Lately there is a lot of debate in the Internet Online Article Free Submission Site Blogs on issues of Quality and Quantity. Many believe that when an author posts over 300 or more articles that their quantity slacks off and thus they sacrifice quality. Indeed this is an interesting comment although when you ask someone what is more important to them; Quality or Quantity, you get a variety of answers and rational for each possible answer. Indeed the smartest humans will simply say when asked; "what is more important Quality or Quantity?” Both.

Fortunately or unfortunately depending on how you view this debate; I am the all-time leader in online article submissions on the Internet in 2005 and 2006. Now then, I would like to make a comment on this and wish to not be labeled arrogant in doing so. Although also realize that there will be folks to attempt to use such labels anyway. My comment is that; I really believe in writing articles, which are indeed factually worthy for the reader and I have written many such articles. Unfortunately in actual observation and test marketing in my own articles I have found that the articles that are read the most have titles which include words such as; sex, skinny, rich, wealth, hair, clothes, style, gadget, electronics, etc.

This is disconcerting to th

ose who wish to write quality articles, as the mindless masses are not interested in quality. They are humans and interested in being skinny, rich, looking good and having lots of great sex, while having all the latest cars, toys and electronic gadgets. So, I ask the online article writer this; "Do you really believe that quality over quantity in online article writing is going to make you successful?” The reason I ask is that I now have just shy of 900,000 article views on one site alone. And those quality articles I have are not pulling anywhere close to the traffic as the Jerry Springer, Howard Stern and Jeff Foxworthy type articles, which I have previously submitted in bulk and make up about one quarter of my 3500 articles. Think on this in 2006.

 Previous      Next