143 followers
371 daily readers
rank of 12
Receive an e-mail notification of new posts on this site:
|
|
|
WritersNotes.Net: Helping Writers Follow Their Dreams Through Information, Inspiration, and Encouragement!
Today, Sunday, October 16, 2011, is Blog Action Day – the day when bloggers from 100 countries around the world gather to post about a single significant topic. This year, 2,250 bloggers will be discussing FOOD! And what makes this year’s topic even more appropriate is that today is also World Food Day!
Food: A Critical Topic to Every Person on Earth
Food is important to all of us, and so many food-related issues exist that it would be impossible to address them all in a single post. So, for now, let’s discuss a few significant aspects of the topic.
World Hunger
Famine runs rampant in many parts of the world, and numerous organizations are doing their part to make a difference. Some offer direct aid, others educate and advocate. Here are just a few:
ONE: Visit the site to learn what this organization is doing to end hunger, and the ways you can help. Sign the Petition asking the U.S. Congress to fully fund the Feed the Future program. The petition’s message to Congress says this about the critical need: “The famine in Somalia has killed 30,000 children in 3 months. In 2011 we have the opportunity to make famine a thing of the past. Lives are in your hands. Please fully fund Feed the Future and help break the cycle of famine for good.”
Ending Hunger: This organization also asks visitors to sign a Petition putting pressure on politicians to end world hunger. The petition states the following: “We who support this petition find it unacceptable that close to one billion people are chronically hungry. Through the United Nations, we call upon governments to make the elimination of hunger their top priority until that goal is reached.” The original goal was 1,000,000 signatures, and to date, well over 3,000,000 people have signed.
Ending Hunger says this about its objectives: “The objectives? A critical mass of people who no longer accept the presence of one billion fellow human beings living in chronic hunger. To make a lot of noise about the problem. To build up political pressure for change.”
Food for the Poor: This Christian non-profit offers help in various forms to people in need, describing its efforts as follows: “Food For The Poor is the third-largest international relief and development charity in the United States, feeding 2 million poor every day. Our Christian relief programs and projects are helping children and the poorest of the poor by providing food, housing, health care, education, water projects, emergency relief and micro-enterprise assistance in the Caribbean and Latin America.”
Hunger in the U.S.
Many people in the U.S. go to bed hungry each night, and the following organization is working to change that:
Food Rescue: This Indiana-based non-profit addresses the issue of food waste and focuses on how food that is currently (or would currently be) wasted can be donated to area food banks to help feed hungry local residents. While Food Rescue only works directly in its own state, the organization does help people in other states put its principles into practice. It also hosts a Virtual Flash Mob that periodically joins together to simultaneously post pleas on the social media fan pages of various food-related businesses urging them to share their excess food with the hungry, rather than throwing it away.
About its efforts, the organization says the following: “Food Rescue schedules and inspires more than 2,000 "food rescues" each month, turning millions of dollars in rescued food into hundreds of thousands of meals for children and families in need through a network of volunteers working to turn discarded food into changed lives.”
Healthier, More Equitable, and Sustainable Food for All
Slow Food International: This organization describes itself as follows: “Slow Food is a global, grassroots organization whose supporters are linking the pleasure of good food with a commitment to their community and the environment. Today we have 100,000 members worldwide, as well as the Terra Madre network of 2,000 food communities who practice small-scale and sustainable production of quality foods.” Slow Food says it is “committed to good, clean and fair food for all.”
Slow Food USA: Slow Food USA’s mission states, in part, “We believe that food is a universal right. Food that is fair should be accessible to all, regardless of income, and produced by people who are treated with dignity and justly compensated for their labor.” The non-profit also says, “Slow Food USA is working to change the food system through a network of volunteer chapters all over the country.” Its visitors are invited to join their local chapter.
This organization has issued its $5 Challenge, which states, “I pledge to share a fresh, healthy meal that costs less than $5 – because slow food shouldn't have to cost more than fast food." Those who take the challenge can submit photos and descriptions of their meals on the Tips & Tricks & Challenges page.
Please Visit These Websites
The above organizations are but a few that are working to provide food for the hungry or to improve the diets of those who are tired of the modern processed foods that are slowly robbing us of our health and vitality. I hope you will take a few minutes to visit their websites, learn more about their efforts, sign their petitions, and find out what you can do to make a difference – for others as well as yourself.
Too many people battle hunger each and every day – and too many others have more than enough to eat yet are still malnourished. These are the ironies of our crazy modern world -- ironies that we will hopefully be able to work together to change in the very near future!
Here’s to that change!
Jeanne
#BAD11
September 24th 2011 08:49
The Adverb: A "Very" Unpopular Intensifier!
Mark Twain once said, "Substitute 'damn' every time you're inclined to write 'very'; your editor will delete it and the writing will be just as it should be." Clever quote. However, aside from the fact that few of today's editors would actually delete this substitute, I do agree with Twain that "very" usually makes a weak modifier (or "intensifier") for an adjective. I'd much rather use adverbs like these to add color to my prose:
extremely, intensely, incredibly, fully, wholly, emphatically, entirely, deliriously, deliciously, delectably, horribly, crazily, refreshingly, luxuriously, inveterately, totally, absolutely, singularly, uniquely, incontrovertibly, impeccably, impressively, quite, most, indeed, purely, truly, or supremely ...
Adverbs in General: An "Evil" Habit?
Of course, Stephen King would disagree with me, apparently. To King, "The road to hell is paved with adverbs." (I imagine that must be why Twain suggested we substitute 'damn' for 'very.') I do agree with King, however -- to a point. Using an adverb to liven a weak verb rarely works. Far better to omit the adverb and select a stronger, more vibrant verb instead. Yet, when used to modify -- or as mentioned above, "intensify" -- an adjective, the widely underappreciated adverb can definitely handle the task.
Adjectives: Effective Tools When Used Judiciously
Whether we should be using adjectives in the first place, however, has also been addressed by Twain: "As to the adjective, when in doubt, strike it out." Again, as in the adverb/weak verb discussion above, the same principle applies to adjectives and weak nouns: If you're using an adjective purely to slip in a colorless noun, while depending on the adjective to spruce it up, it's probably better to skip the adjective and pull a more expressive noun from your literary quiver. If more writers did this, the much-maligned adjective would command greater respect.
After all, words are the tools of our trade, and using them with power and precision is our crowning achievement.
Here's to powerful prose!
Jeanne
Smorty's Latest Advice to Its Bloggers for Maintaining Their Google PR
In light of the recent PR cuts that many blogs have experienced during the latest Google update, Smorty has recently begun offering its bloggers advice on how to reduce the likelihood that their PR will be cut. This advice is, of course, based on the widely held assumption that the reason for these unprecedented PR cuts is the widespread practice of paid posting. Here's what Smorty has begun advising its bloggers:
There have been some recent changes that Google have made with regard to sponsored postings. Smorty would like to offer you some advice on this issue. Google has primarily targeted PayPerPost member blogs and reduced their Page ranks across the board. Although this WILL NOT REDUCE your rankings or readership, your blog will receive more campaign offers if it has a higher page rank. To prevent any future loss of page rank due to this issue you can take the following steps:
1. Remove all sponsored post tags on each of your posts. Google can follow these tags to determine if you are being paid for posts.
2. Remove any PayPerPost tags on your posts for "hire me" and "review me". Any general affiliate banners are fine to keep.
Is This Good Advice, and Should It Be Followed?
While I certainly do not mean to malign Smorty--since I've found them to be a fair company to work with--I must nonetheless question the overall wisdom and, in particular, the ethics of this particular course of action. (I do recognize, of course, that many believe the above steps to constitute necessary acts of self-preservation for bloggers who are being targeted for PR cuts, presumably because of paid posting, which Google purportedly equates with link-selling.) And while no one can be absolutely certain whether that was, in fact, the reason for the recent PR cuts--and many actually question this, since presumably many who don't post paid content were also targeted--we bloggers still need to determine what our response to the situation will be.
My Thoughts on the Matter: Stick to Your Principles
Though every blogger must decide for him or herself what course to take--because each will have to live with the consequences of that decision, whatever they may be--I tend to feel that it's always best to stand by your principles, maintain high ethical standards, and do right by your readers.
The following are a few of my thoughts on the matter which are quoted from a comment I wrote in response to another comment left on one of my recent posts:
I see the entire situation a bit differently than Smorty does. I feel it's unethical not to disclose the sponsored nature of our paid posts to our readers--which is why I never accept paid posts that require non-disclosure. (See my disclosure policy.) I believe my readers have the right to know when a post I've written was sponsored and when it was spontaneous.
I think it's a shame that PayPerPost is being targeted by Google simply because their ethical standards are high enough that they require disclosure, and I applaud them for being the only paid posting company I know of that does. It's just the right thing to do! (It's funny the way honesty can get you into trouble sometimes.)
I feel that PPP doesn't go quite far enough, however, in that they allow certain advertisers to specify "sitewide disclosure only," which simply causes confusion, because the reader has to guess which posts are sponsored and which aren't; and that's unfair. (Along with not accepting "non-disclosure" posts, I never accept "sitewide disclosure only" posts, either.)
Despite Smorty's advice, I have no intention of removing my sponsored posts from my Paid Posts category. That category was created specifically for the benefit of my readers, because I believe in being honest and above board with them. If Google can't handle it, they'll do whatever they have to do. But, that's OK, because at least I'll know that I did what I knew to be right.
And that, dear Reader, is my view in a nutshell. While I realize that there are many aspects to this issue which make it complex, I also strongly believe that there are some principles that simply shouldn't be sacrificed for expedience' sake. For me, at least, that's the easy part.
The hard part could come later.
Thanks for reading,
Jeanne
This is not a sponsored post.
Did you enjoy this post? Have any thoughts on the issue? If so, we'd love to hear them!
Google Cleans House: Makes Unprecedented PR Cuts
Much has been written lately about the recent dramatic decrease in the Google page rank of a number of blogs--many of which are quite influential members of the blogosphere which have long enjoyed high PR. There's been a great deal of speculation as to why these blogs have fallen out of favor--or at least have been somewhat devalued--in the estimation of Google; and many believe that they are being penalized for so-called link-selling.
The Heart of the Issue: Is Google Right to Lower Blog PR for Sponsored Posts?
The question of whether Google has in fact lowered the PR of these blogs because of paid posting, and if so, what should be done about it is an incredibly intriguing one; and, were it not so critical to the success of the affected bloggers, it would be a fascinating intellectual exercise to ponder and speculate about the issue. But, I personally would much rather get to the heart of the matter. As I see it, the point isn't whether or not we bloggers need to stop writing sponsored content containing links to the sponsors' websites or begin hiding the fact that we do write such content in order to protect ourselves from the wrath of Google (as many are advising us to do), but whether or not Google is right in the first place to lower a blog's PR for writing sponsored content (if this is indeed the reason for the recent PR penalties).
The Real Question: Does Sponsored Content Equal Link-Selling?
The real question is, "Does sponsored content constitute link-selling?" I would submit to you that it doesn't. Writing ad copy--and being paid to do so--has always been a legitimate and respected way for a writer to earn income; and today it's no different, despite the fact that links have now become a natural part of that ad copy. With the advent of the internet and the resultant necessity for the modern business to develop a web presence, company websites have simply become the norm. It naturally follows, then, that any ad copy written today--whether online or off, whether posted to a website or a blog--would contain a link to the company's website. That's a given. It goes without saying--or at least it should.
My View: Irrelevant, Disembodied Links vs. Relevant Content-Rich Posts That Include Links
In my view, link-selling would be offering to post disembodied links to a website or blog--links which have nothing to do with their surrounding content--at a price-per-link. I do not consider carefully-placed links, which are seamlessly integrated into the body of a well-written review, opinion, or even outright advertisement about a company, website, product, or service, to be paid links. But, of course, that's just my view.
What do you think?
Eagerly awaiting your thoughts,
Jeanne
Note: I should add here that the views expressed above represent my opinion where blogs which have a main purpose other than advertising are concerned. These views do not extend to blogs which have been created for the sole purpose of earning money through advertising, but only to blogs which contain a significant amount of other helpful, quality content which is merely supplemented by sponsored posts.
This is not a sponsored post.
Did this post strike a chord with you? Have anything to add? Please feel free to comment!
While browsing the Web today, I happened across a discussion on MetaFilter.Com which questioned the legitimacy of Orble.Com as a blog hosting site. (Why not pop in over there and have a look?)
I thought this would be the perfect opportunity to set the record straight. However, when I attempted to sign up in order to leave my comments on that particular thread, I was informed that, due to the costs involved in keeping up the site, there would be a $5 fee to join.
Now, I am by no means cheap. In fact, most people who know me would say I'm quite the opposite. But, somehow it just didn't seem right to be required to pay for the privilege of simply leaving a comment. I therefore decided to send a message to the administrators of the site, via their "Contact Us" link, instead. In it, I addressed some of the specific points brought up in the discussion (originally posted sometime in March).
I thought it only fair to put in a good word for Orble. After all, I've had a great experience blogging at Orble.Com, and its gotten even better since they've given me my own domain (almost a week ago). I have no idea what will come of it. Perhaps they'll simply ignore me, since I didn't pay the signup fee. Perhaps they'll respond. This is something that only time will tell. But I do know one thing: They'd have a lot more trouble ignoring all of us--don't ya think?
'Nuff said!
Jeanne
|
|
|
Add Comments
Comments (2)