atw: Re: Blogging and employers
- From: "Caz.H" <cazhart@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 13:54:40 +1000
I haven't managed to move past "relevant memberships". I've been mulling it
over all morning.
Does that mean I can only include, in my credentials, blogs for which one is
required to login to comment (much in the way that I have to login to buy
groceries online), but not the millions of blogs that require no such
"membership"?
Any guesses on the service level that might (only might!) apply when they
write "predominantly free from errors".
99.98% error free?
95% error free?
The only reason I ask is because I'd like to know what level of errors
they're happy to have on their web site, because, clearly they don't mind
having a few.
C
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 1:43 PM, Bob Trussler <bob.trussler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Free from errors!
> What does "this is a key indicator to passion for the web" mean? ... to
> passion?
>
> Must be web-speak
>
> Bob T
>
>
>
> 2009/6/3 Deborah Cross <Deborah.Cross@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Checked for you on Twitter before I replied - I think it is already here
>> and you've missed it :P
>>
>> Depends on the industry and outputs of the role of course, but if you're
>> employing someone to edit content intended for the web their experience with
>> doing this is relevant, which includes blogging and tweeting. The employer
>> is obviously looking for someone web savvy and actively participating online
>> in a community. Which isn't a requirement of all jobs I imagine.
>>
>> What is upsetting to me is that the employer doesn't think technical
>> writers have the web skills they need. This could be a misconception on
>> their part, or it could be the impression left by previous applicants
>> and interactions with technical writers.
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
>> austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *James Hunt
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, 3 June 2009 10:53 AM
>> *To:* austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> *Subject:* atw: Blogging and employers
>>
>> There is an interesting current job ad on a Web site, for a technical
>> editor. There is no need for a link - the latest version of the ad leads off
>> with:
>>
>> "UPDATE: THIS IS NOT A TECHNICAL WRITER POSITION. please read the entire
>> advertisment clearly and in full before applying."
>>
>> - and that takes care of most of us, even those who can read clearly.
>>
>> This paragraph in the ad is the interesting one:
>>
>> "A tip for potential candidates, only those who have blogs and relevant
>> memberships will be taken seriously as this is a key indicator to passion
>> for the web. Of course those blogs will be well written and predominantly
>> free from errors."
>>
>> Did I miss the revolution here? When did blogging change from an unpaid
>> hobby to a mandatory job qualification? How common is it for potential
>> employers of editors or writers to make demands like this? And how long
>> before we are judged on our Twittering?
>>
>> JH
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Bob Trussler
> Phone 0418 661 462
>
Other related posts:
