Having written 2 freelance articles already, I came up with 11 differences between writing a blog and writing for real media:
- Having an editor is great; they find
allmost of your mistakes and delete the sentences you probably should have deleted when your hypothesis changed during the construction of the article, but held on to for sentimental reasons. - Editors suck; they change the meaning of your sentences and don’t give you the chance to correct them before publication.
- Deadlines suck; self-publishing gives you the chance to hold something back if it’s not ready for prime time.
- Companies are “it” not “they” and other formal stuff.
- You don’t have to worry about marketing your articles. For that mater, you really don’t have to worry about traffic because they don’t tell you how many people are reading your articles.
- You’ve got to write out two and five but not 10.
- Your articles get picked up by Yahoo (No Pain…). Wait a second, they get picked up by Yahoo if you’re a blog too (all three of those are mine).
- You use ems — because they’re more formal — to separate thoughts (not parentheses).
- One space after a sentence. Actually it’s like that way on my blogs too, but that’s because WordPress fixes it for me. So I guess the difference is there’s no WordPress to help you out.
- Proofreading. I reread anything I write on my blog 3-5 times. It’s more like 5-7 for my articles.
- The pay. I’ve made more writing two articles than I have writing 24 articles on my blog. “More” being a huge understatement.
Back to your regularly scheduled parenting blog at some point in the future when the kids do something funny/silly/smart/etc. Although I can tell you that having a part time job is somewhat stressful while being a parent. I can get most of the research/writing done while the kids are asleep, but that takes away from my time with Susan. Hopefully it will go to full time in a month or so. Otherwise, I think we’re going to have to use much of this extra money I’m making to pay for some fun family destress time (and perhaps a maid too).
November 16, 2007 at 12:14 am
Two new studies show why some people are more attractive for members of the opposite sex than others.
The University of Florida, Florida State University found that physically attractive people almost instantly attract the attention of the interlocutor, sobesednitsy with them, literally, it is difficult to make eye. This conclusion was reached by a series of psychological experiments, which were determined by the people who believe in sending the first seconds after the acquaintance. Here, a curious feature: single, unmarried experimental preferred to look at the guys, beauty opposite sex, and family, people most often by representatives of their sex.
The authors believe that this feature developed a behavior as a result of the evolution: a man trying to find a decent pair to acquire offspring. If this is resolved, he wondered potential rivals. Detailed information about this magazine will be published Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
In turn, a joint study of the Rockefeller University, Rockefeller University and Duke University, Duke University in North Carolina revealed that women are perceived differently by men smell. During experiments studied the perception of women one of the ingredients of male pheromone-androstenona smell, which is contained in urine or sweat.
The results were startling: women are part of this repugnant odor, and the other part is very attractive, resembling the smell of vanilla, and the third group have not felt any smell. The authors argue that the reason is that the differences in the receptor responsible for the olfactory system, from different people are different.
It has long been proven that mammals (including human) odor is one way of attracting the attention of representatives of the opposite sex. A detailed article about the journal Nature will publish.