage of the service, I'd recommend that people need to be able to find or hear much more about the positive experiences from real people who have received the service and, maybe, to see the impact in terms of a 'before' and 'after' and the consequential benefits in terms of:
* income earned
Take it beyond trust - show people the benefits....
What you say makes sense, makingamark, however I doubt many hubbers would be prepared to offer that kind of information about their top performing hubs. By identifying their topic, page views, income earned etc, they'd just be making themselves a target for plagiarists and copycats.
Under the circumstances, I think trust is a key element when it comes to the editing process. Hubbers either trust hp to give it a go, or they don't. As more general feedback is aired, the initially reluctant hubbers will either join in or stay out.
In the meantime, if only 5% of hubs have been edited there's plenty more hubs for editors to work on. It will be very interesting to see what the feedback is when they get to 40 or 50%.
May be Lionrhod: Those with web sites put their images on Google Images and other sites maintaining copyright to those photos. Point is, just because it is there, doesn't mean we can use it, just like your hubs being found online does not mean they are for free taking.
Right now I'm looking into alternatives into getting at least one of my blogs off blogger. Why? Because Google (who owns Blogger) seems to think that they own the rights to my articles in perpetuity. Yep. Like forever.
This came as a huge shock, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't even there when I created my first blogspot blog. (I tend to be nitpicky about reading TOS). What I can say is that I won't write another paragraph of content for them until it's established that I alone own my content.
Some of the things that I respect about HP is that they acknowledge that I am the ultimate owner of my content and that other folks have the same rights, whether words or photos.
Can you quote the relevant clause? All I could find was this:
"Some of our Services allow you to upload, submit, store, send or receive content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours.
When you upload, submit, store, send or receive content to or through our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones."
If you have single-topic blogs, I would recommend taking the plunge and getting yourself a hosting account. You can host several blogs on one hosting account and it will cost you less than $100 a year.
I know that in one of my earlier posts to the forums here I located and posted the relevant clause. I'll try to find it again. I hope you won't mind my taking a couple days to re-locate it.
And of course given that sites tend to change their policy (especially as their writers freak out) they may have changed their policy since then. I'll see what I can find.
Meanwhile, it would have been one of my posts discussing whether a move from Blogger to HP was a wise and appropriate move.
HMM... actually, some of what you quoted above looks familiar except that it stated it had the right to do so [use your work] pretty much forever.
$100/year is a lot atm. We're trying to figure out how to pay for a lawyer to save the Moms from a predatory guardian, so every penny saved matters. Thanks though.
The relevant clause is posted here: http://www.aroyaldaughter.com/2013/01/0 … ownership/ Though there's always the chance that policy has changed. Note "even if you stop using our services." Makes me pretty uncomfy as an author.
That link also includes the (not bolded) qualifier, "The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones." Note the word, "limited".
If you read HubPages TOS they say something very similar, except that the rights end when you unpublish. Those rights have to be there, otherwise sites wouldn't be able to display your work at all.
It's true Blogger could change its rules - but equally, so could HubPages. I have been a member of two other writing sites which allowed you to delete your work at first, but subsequently changed their TOS (without any official announcement, I might add).
I think blogging platforms like Blogger are far less likely to start claiming your work than revenue-sharing sites. Google doesn't need to own your writing to make money - that's not its core business - whereas your articles ARE a critical part of a rev-sharing site.
If you were financially in a position to switch to a self-hosted blog, I would say it's a good idea: but since you're not, Blogger is by far your best bet. You could move to Wordpress.com, but you're not allowed to have any advertising there so you can't make money from blogs there.
Great points. I'll have to continue thinking on this and I sincerely appreciate your input and advice.
You won't find any site that doesn't say something similar.
The reason they do is they need a licence from you to actually display what you write. When you look at it from that point of view I found it all suddenly seems very logical
Thanks for the link, Lionrhod. That's a brilliant article!
I took the option off the table. I don't care if my hub says JFK was shot by Jackie, I don't want anyone touching my work. I had a teacher edit a poem of mine in high school and then post it in the school newspaper (all without my permission) and I still haven't forgiven her. lol
Skimming the above does lead me to think that the scheme is a bad one - odd, given that the staff usually know what they're doing.
I wonder how much negative reaction and reluctance to use the scheme stem from our being overly proprietorial - to the point of excessive defensiveness? And having faults highlighted (I hope that I would say "identified" were I to submit to the scheme) is difficult for many, especially when those faults are actions that we indulge in frequently.
I got an email yesterday asking for feedback on the system
This is (I think) because I have opted out of it.
It gave me options for why I had opted out.
It then invited more feedback - so I told them what I thought
Bottom line at present, I think the system seems to be more about describing features and making promises and less about demonstrating benefits and displaying positive testimonials. The latter are what will get people to adopt the system - but only if those doing the reviews and making the changes are actually delivering benefits as a direct result.
One thing I forgot to say is that I think there needs to be a different structure to the review
For example: If I was offered a REVIEW ONLY by an independent person, I might consider that. This would need to identify where they thought improvements might be made and why. Then it would be up to me as to whether or not I agreed and any changes made would be entirely within my control.
However for this to happen I would need to be persuaded that the person doing the review was credible.
* I'd want to see testimonials,
* I'd want to be able to look at their own hubs,
* I'd want to know what benefits had accrued as a result of recommendations they made re. other people's hubs. REAL TANGIBLE MEASURABLE BENEFITS.
That's the bottom line I adopt when checking out people prior to commissioning them to do jobs I want doing. Why on earth would I take any other approach to people reviewing my hubs?
I got the same e-mail described above, presumably because I also opted out of the HubPro editing program. I haven't responded yet, but when I do I'm going to tell them that I like my Hubs the way they are, and I don't want anybody messing with them. Simple as that.
Like many here, I opted out for fear of what will happen to my hubs. I am ambivalent but have read so many bad things about the changes made I decided I didn't want to chance it.
Wow, this discussion has got quite heated! On a personal level I like the idea of someone looking and checking my hubs. Not only does it make me feel as if someone is actually interested in reading about what I write and scoring me I think quite truthfully on each hub which helps me to write even better in the next hub. I have recently had two hubs that were not published due to lack of quality, however, the weird thing is I have had more comments left on these two hubs than any of my other 50, now that seems really odd to me.
by Nalini Marquez15 months ago
Hello,Could I please get help from a moderator regarding ads that were disabled from a moderator on one of my hubs?I know that we are supposed to contact HubPages and not post in the forum regarding the disabling of ads...
by Paul Goodman2 months ago
Some months back I had my first experience of HubPro editing. I was a disappointed at the time. A few grammatical and spelling issues were cleaned up, and there were other changes too which were fine. ...
by Anne20 months ago
So for the last couple of weeks I have actually been studying at University.I now log into my hubpages account and some editor has made all these changes. It reads so stupid.I am furious that someone has touched and...
by Phyllis Doyle Burns2 years ago
I really have not been too concerned about scores till recently since that darn HubPro was created. I think HubPro is totally done the wrong way. Editing should NOT be done without our consent and should NOT be done IN...
by Catherine Giordano6 months ago
I opted in to Hub Pro and I just had my first edit. Nothing was changed except to remove three of my four amazon capsules and remove links to other websites that I included to provide supporting evidence for my claims....
by Robin Edmondson14 months ago
Please check out our Blog Post on a couple of quality-related changes on HubPages!
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.