The Discover Thing

Jump to Last Post 1-17 of 17 discussions (66 posts)
  1. Rupert Taylor profile image96
    Rupert Taylorposted 7 months ago

    This week's newsletter answers none of the questions being asked in this forum. One sentence struck me with a bit of the jitters:

    "As of now, it is a bit difficult to give further estimates on how editing will work and which sites will be affected."

    Sounds to me that HP is making it up as it goes along without an overall plan. Please tell me I'm wrong.

    1. Jodah profile image86
      Jodahposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      It does sound that way, doesn’t it? A bit hit and miss … use Feltmagnet transfer as a Guinea pig, then go from there. It sounds like they are going to split Discover into different categories.

    2. bravewarrior profile image81
      bravewarriorposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      I agree with you, Rupert. However, I have a question that I hope Lisa will chime in and answer: When posting new articles, should we not try to send them to the other niche sites? I ask this because, although I've stated I have no inclination to post anything new, I do have something I'd love to share regarding the animals that inhabit our earth that I experienced firsthand.

  2. Miebakagh57 profile image70
    Miebakagh57posted 7 months ago

    HubPages said Discover site is doing better than certain network sites.                                     Whatever that means? So moving stories from niche sites to dot Discover will solve traffic issues? Why did that not happen during the shift from Hubpages to the network sites?                                    Certainly, Discover was doing well on its own, but now why try to bring it to a stand? Crazy monkey.

  3. PaulGoodman67 profile image99
    PaulGoodman67posted 7 months ago

    I get what you're saying, Rupert, but I'm not sure there's much choice other than for HP to make it up as they go along.

    I remember Paul E asking after the Panda update how online companies are supposed to plan when Google can change the rules at any moment. Google's response was to keep making changes, many of them radical.

    That said, the latest moves are weird. Discover should not have such a high authority rating and increasing views, if Google is genuine about promoting quality, and yet it does!

    HP's Discover move is a rational response to an irrational situation, as far as I can see. How it works out going forward, I don't think anyone knows.

  4. Rupert Taylor profile image96
    Rupert Taylorposted 7 months ago

    So, what you are saying Paul, in your usual passive-aggressive manner (tee-hee), is that we are, to use an old Irish expression, fe**ed.

    1. PaulGoodman67 profile image99
      PaulGoodman67posted 7 months agoin reply to this

      I've been feeling that we're fe**ed for some time, unfortunately.

      I welcome HP trying something radical as this site is dying but it feels like we're entering the twilight zone. smile

    2. SerenityHalo profile image93
      SerenityHaloposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      I think, unfortunately, we were already in dire straits before this change. I actually see the transfer to Discover as there is still some fight left and things to try. I can understand testing the waters before making a larger upheaval.

      This is actually the worst month I’ve experienced in earnings for years. I welcome changes to try and rectify the traffic and earning issues. Sure, there are other things that I would like to see change that I think are causing the problems, but shuttering the not-performing-well niches does make sense.

      I assume something will be done about Discover after they can get a better sense of what’s happening and what to do with so much volume of content.

      The good news, HubPages still has some fight left in them. They really want to survive and succeed.

      The bad news, it’s hard to tell what needs to be done with Google and other threats like AI.

      That’s how I’m currently taking things. Maybe I need a side of rutabagas.

      1. Linda S Grimes profile image99
        Linda S Grimesposted 7 months agoin reply to this

        SerenityHalo--
        So you're experiencing low earnings? Same here.  Three weeks ago on the Forum, I asked about others' experience and got replies that earnings were up: https://hubpages.com/community/forum/36 … r-earnings

        1. SerenityHalo profile image93
          SerenityHaloposted 7 months agoin reply to this

          Yes, I have had a noticeable and painful drop in earnings come July. Earnings have been declining for me a long time, but this month is frightening.

      2. Glenn Stok profile image93
        Glenn Stokposted 7 months agoin reply to this

        Andrea, you have a good point about “testing the waters before making a larger upheaval,” but I think removing content from niche sites and combining them in a content farm is too extreme.

        Content farms have been destroyed by Google’s Panda algorithm ten years ago. Why should we experiment with that again? So far, Lisa never addressed that question.

        A better and easier way to test the waters would be to make the layout more reader friendly to keep people engaged. I’m referring to reducing the number of ads, and positioning them better so people can read without frustration.

        Back in the days before Maven/TAG took over, it’s been proven that limiting ads to three per page brought much more residual income than we have today. In fact, Ten Times More! I’m going by my own history log to say that. For that matter, some Hubbers might remember when Google had a rule limiting ads to three per page.

        1. SerenityHalo profile image93
          SerenityHaloposted 7 months agoin reply to this

          I think you make excellent points. I have long been in favor of changing the ad layout.

          It’s an assumption on my part, but the change to Discover could be in part due to the recent Google leak, where it was essentially determined that the search engine giant hasn’t been honest about how it ranks things. I very much wish Google had more competition because its monopolization of the Internet has created a long list of difficulties.

          Content farms are generally frowned upon, yes. I have no answers for how Discover can sidestep that problem except reinvent itself. It’s not immediately clear to me why Discover has a higher authority score.

          I would love to have my old earnings and for the ads to be reduced.

          I suppose I hope that moving things to Discover will result in a turnaround and could be the beginning of changes here. It’s risky, maybe even extreme.

          You are wise and knowledgeable about many things here. Please keep adding your voice in the forums!

          1. Glenn Stok profile image93
            Glenn Stokposted 7 months agoin reply to this

            It's not clear to me either, why Discover has a higher authority score. It seems to go against all prior SEO recommendations.

            Thanks for your kind words about my comments here. The same is true for you Andrea, since your thoughts are highly significant and well-expressed.

        2. Solaras profile image82
          Solarasposted 7 months agoin reply to this

          More income for you, back in the day, but not more for TAG.  We are no longer receiving a percentage of the total impressions.  We are paid for only one or two of the impressions per pageview, while TAG gets the balance - up to 28 impressions, if readers can slog through the ads to the end. 

          They are unwilling to give that up, even if it kills the goose that lays 28 eggs per article, today.  In the long run, they would rather have no eggs, than to give up a few eggs now, to have a continuing revenue stream 1 year from now.

          So, it seems short sighted, unless you suspect/know that 1 year from now Google intends to put an end to the world wide web, and just give readers its stolen AI content, in addition to articles from a few large advertisers, videos from influencers of their choice and Reddit/Quora forums as crumbs for the common man.

          https://content.techgig.com/technology/ … 254730.cms

          "The AI Barrier
          Google is now erecting a barrier between searchers and the information they seek, utilizing Generative AI to produce what it believes are more useful results, such as summaries. However, this approach has its drawbacks. According to Meredith Whittaker, Google’s former research director, this "derivative content paste" can introduce errors and "hallucinations," deviating from the original material. Additionally, this new barrier removes the creators of original content from the value chain, making the internet a blander place.

          The world promised by web utopians has not materialised as expected, and Google’s recent changes signal a significant shift. As the web becomes increasingly marginalised, it is clear that the internet landscape will continue to evolve, perhaps becoming more streamlined but also potentially less vibrant."

          To this I would amplify that Google are not only removing the content creator from the value chain, but plagiarizing content in order to remove the creator for any income stream. Ultimately, websites that get no traffic will disappear, and the original content creators will fade away, with Google owning their content by default. That is unless a massive class action lawsuit can be brought, to curtail their copyright infringement.

          Therefore, I don't believe Google has any interest in their EEAT quality rules any longer; their purpose has evolved.  They are off on a new mission to give the user what Google wants them to have, and have ceased to care whether the user finds quality content from experts.

          In this scenario, Google gains more control, more income and lower costs when billions of pages of content are reduced to a few thousand large websites and AI summaries of long lost origin.

          1. tsmog profile image86
            tsmogposted 7 months agoin reply to this

            Thanks! Informative! Appreciate the link. Off topic, I see implications with social engineering too.

            1. Solaras profile image82
              Solarasposted 7 months agoin reply to this

              Exactly! Social engineering in an age when classic books are being banned and far right educators want to remove history lessons that include uncomfortable topics like slavery and Jim Crow.

              The Utopian web promised all of the world's information at our fingertips.  We squandered that boon in favor of focusing our attentions on videos of hysterical kittens scratching sofas in ways that would melt our hearts.  Meanwhile, those with their own agendas are quietly eliminating independent voices in favor of big corporate narratives.  "They paved paradise, and put up a parking lot."

              1. tsmog profile image86
                tsmogposted 7 months agoin reply to this

                "The Utopian web promised all of the world's information at our fingertips.  We squandered that boon in favor of videos of hysterical kittens scratching sofas in ways that would melt our hearts.  Meanwhile, those with their own agendas are quietly eliminating independent voices in favor of big corporate narratives.  "They paved paradise, and put up a parking lot."'

                With sincerity, Profound!!

          2. CYong74 profile image98
            CYong74posted 7 months agoin reply to this

            We no longer have any other reliable way to know about our actual statistics other than what’s presented by HP/TAG. Once upon a time we could still get a hint from Google Analytics but with universal analytics phased out and HP having no intention, as it seems, to implement support for G4A, all we have are the simplistic tables in our account.

            On G4A, with all the talk about authority and numbers from services like Semrush, I’m surprised no one mentioned that such services are now unable to use G4A to moderate/refine their findings. (They always encourage you to link) Which then makes you wonder how accurate their numbers are.

            The HP tables long stopped making sense to me too. Other than several marked changes in calculations over the years, it just seems bizarre that I consistently get almost the same page views as impressions.

            With the current ad regime, that’s just unlikely, isn’t it? The ads repeat so much that multiple ones show up within the same window frame. Which means even if not a single person scrolled down my article, I should still get more impressions than page views.

            And so I think you’re completely right, Solaras. It really does looks like a raw deal in which TAG is likely getting 20, maybe even 30, 40 times more revenue than any of us. It doesn’t help that there’s consistently no effort to put distaste about this to rest.

            1. Solaras profile image82
              Solarasposted 7 months agoin reply to this

              Indeed, who is to say what the actual pageviews, impressions or CPM are. We get what we are given, and if we don't like it, we can lump it.

      3. EricDockett profile image91
        EricDockettposted 7 months agoin reply to this

        I hope you are right, but from my perspective, if HP—or rather TAG—actually wanted to succeed, we never would have gotten to this point to begin with.

        For years, HP hasn't bothered to listen to writers. Many of us called this a long time ago, and if we saw it coming, surely they did too.

        But HP ignored the problems, and instead they focused on "news" writers, and oddball projects like Rojo.

        They abandoned the original mission of HubPages and instead tried to figure out ways they could squeeze money out it.

        They drove away good writers will illogical policies. Those of us who remain are like the last idiots still dancing at a party wherever everyone else has been smart enough to go home.

        Well, guess what? Hear that knock at the door? It's the chickens, and they've come home to roost.

        I want HubPages to succeed, not only from a financial perspective, but because I've spent a good portion of the last 12 years of my life here. I really hope you are right, and this somehow works out, but it feels bad.

        1. SerenityHalo profile image93
          SerenityHaloposted 7 months agoin reply to this

          I agree and relate to many things you say here. I think some bad ideas have been pitched and implemented over the years. The new comment system no one uses was strange to say the least.

          The move to Discover makes me think there is a bit more urgency now. I’d like for HP to survive too as it has been a great place to grow as a writer and earn passive income. I can take what I’ve built here with me. But I’d like to continue a presence here and hope to see up arrows and more money.

          It’s okay to be one of the last idiots attending a party, as long as you have other parties you’re attending. HP is one stop for writers, don’t make it the only stop. It’s easy to focus solely on HP. That’s more a caution for anyone reading this.

          I can’t promise things will work out. I do think the staff is trying to improve things. There is at least some fight in them. TAG is another story… I’m still hoping HP is sold to a better owner.

          1. bravewarrior profile image81
            bravewarriorposted 7 months agoin reply to this

            I'm hoping HP buys their platform back and eliminates being subjected  to strategies, rules, and regulations that do nothing but deflate the platform and the writers who have built it. HP did very well on it's own for years, even when they introduced niche sites (that were not inundated with disruptive ads!).

            HP, please take your rope out of the water. No one is saving you/us. Rather, they've been sinking this ship ever since you let go of the reins!

  5. Glenn Stok profile image93
    Glenn Stokposted 7 months ago

    They didn’t answer my questions either, Rupert. I agree with your sentiments. In the other thread, I asked Lisa what was the deciding factor that did away with the previous directives.

    Specifically, HubPages has always told us not to link back to HubPages. That includes Discover since it’s a subdomain of HubPages. HubPages also created the individual niche sites to avoid combining unrelated content under a single domain and being slapped for being a content farm.

    Neither of these two concerns were addressed in this week's newsletter.

    1. PaulGoodman67 profile image99
      PaulGoodman67posted 7 months agoin reply to this

      Yes, the situation is even more extreme than many hubbers realize. While the niches operate as independent entities, Discover is a subdomain of hp.com and hp.com has some really terrible stuff in it, much worse than Discover!

      1. SerenityHalo profile image93
        SerenityHaloposted 7 months agoin reply to this

        Honest question: are old HubPages articles still indexed on Google? I was under the impression you have to really go looking for the old stuff to find it.

        1. Shesabutterfly profile image98
          Shesabutterflyposted 7 months agoin reply to this

          If the topics are more obscure or do not have good quality competition some can be easy to find. I have come across a few over the years and I still have a handful of HP articles that only take a few extra result clicks to find, approximately the 35th or so result after weeding through the sponsors, AI, and videos. They are not bringing in traffic as far as I can tell, but they're easy enough to find and still very much indexed.

          I did notice Discover now says Hubpages with the HP logo instead of Discover which is news to me. I don't remember it always being that way. I thought it had a D logo and emphasized Discover, but maybe I'm remembering wrong. It's been several years since I've tried seeing where my articles rank.

          On a side note, my HP articles are much harder to find on Duckduckgo. The Discover.hp domain also ranks a bit lower than on Google I've noticed. I switched to DDG a few months back and will never go back to Google. The only issue I have, is the plethora of TheSpruce articles that come up. They seem to be monopolizing some niches, despite not always having the most accurate information.

          It's disheartening that we have to rely on Google, because other search engines don't have enough of a following to garner enough search engine traffic.

      2. Glenn Stok profile image93
        Glenn Stokposted 7 months agoin reply to this

        Right you are, Paul. That’s my concern too. Combining our articles, that were once considered quality for inclusion in the niche sites, is not a reasonable solution.

    2. eugbug profile image95
      eugbugposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      Maybe Hubpages has been absolved of its sins by Google?

      1. PaulGoodman67 profile image99
        PaulGoodman67posted 7 months agoin reply to this

        I suspect it may only be temporary and we're being lured into a trap! big_smile

    3. Miebakagh57 profile image70
      Miebakagh57posted 7 months agoin reply to this

      Definitely.

  6. ControlledChaos1 profile image94
    ControlledChaos1posted 7 months ago

    I know I'm not the first to say it, but it bears repeating... the articles do not look good with so many ads stuffed in them. That probably has at least a small part to play in declining views.

    1. Miebakagh57 profile image70
      Miebakagh57posted 7 months agoin reply to this

      I agree completely.

    2. Genna East profile image92
      Genna Eastposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      I agree.  When a site tends to prioritize ads over the user/reader experience to meet revenue targets, they will lose readers. Who wants to struggle through an article or publication while the mind’s eye has to hurdle over stumbling blocks of ad placements, continually,  or dodge  those that slap one in the face?

  7. Solaras profile image82
    Solarasposted 7 months ago

    If Google is on a mission to eliminate the small, niche/expert sites, and replace them with AI summaries and a few large content entities, it would make sense to consolidate all of the HP information into one large, structured database. 

    Google ceased to update its platform, Blogger, 10+ years ago.  Evidently, they don't want blogs or small websites any longer.  Accordingly, they have stopped indexing the little sites, as has been experienced by some of the writers here.  If Google no longer cares about EEAT, and site size is now part of the winning SEO equation, that could explain why Discover is on the rise, while niches are on the wane.

  8. Glenn Stok profile image93
    Glenn Stokposted 7 months ago

    TAG moved all my hubs from Soapboxie and YouMeMindBody despite saying they would monitor FeltMagnet before making more moves.

    At this point, I fear TAG may soon go out of business, and we lose HubPages.

    Maven bought HubPages in 2018 because it was a profitable company after they created the niche sites and limited ads to placement between capsules rather than everywhere. Since TAG damaged what worked and resisted going back to what worked, they are quickly losing money, as the stock price (NYSE: AREN) reveals, down from $21 to 89¢.

    1. bravewarrior profile image81
      bravewarriorposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      All the more reason for HP to buy themselves back or sever their contract with TAG, Glenn.

      1. Glenn Stok profile image93
        Glenn Stokposted 7 months agoin reply to this

        HubPages won't, but we can. There are presently 36,191 published Hubbers. With TAG's market capitalization so low, if we all bought just $655 worth of AREN, we would collectively own the entire company.

        1. bravewarrior profile image81
          bravewarriorposted 7 months agoin reply to this

          I can't afford that, Glenn. Can you? Or any of the other hubbers who aren't even earning enough to buy a gourmet cup of coffee? I'm living off Uncle Sam. He certainly doesn't give me enough to invest in a failing entity.

          1. Glenn Stok profile image93
            Glenn Stokposted 7 months agoin reply to this

            I used to get more than that each month until TAG undid all the improvements HubPages made before Maven bought it. Now, it's practically nothing. sad

        2. WriterJanis profile image90
          WriterJanisposted 7 months agoin reply to this

          Does anyone know how many current HubPages writers there are?

          1. Glenn Stok profile image93
            Glenn Stokposted 7 months agoin reply to this

            As I said in my prior post, there are 36,191 published Hubbers. That was when I last checked the stats on the “about us” page. That's how I determined we can own TAG with a combined investment as I detailed in my article. But I know it’s not as easy as that, as I also explain in my article.

      2. Ken Burgess profile image68
        Ken Burgessposted 7 months agoin reply to this

        That's not a half bad idea, buying (back) HP and restoring many of its prior successes.

        I wonder if AI could be used to edit and update the content, teach it how to prioritize and resubmit articles to work around stagnation and Search Engine discrimination... if that is even possible these days.

        The problem with the advances ongoing with Google Search and Bing/Co-Pilot is they are slowly doing away with results that aren't profitable for them to show and they are presenting summarizations of the information you are searching... people are beginning to settle for that... and not going to links provided, not going to the actual articles.

        1. WriterJanis profile image90
          WriterJanisposted 7 months agoin reply to this

          Ken,
          On the one hand using AI sounds good, but unfortunately AI isn't always correct and there are many times the AI uses Wikipedia as its' source and Wikipedia isn't always correct.

    2. PaulGoodman67 profile image99
      PaulGoodman67posted 7 months agoin reply to this

      Yes, I’ve had a bunch of stuff moved too that wasn’t Felt Magnet. It doesn’t seem to fit with what was said earlier in the week.

      I would make sure that you know as much as possible about the financial situation before you buy shares, even at a low cost. There seems to be lots of complicated legal action going on, for instance. The Sports Illustrated drama never seems to end.

      1. Glenn Stok profile image93
        Glenn Stokposted 7 months agoin reply to this

        Yes, Paul. That is definitely the wise thing to do. I bought those shares after attending the three-day Maven conference when they made everything sound so wonderful about their plans for HubPages. Their business was different then before TAG took over. When that happened, my Maven shares were converted to TAG.

        1. PaulGoodman67 profile image99
          PaulGoodman67posted 7 months agoin reply to this

          Also, it sounds good to own the company but who would run it in practice? There have been some bad mistakes made by TAG such as the Sports Illustrated debacle but some of the issues are wider and deeper and reflect changes across the internet over the past 15 years.

          For instance, text, photos, and music used to be king but now it's increasingly video and in particular, short clips. AI has begun to make written work valueless, just as digitization did to music.

          Now is a risky time to invest in a publishing business.

          1. Glenn Stok profile image93
            Glenn Stokposted 7 months agoin reply to this

            You’re right, Paul, with everything you just said. My article about taking over was only meant as a thought process. It’s not realistic for many reasons that I discuss in my article.

            Nevertheless, the idea is that with over 36,000 active Hubbers owning the stock, we would have compete control, in a combined effort, over corporate decisions.

            With that, we could go back to the server HubPages originally used, supporting limiting the placement of ads between capsules, comments by readers, and not making it a content farm again that screwed us in 2012.

  9. Rupert Taylor profile image96
    Rupert Taylorposted 7 months ago

    Glenn, there may be 36,191 published Hubbers, but I'm fairly sure only a small percentage are still active. For those of us still here, your theoretical $655 would be much higher.

    I would be as likely to invest in it as I would in Truth Social - that is not at all.

  10. Miebakagh57 profile image70
    Miebakagh57posted 7 months ago

    It's useless even to invest a single article in hubpages these days.                                               You can't get 'a cup of coffee' just for that...period

  11. Linda S Grimes profile image99
    Linda S Grimesposted 7 months ago

    Wow, things are sounding pretty dire!  Do y'all think HubPages is on the verge of folding?

    1. Miebakagh57 profile image70
      Miebakagh57posted 7 months agoin reply to this

      Who knows?

      1. Linda S Grimes profile image99
        Linda S Grimesposted 7 months agoin reply to this

        Maybe the editorial team knows, or, has more of a clue than we writers do . . .  Some reassurance might be in order . . .

    2. viryabo profile image83
      viryaboposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      It’s beginning to appear so.

      Last week, I was a tad optimistic. Now? I’m not so sure anymore.

  12. FatFreddysCat profile image60
    FatFreddysCatposted 7 months ago

    https://hubstatic.com/17107398.jpg

    1. Genna East profile image92
      Genna Eastposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      Lol.  Perfect, Freddy.  Touché.

  13. eugbug profile image95
    eugbugposted 7 months ago

    My "Fixing a Buttons in Jeans" article has a featured snippet now that it's on Discover. I can't say whether it had one when on Feltmagnet, or was it ToughNickel?

    1. incomeguru profile image85
      incomeguruposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      Deleted

      1. incomeguru profile image85
        incomeguruposted 7 months agoin reply to this

        “Fixing a buttons in jeans without sewing” also has.

        https://hubstatic.com/17107598.png

  14. incomeguru profile image85
    incomeguruposted 7 months ago

    For those whose articles were moved, is it true that articles recently moved to discoverdothubpages have started gaining traffic?

    1. PaulGoodman67 profile image99
      PaulGoodman67posted 7 months agoin reply to this

      I've not seen any traffic increases on my accounts. Even if the move worked, it wouldn't likely have an immediate effect. It would depend upon Google but probably take weeks, maybe more.

      Overall, discover.hubpages.com traffic rose between November 2023 and April 2024 and then stopped rising and more or less plateaued.

  15. Mark Ewbie profile image60
    Mark Ewbieposted 7 months ago

    I guess I am 1 of the 36,191 HubPages writers although I have not written anything for years.  Briefly revisited last year because I wanted to publish an ego piece but with no comment section to make me feel good, and the ads, oh my goodness - the ads, I decided not to bother.

    I do still return and check out interesting forum threads.  I don't bother looking at traffic to my handful of remaining articles.

    Would I invest money in a writer's cooperative?  Not in a million years.  No offence or anything but I used to write on here for fun.  The idea of cooperating with others in some kind of worker's collective, and worse still, a writer's workers collective - you know what writers are like - doesn't appeal.

    So HubPages for me now is a place to briefly check the forums and see what sensible people, and there are many, are saying about Tag, HP, Google, AI and so on.  A small window into what is happening without getting bogged down in the details of SEO.

    HP used to be my spiritual home.  Where I half learned to write and failed at playing the internet game.  No matter, it gave me much pleasure and I am still grateful despite all the ups and downs over the years.

    I have nothing worth adding. Chasing an income is hard work.

    But writing for pleasure remains.  They can't take that away.

    1. Glenn Stok profile image93
      Glenn Stokposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      Hi Mark, It's nice to see you here. I have never forgotten you from the days you were active on HubPages. And I recall when one of your artful creations was featured on HubPages' home page.

      I like the name you gave my idea—a "writer's cooperative." But I totally understand your feelings about not in a million years.

      In addition, you brought up an important point that I didn't consider. I based the idea on the number of published authors. But I overlooked the fact that many of them are no longer active.

      Thanks for chiming in, Mark. I hope you've been well and doing enjoyable things.

  16. Solaras profile image82
    Solarasposted 7 months ago

    I find this panicked move to shift sites wholesale to Discover, which had no real structure, about as disturbing as not getting paid promptly in the aftermath of the Sports Illustrated debacle.

    I don't understand why they would not create subdomains for the sites with better, more accurately descriptive names.  Also IMO, Discover is a much better name than the antiquated HubPages name.  Is everyone crazy or is it just me?

    1. Glenn Stok profile image93
      Glenn Stokposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      That crossed my mind too, Barbara. "Discover" works for every topic that would go into it. Too bad they can't use it as a top level domain name, but it's already taken by that credit card company.

    2. bravewarrior profile image81
      bravewarriorposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      Barbara, I fear we've all been driven mad/crazy by all of this over the past few years. I feel like we're living inside a snow globe. Shake us up and see if the flakes (we writers) form a blanket or keep swirling around willy-nilly in the wind! roll

    3. Linda S Grimes profile image99
      Linda S Grimesposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      I agree that there is poor quality in the network site names such as "Owlcation" and "LetterPile."  "DiscoverHubPages" sounds fine to me.  Or as mentioned "more accurately descriptive names" is in order. 

      For another issue:  Has anyone noticed that editing seems to have slacked off?  My articles used to get much more thorough edits than now.  Unfortunately, too much of that editing resulted in inaccuracies that I had to correct, but it also corrected many typos, and that was helpful.  One of the more prolific editors was Chris, and he must left HubPages; he is no longer listed on the editorial team page.

  17. Peggy W profile image98
    Peggy Wposted 7 months ago

    It is sad to be reading this!  I guess I better do a better job of saving all of my articles.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)