#you can just copy it and if there’s anything I missed or incorrectly described you can change it

[parallelunivrses]

[ID: grayscale pencil sketch, framed similar to a Polaroid. The picture features many dark birds on a telephone wire and two tall poles. One of the birds is in flight, although it is unclear if it is taking off or landing. The picture has a square drawn around it, and underneath reads in all caps “(begin underline) nothing harder (end underline) to go through with than a (begin underline) vanishing act (end underline)”. End ID]

no morning colder than the first frost / no friends closer than the ones we've lost

Rain in Soho by The Mountain Goats + birds on a telephone wire

[ahsokasanity]

Chapter Three

A Court of Shadow and Ribbons

In case you missed the beginning Chapter One

Azriel had not, had probably never ever slept like he did that night. He told Mor about Gwyn and Elain and the necklace and the middle of the night training session. Mor was excitable. That was the only way to describe her glee, her enthusiasm as she asked and asked, as she too commented on their features and their enticements. This was super weird for about ten minutes until Az realised that Mor was his best friend in the whole world and the person who was truly barracking for him to be his happiest self.

She agreed with Rhys, and with Azriel that Elain was out of bounds. That they all needed to help Elain deal with her situation and to best come around to the idea that Lucien was her mate. He is her mate, but she didn’t have to accept the bond. She would however have to make some effort to either accept or reject Lucien, with no complications from Azriel offering her anything but support and friendship.

Azriel felt free. So free to be able to talk like this, without guilt, without restricting his fury or his hurt or his frustration. Mor just held his hand and nodded and soothed and agreed. He let all of the last year of flirting, of protecting, of wanting Elain slip from him. His shadows seemed to lengthen along the bed and down to the floor as if they too were washing away the feelings that surrounded the middle sister to his brother’s mates.

“Oh yes, I like her” Mor gleamed when he told her about the roof top conversation he’d had with Gwyn on Winter Solstice.

“She’s just so introverted Mor, I know why but how could I ever, why would she ever change that… for me”

“We’ve all got our stories of trauma, you know that. Some worse than others, but it affects us everyday. Maybe you’re going to see more of Gwyn and she’s going to come out of the library and into life, now that she has Nesta, and Emerie and training”

Azriel shrugged. “I hope for her sake that she wants that, and I hope for mine that I can be the uninterested rock in a crashing sea. I feel myself being pelted too”

Mor wrapped an arm around his middle and lay her head on his chest

“You have always been that for me, even when your feelings made me uncomfortable, even then I knew that you would stand for me and support me. I’m so sorry that I couldn’t be as strong as you”

Azriel just sighed heavily and gripped her tightly. This laying with Mor was not increasing his angst, it was calm and without maleness. It was that which had been missing for him for all of this time. He would find a partner and he would do his best to please her. Until then, he had his friends, he had his affection for Gwyn and he would be a better male.

                                                                       *

 The next day was all hurry and hugs and smiles and affection and Mor felt so light, so damn excited about a new day. She watched as Az soared overhead through her wards and winnowed back to the training ring at the House of Wind. She knew that she needed to stay here and get this job done. The treaty signed, for their futures, for Rhys and Feyre’s son, for all of their children.

It never ceased to amaze her how people could work outside of their best interests, believing they were doing right. Hadn’t she and Azriel thought that they had been right all of these years, relying on, avoiding and loving each other without truth? There was a better way. The Morrigan always told it and now she would live it.

                                                                       *

Most of the priestesses and Nesta and Cassian were on the roof as he landed on the far side, swooping around to give everyone fair warning that he had arrived. Gwyn smiled up at him and Emerie looked longingly at his sailing down, her wings rippled as they caught some of his breeze. Azriel normally did not like to make an entrance. He was the shadowsinger, the assassin, the person who was not noticed. Today he landed, turning it into merely a step of his normal walk and made his way to Cassian, nodded his head and looked out across the city of Velaris with the ghost of a smile on his lips.

Cassian turned to him, thought of a crude comment, suppressed it and looked at the women again. Before he started for the day, he put his hand on Azriel’s shoulder

“You look good Az, we missed you at dinner”

Azriel merely touched his hand and said

“I bet you didn’t and thanks. I’ll tell you about it later” and got right into training mode by rolling his shoulders and lifting his toes up and down.

 After training, Nesta and Gwyn found each other in the stacks on level five. As low as Nesta wanted to go in this library. Gwyn was tucking something back into her robe as Nesta approached, but she didn’t seem furtive. Nesta lifted her chin

“What is that?”

Gwyn pulled the glass rose out of her clothes and held it up for Nesta

“Like you don’t know all about this!” She stared at Nesta and saw the look of wonder at the jewel and the flit of confusion cross her face as Gwyn made the accusation.

“Where did it come from, it is so lovely. It looks SO beautiful on you, with your hair” Gwyn let Nesta hold the jewel and she played it around her fingers letting the distant and close fae lights turn it all the colours of the rainbow.

Gwyn shook her head and returned the jem to her robes with a halting movement and looked at Nesta again

“Are you sure? You don’t know what that is, where it came from”

“Absolutely, but I am a little envious, the craft is wonderful” Nesta walked toward her trolley and Gwyn followed her

“Clotho gave it to me yesterday morning early, she said it was from a friend so I assumed apparently incorrectly, that was you. Weird. I don’t have that many friends”

Nesta spun around about to correct her

“Oh you know, friends. People that would give me such an item. Just you and Emerie. I’ll ask her tomorrow” Nesta agreed, and thought how anonymous presents could be really annoying even when they were perfect for the person. You could go mad trying to work out who it was from. Who thought of you and that you might like it. Who bought it for you and why?

The rest of the day was hard but interesting work. Merrill was working on more Valkyrie myths and Gwyn drank them up as she copied notes and moved books and made her own memorandums when she read something that she particularly wanted to share with Nesta and Emerie. The mind stilling exercises looked like something that she would like to try.

Chapter Four

[orisitme-blog]

Writing My Novel – Lessons Learned Part 1

So, it has been just over a year since I published my first novel. In my previous working life, we would always have a ‘lessons learned’ meeting a couple of months after a project went ‘live’ in an effort to try to understand if we could have done anything better and it occurred to me that I should do the same with my novel.  So, adapting my project life-cycle knowledge to the process of novel writing, here goes:

Requirements

Before you start any project, you should of course define your requirements – and so I did (sort of). I didn’t really think too much about who the book was for other than anybody who was interested in Brexit and satire but I did plan every character and summarized every chapter.  What surprised me was how much the characters and the story I was telling changed as my tale started to unravel. My characters altered states and made their opinions known in ways I had not imagined. Like a tree through the seasons, swaying one way, then another, losing leaves, being lopped, then regrowth. A lot of regrowth.  

My conclusion then on being clear on what you want to write is of course - yes, be clear on the genre and who your audience is but don’t attempt to nail it all down at the start. Writing is a creative as well as a technical process and although you do need to ensure your basic structure is right (a bit like building a house) for many writers the process is organic (I say ‘for many’ – there are of course some who can sit down and plonk words down onto a page in their correct story-telling sequence first go) but most writers are not like that - I know I’m certainly not. So, my lesson learned for the future is to set down a framework, write a first draft with summary chapters, find out who appears, get to know them, see where they take me and what they get up to then rewrite, rewrite, rewrite.  

Mentoring

I was finding certain chapters in my novel quite difficult to write and so I decided I needed some guidance, somebody to help and advise me. I did my homework, selected one of the top agencies and paid a few hundred pounds for their mentoring service. They selected a mentor from their pool of consultants and she worked with me, she read my manuscript and offered guidance.  It worked well. She was helpful and worth the money. Would I do it again though? Maybe, if I could guarantee I would have the same mentor, otherwise probably not. My lesson learned is that it is expensive and I am now aware of how ‘hit and miss’ the process can be. I was lucky, I got a good mentor, it could have been so different…

Editing

I obviously needed an editor so I used the same agency for the editing process. Why not? The mentoring had worked well after all. So, I sent in my finished masterpiece … manuscript for a quote. It was just under 70,000 words. Now, I will be the first to admit that I was a little fuzzy on the editing process at the time (it is all so much clearer to me now). So, I called the agency and I discussed with their reception lady what needed to be done. She gave me a hefty four figure quote and explained to me that for my money their editor would do a copy-edit, a check for punctuation and grammar and also proof read my novel. I knew there was a fair amount of work involved so I agreed.  

For just over three weeks, nerves on edge, I waited for the return of my manuscript. Waited as one might wait for a child returning from their first school trip away. However, all I can say is that when I did get my manuscript back it was as if I’d gone to pick up my child and found her sitting on a bench in the car park having gone nowhere at all. I will say at this stage that the three weeks away from my novel helped me to look at it in a completely new light. I read it with an air of detachment and spotted all of the previously unseen errors and niggly mistakes that I hadn’t previously been able to see because I was too close to the content – take note, I noticed these things after it had been through their editing, punctuation, grammar and proofreading processes! I could not believe the state it was in.  To be brutally honest I was a little embarrassed that I had submitted it in that state in the first place. They were not at all embarrassed about taking my money and not doing the work though.

The only aspect of human discord that I am good at is how best to avoid confrontation.  Which is generally what I do. That said, when a company, blatantly takes the piss out of you (I’m sorry they are the only words that I think of to accurately describe what happened) then I feel duty bound to make a stand. So, I evaluated the situation and considered my options. I am a great believer in being careful which battles I choose to fight in life but it became obvious to me I had to do something about it. I couldn’t let them get away with it.  As a start I contacted the agency, I mentioned that I was a bit surprised at the manuscript they had sent back to me and asked if maybe they had sent me the wrong version.

Long story short – they explained to me that copy-editing, punctuation/ grammar and proof-reading were separate processes, that my novel now needed to be proofread and if I wanted it done they would give me a quote. I pointed out to them that I did understand that they were separate processes but that they had  quoted me a sum of money and told me that proofreading  would  be included – they therefore set my expectation level so it would be fair enough for me to think that the work would be done. I then (and this is the reason I had little hesitation in confronting them in the first place) included in my reply the email in which they had confirmed exactly what they said they would do. Without the email as evidence it would just have been an ‘I said/ you said‘ scenario and who can be bothered with that? They then came back to me and confirmed that the work they sent back was, overall, to a standard with what the industry would produce (I tell you this lot did not make the publishing industry look good at all!) but that they were prepared to offer me a small refund or a slightly larger amount on a credit note. I wish I was kidding.

I then decided to add a little detail as to why I was not satisfied with the work they had done. I pointed out that their editor had introduced a couple of punctuation errors, when referring to two of the characters had spelled their names incorrectly and in one chapter a baby – who was a boy at the beginning of the chapter was a girl by the end of it! This was in a single chapter and she never picked up on it. It is basic editing and I know, I know, I’m embarrassed by it but my excuse is that it was my first novel. To this day I have no idea what their editors  excuse was for producing such sloppy, unprofessional work.  Apparently this woman has written a book on editing. I despair.  

When an organization behaves in such a way the damage they do in trust – not only to their own company but to the business as a whole is immense. That said, the last contact I had with the agency, they put their hands up, admitted their mistakes and provided a solution. I work on the principle that in business – as in life – anything can go wrong at any time and all you can ask when it does is that the parties involved are open, honest and discuss and correct their mistakes in a non-tricky way. It’s called integrity. Eventually they did that so good for them.

We eventually agreed on a 50% refund.

As a result of my experience I decided to rethink the whole editing process for my future novels, in part 2 of my blog I will discuss how I got my novel edited and the lessons that I learned from  the editing process. I will also talk about  the  mistakes I made during the publication process – there were several - the main one being the title! I can’t believe I chose such a rubbish title for my novel - too late now though, I’m stuck with it!

S.A.Lama

Author ‘Brexit comes to Bedwell Ash.’  

[tipsycad147]

Collecting out-of-print Tarot decks

by Michelle Gruben

Every Tarot collector wants that one deck. The 1980s deck that you first learned to read with (and haven’t seen since). The indie Kickstarter deck you should have bought when you had the chance. The deck that everyone raves about that’s long overdue for a reprint.

As a lifelong collector (and occasional dealer) of Tarot, I know the agony of searching for those elusive decks. I’ve written this guide to help you round up the stragglers on your list. With a little sleuthing, patience, and (moderately) deep pockets, anyone can build the Tarot collection of their dreams. This article is geared toward those who buy Tarot decks for reading and study, rather than purely for collectible value. But if you happen to make money buying and selling Tarot, more power to you!

First, it’s helpful to understand why Tarot decks go out of print in the first place. Every time a Tarot deck is created, the publisher—whether it’s the artist or a publishing company—has to make a very risky bet. They have to settle on an initial print run, or the number of copies that will be produced. The publisher uses a current budget and past sales figures to arrive at this number, but it’s not an exact science.

If the number is too low, the deck will sell out quickly, disappointing customers. If the number is too high, the publisher could be stuck with unsold copies of the deck for years, tying up cash that could have gone to other projects. Print runs vary from 500 or fewer copies from indie artists, up to tens of thousands of copies from major publishers.

Most Tarot decks never see a second print run after the initial printing sells out. However, if the deck becomes extremely popular, the publisher may opt to put a new edition. Some titles are translated into other languages, and appear in multiple sizes and formats. A classic deck may even get an anniversary edition to mark a major milestone. Not all reprints are created equal, though. Sometimes, the print quality improves and errors are corrected in the new edition. Other times, the deck suffers from flimsy paper stock, “off” colors, and skimpy packaging.

Intellectual property issues can delay or block a re-issue. The Thoth Tarot by Aleister Crowley went missing for several years. The hiatus was due to a legal dispute between the Ordo Templi Orientis, which claims the rights to the artwork, and U.S. Games Systems, Inc., which has a contract to publish the deck. Eventually, a new edition made it to the market—but not before dealers went crazy hawking the out-of-print decks on eBay.

I’ll be the first to admit it: Finding rare and out-of-print decks isn’t easy. There are thousands of different Tarot decks, most from small print runs, and no centralized resources for collectors. In addition, serious Tarot fans tend to hold on to their decks for a long time—like, until death.

Your Tarot wish list

If you’re serious about filling out a Tarot collection, the first step is to make a wish list. Patience is a virtue when hunting for Tarot, so the list will help you focused during those long stretches of no luck. Write down the name, publisher, and any other particulars—like edition or language—for your desired decks. You can also arrange the wish list by priority (“Decks I Would Sell My Firstborn For” down to “Decks I Might Buy If the Price Is Right”).

Once your collection reaches a certain size, you’ll also want to keep an inventory of decks you already own. I don’t wish for anyone to be hovering around a stinky flea market trying to remember if they already have Motherpeace.

Ready to start chipping away at that wish list? Here's four places to look for rare Tarot and oracle decks:

1. Check online marketplaces.

eBay, Amazon, and AbeBooks are the most popular venues for used Tarot decks. Searching online listings is the fastest—but probably also the most expensive—way to get your hands on a long-lost deck. The three sites listed above have the largest selection of vintage Tarot. Generally speaking, used book lots and estate sales put Tarot decks in the hands of dealers, who pass them on to collectors. Search terms like “vintage,” “original” or “OOP” will show you the current haul of collectible decks.

Browsing these three sites is a good way to find out what a particular deck is worth—or at least, what dealers want it to be worth. I’ve seen mass-market decks that originally retailed for about $20 offered for $300 or more. And that’s without the deck being particularly rare or sought-after. Some dealers buy up all the current Tarot titles they can, just hoping that the publisher will sell out and the value of the deck will shoot up.

Don’t be discouraged if you find your coveted deck listed at an insane price. Remember, the value of something is only what someone else will pay. It’s often the case that the seller has no idea what the item is worth. They do know they have only one available, and they’re simply trying to get the best price from some eager collector. The seller may come down if no one bites, or if similar listings pop up. They will certainly come down if the deck is reprinted. If you’re willing to wait, it’s entirely possible that you might find the same title somewhere else for much less.

Try setting up alerts so you can be notified when your wish list items show up in listings. Large marketplace like eBay and Amazon usually support this function. Of course, if the deck you want is truly rare and at the top of your list, you may wish to snap it up as soon as you get a chance.

Online Tarot collecting is not without its risks. Read the listing carefully, and be sure to ask any questions before checkout. Because Amazon requires an ISBN number for listings (but doesn’t keep a complete catalog of ISBNs for out-of-print titles), sellers sometimes list old Tarot items under the wrong ISBN. It’s very disappointing to get the wrong edition (or worse, a book when you were expecting a deck.)

Also, don’t assume that people selling used Tarot decks on major sites know anything about Tarot. Some may be specialists, but some are liquidators who deal in all types of books and other items. Right now on eBay, there are decks with missing cards, decks described incorrectly, and newer editions passed off as vintage. Beware of “as is” listings and sellers who don’t describe the item thoroughly with words and photos. A reputable seller should at least be able to verify that all the cards are there and provide you with the publishing info from the box or booklet.

2. Scrounge around (in person).

Your second option is poking around in cluttered rooms that smell like books. (Poor you!)

Not a lot of metaphysical shops carry used Tarot decks. Part of the reason may be superstition, or clients' worry about the energy of previous owners clinging to the deck. But the bigger reason is probably the hassle. Every used deck has to be checked for condition and completeness. Most of the decks published in the 1980s and beyond just don’t have that much value, other than sentiment. As a shop owner, I can attest that the profit margin on new decks is small enough, and the margin on run-of-the-mill used decks is miserable. But it’s worth checking if your local occult store sells or trades vintage decks.

The next stop for scrounging will be the used book stores in your area. Because of pilferage, decks are usually kept behind glass or the front counter, so you may have to ask for them. Tarot can also show up at such unlikely places as estate sales, rummage sales, auctions, and library sales. Workers at these things don’t always know where to place the decks, so I check the New Age section, the games section, and the rare book shelf. (Unfortunately, the general public seems to think Tarot decks are worth a lot more than they are. Don’t be shy about setting them straight with a cash offer.)

When you run across vintage Tarot decks at a reasonable price, buy them all! Honestly, do it. Whether the decks are on your list or not, they’re really neat to rifle through and they don’t take up much room. They could be a useful bargaining chip when you meet with other collectors. (See #4, below.)

Magickal folks, you can use visualization and intuition to make a hard-to-find Tarot deck come to you. Put your intention out there, then go where your hunches and whims lead you. If you have access to a favorite image from the deck, print it out and put it with your collection. Or you can simply visualize yourself reading the deck or holding it in your hands. Then follow your nose and keep your eyes peeled for your new deck.

3. Contact the artist or publisher.

Through the wonders of the information age, it’s now possible to get in touch with nearly any (living) artist or author. It’s a long shot, but it just might yield up a Tarot deck or at least a hot tip.

Try sending a message to the deck creator through their website or Facebook page. Tell ‘em how much you love the deck, and how disappointed you are that you missed the limited edition, or gave away your personal copy, or lost it after revel fire that one night, or whatever. Then ask them if they know any way that the deck can be obtained.

Sometimes, artists will have a limited number of copies that they keep for family and friends. They may be willing to sell you one. Perhaps there’s been a second printing that you didn’t know about. Could be a bookstore in Winnipeg has some old stock. Maybe they’ll tell you about a new deck they’re working on that’s so awesome, you’ll cross the old one off your list.

Reaching out to artists that inspire you is usually very gratifying, even if it doesn’t land you a deck. Artists need love! For out-of-print titles stuck in purgatory, your message will at least demonstrate some interest, and possibly nudge them toward another print run.

I’m shy, so I’ll admit that this is not my favorite strategy of the bunch. Several years ago, I was desperate to get my hands on the rare-ish Alchemical Tarot by Robert Place. I got a large tattoo from the deck on my leg, and the plan was to send him a pic and ask if he had a deck to sell me. But I chickened out! I (Fortunately, it was later reprinted.)

Nowadays, I chat with lots of deck creators, and I’ve found them to be a great resource for finding those rare decks and special extras. Many creators are collectors, also. They’re often the first to know when a re-issue or new release is forthcoming. Re-issues always drive down the price of out-of-print decks, so this is useful intel whether you buy or sell Tarot.

4. Connect with other collectors.

Other Tarot collectors make wonderful fishing buddies. Whether you meet them online or in person, connecting with Tarot community will yield a wealth of information. They can help you set up trades, find new leads, evaluate purchases, and identify your decks. The only danger here is that your wish list will grow and grow!

If you have decks in your collection that you no longer want, other collectors will be happy to take them off your hands. Bring a handful of old decks to Tarot classes and spiritual book swaps, and they may find a happy new home. A Tarot meetup I used to attend had a monthly “Show and Tell” that very often turned into “Show and Sell.”

For many years, the leading online Tarot swap community has been on the Aecletic Tarot forums (registration required for most features). They are generally fair and knowledgeable folks. You can post buy/sell requests or show off your collection! Remember, the only thing better than finding a much-longed-for deck is helping someone else to do the same.

Happy collecting!

https://www.groveandgrotto.com/blogs/articles/collecting-out-of-print-tarot-decks

[comprosedreviews-blog]

Secret Heir by MJ Prince (with Monica)

'I voluntarily reviewed an��Advance Reader Copy of this book'

I’m not the kind of person who likes giving bad reviews. I don’t like it because I know that when a writer makes a book, they are putting a lot of effort into writing it. I, being a writer myself, fully understand the huge time commitment and stress that comes with writing a novel.

However, sometimes it needs to be done. I’ve been sitting on this typed review for too long, watching as other people who received this ARC gave it fives and fours and I’m just like… is this because you were given an ARC? I had already given it a star rating and didn’t feel the need to bash the book, but I also don’t want a bunch of people to buy it without first knowing what they’re getting into.

I want to make it clear that this review is a reflection of the book and not the writer. Just by publishing a book, the writer has made it clear she’s a hard worker and I’m not trying to bash her.

The way I see it, books are held to two categorical standards: content and creation. I think this book failed in the former and showed promise, but ultimately failed, in the latter.

Content: Firstly, I don’t think this book was edited. If it was, then the editor did not do a great job. There were several places where words were confused for other words (almost as though autocorrect attacked the pages) and things were misspelled. If this happened a mere one or two times, it would be forgivable—people mess up and life goes on—but it happened almost every other page. A read through should have gotten rid of a lot of these mistakes, which is why I think it is SO SO SO important that we writers read our own work closely and not just once. We’ll miss stuff, it’s inevitable, but that’s what the professional edit is for.

Apart from that, the dialogue was formatted incorrectly. You’d start a paragraph with one character talking, go to the next paragraph and have the same character talking and start yet another paragraph with the same character talking. This issue was often a big deal because it left a lot of confusion about who was saying what. It looked like this:

“Kidding. But my first time was with a guy from my last band. We dated for a year back in sophomore year but long distance relationships are too hard to maintain.”

“So, there’s nothing going on between you and Raph?” Dani prods. “Not even a little kissing, groping, touching …”

Dani says both lines of dialogue, though you wouldn’t know it based on how it is written. I feel like an editor would have spotted and corrected this.

There were also a lot of redundancies. And, while redundancies are forgivable and bound to happen from time to time, the amount that they appeared and the scale that they appeared on, made me feel like my intelligence was being insulted. That frustrates me as a reader for two reasons: 1. I’m not stupid and 2. My time is being wasted. I shouldn’t have to read the same thing twelve different times. Here is an example of this:

“And I’m your grandfather .��

I don’t think I heard him right, because that can’t be true. I stare at him in disbelief.

“What?” I’ve stopped moving completely now. Shocked into stillness. Well, that’s not what I was expecting. At all. He doesn’t say anything, letting me digest his words.

“You’re not—you’re not my grandfather. He’s dead,”

Now really, all that was needed was the last line of this quote, and at MOST we could have also gotten that she had stopped moving because of shock—but we were told in six different ways that the character was surprised… which, when done to the extent it was done in the book, is beyond frustrating.

IN SUM: What gets me most about the content is that these aren’t things you can be subjective about. They are mistakes—mistakes that could have and should have been buffed out. Objectively, there were major content issues that can’t be separated from the story no matter how hard you try. If you don’t care about this sort of thing, then more power to you, but it genuinely made it hard for me to read.

Creation: Creatively, the plot showed promise. I agreed to the ARC because it was a book I genuinely seemed interested in. The world of Eden that the author created was fascinating and intriguing. I loved the little ties to real world mythology thrown into the mix (and though I hate to admit it) I loved the school setting with magic underlying the plot.

All of this created something that I would have considered an AMAZING story, but it fell short.

I simply cannot support the asshole love interest trope. I can’t do it. Not only was it impossible for me to empathize with Raph who appeared to have a predatory desire for the main character that started and ended with how hot she was, but also he was a complete jerk to her and that fact was overlooked a billion and a half times.

Honestly, I don’t like the idea of young readers reading this and thinking that this is a desirable man. Look for someone who will treat you right, not just for someone who has the perfect pair of abs.

AND I THOUGHT that the author was going to end up making Raph an antagonist. End up finally, for once, having the main character end up with someone good and healthy for them. But that just wasn’t the way of this.

The main character also came across as stupid. She denied how pretty she was throughout the whole book in spite of everyone telling her she’s hot and in spite of all the gawking she received by the hormonal teenagers in the book. She also had no idea why Raph paid attention to her, even though the story is in first person POV and she listed out repeatedly (thank you redundancy) all of these facts that spell out he wants to go out with you.

It was basically like this for pages:

He keeps wanting to hang out with me. But he doesn’t like me. I don’t see why these people keep saying he does. He told all the guys at school not to go near me. He isn’t being as much of a player. He touches me a lot more. He gets angry when other guys flirt with or looking at me, but I DON’T GET WHY EVERYONE IS SAYING THAT HE LIKES ME.

I wanted to shake some sense into her. I liked her no bullshit attitude, but the way she acted undermined that, making it feel more like a ploy to make her appear strong and less like a personality trait that gave her any dimension in character. Also, how could she like this guy? And don’t tell me she didn’t, because every chance she got she described how immaculate he looked and she continuously forgave him for everything.

I did like when she blew up his car though. So there’s that. Not that this is a healthy way to deal with your emotions… but he totally deserved it.

IN SUM: The plot line// world had potential but was substituted for little more than an unhealthy romance. The book idealizes the idea of women having to pretend they don’t know their own self-worth and abusive relationships and was genuinely super predictable.

Would I recommend it? No.

thanks for reading, 

Monica

[platinumjeon]

Ankle Biter | final - 07

pairing: taehyung x reader - single dad! au

warnings/genre: major fluff, major angst, smut eventually I’m sure because of my thirsty ass

summary: You swear that your job sucks, except for the guy who keeps coming in every morning to order himself a black coffee, and his kid a strawberry milk and chocolate muffin. When you and Taehyung have an awkward run-in at the cafe thanks to his kid, feelings start to emerge and so do the secrets.

words: 3k

playlist | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | epilogue

WOW HAHA literally 6 weeks later here is the LAST CHAPTER! An epilogue will be posted within the week. I have never been to court so sorry if there are inaccuracies. Enjoy! :)

The next morning, you awoke to the rolling of thunder through ominous, miserable clouds that opened up and poured an ocean from the sky, leaving everything in it’s wake drenched and useless.

That’s how you felt when you noticed Taehyung was not in the spot next to you, the sheets wrinkled and cold. He was standing with his shoulder pressed against the glass window overlooking the grey city, his coffee-colored eyes glazed over with stale tears that refused to escape their confines. Drenched and useless. 

Drenched in the heaviness the day will bring, drenched in uselessness because now, there isn’t anything anyone can do about the outcome. There was nothing more you could do to console him, and as you stood there watching his eyes sweep over the city when you were wondering if he was really looking at the city at all, or just consumed in his thoughts.

It was early - hours before the trial commenced but mere hours before an uncontrollable fate played out like a song on a violin, scratchy and out of tune. You walked into the kitchen, reaching to grab a mug from the cabinet when you heard Taehyung’s footsteps, and your eyes traveled from the coffee maker to his own face. Eyes deep set in rings of purple sleeplessness, corners of his mouth turned down in an imminent frown of discontentment, of worry; you cocked your head and looked to the floor, letting the empty cup dangle from your finger tips.

“How are yo-”

“I don’t want to talk about it,” Taehyung growled, and you swallowed before turning around and silently making yourself a cup of much needed coffee. You wondered what happened to the happy man that came bouncing into the coffee shop every morning with his carbon copy sat on his hip, mouths chattering excitedly as you tried not to smile at how much the two looked alike. In a way, you missed the simplicity of it all. There wasn’t anything that hindered the future at that point, but you yearned for Taehyung’s arms around you anyway, and you knew that even now, there’s no way you could trade the past for the present.

You didn’t offer Taehyung any words of encouragement or gestures of comfort over the next three hours of getting dressed and organized for the trial, and the two of you stayed parallel in silence until he walked over and stood in front of you, the tie around his neck painfully tangled and knotted.

“My hands are shaking,” he mumbled, and you obliged with a nod. Dropping your left heel to the floor, your hands went to his neck with nimble fingers gently untying his mistakes and gracefully knotting the tie before bending down to retrieve your shoes.

Taehyung gripped your hand the entire ride to the courthouse, but the inner strength you knew he hid away showed itself once he got inside. His hand left yours to shake the hands of his various lawyers, his boxy, yet professional smile coming out as the frown was tucked away under layers of paperwork.

“I have to go find Jimin. Can you stay with the others?” Taehyung asked, swooping in out of nowhere and bringing you back to reality. You nodded and he grasped your hand for a moment, then separated as he ventured off to find out if Jimin was here with Taeji yet.

Turning slightly, you groaned. The five of them stood in a loose circle, coffee in hand and chatting quietly amongst themselves. 

You liked them. But after what Taehyung had confessed to you, it wasn’t easy to rid of the resentment you felt towards Jungkook and Yoongi. You weren’t sure how to act around them, wondering if you should pretend you don’t know or show that you absolutely know, but you don’t have time to decide because Namjoon spots you and waves before walking up to you.

“Hey, Y/N.” Namjoon said, coming and wrapping you in a quick hug before grabbing your wrist to drag you towards the group. “How’s Taehyung holding up? After that, uh..nosebleed?” He asked, looking down. You smiled faintly.

“Fine. He hasn’t had any others. The veins and stuff in his nose are obviously damaged so I’ll make him go to the doctor to see what they can do.”

It wasn’t a straight answer and Namjoon noticed, looking down at you with scrunched eyebrows as you approached the group. He was quiet as the two of you settled in between Jin and Hoseok, with Jungkook and Yoongi staring at you with wary eyes.

You took a breath in, “Are you guys all ready to testify if you’re called?” 

They all nodded, Yoongi speaking up, “Look, it’s Minsoo’s parents.”

The six of you very obviously turned, eager to snub Mr. and Mrs. Choi and make sure they know they hatred you harbor for them but the two didn’t even bother looking your way. It was odd seeing Mrs. Choi looking the way she did - her hair done perfectly but purple bags hanging from her eyes, just like Taehyung’s.

You turned back to the group and lost yourself in the quiet chatter that echoed in your ears as you thought of Mrs. Choi’s tired face. Sympathy seeped into your mind momentarily but you quickly shut it out, refusing to give into the rat-faced woman who very obviously did not exactly like you, or Taehyung.

“I’d like to call Y/N Y/L/N to the stand.”

Taehyung’s lawyer stood, adjusting his jacket before opening the swinging door that led to the stand for you. Muttering a quiet thank you, you seat yourself on the hard wooden chair provided in front of the stand. 

Taehyung’s lawyer starts. “Ms. Y/N, you are aware that this is no normal family court case, right?” He begins, and you’re aware, but you’re also aware of your sweaty hands and shifting eyes. 

You only nod. The lawyer continues.

“What kind of father would you characterize Mr. Kim to be?” 

Swallowing, your mouth goes as if there’s cotton stuck in your throat, choking back the words you wanted to say. Your eyes drift to Taehyung, sitting attentively in his seat, his tie pin straight against his chest and his mouth turned into a small frown of concern. The sight of him relaxes you, and he notices, mouthing calm down, relax, breathe, over and over again until your hands stopped shaking.

It wasn’t that you were scared of the lawyer, or his questions, but if you answered morally incorrectly for any questions directed your way that would be it for Taehyung; and that would be the end of his rights as a parent. The image of Taeji with tears in his big brown eyes was burned into the side of your brain like a branding iron, and you sat up.

“Utterly caring. Attentive, and kind and always looking out for his son.” You say, and Taehyung lets a small smile emerge from the frown lines on his tired face.

The lawyer nods, turning on his heels. “You were a witness to Taeji’s allergic reaction a month ago. Can you describe the event in detail to the court?” 

You clear your throat. “The muffin must’ve been contaminated somehow with peanut butter - something Taeji is allergic to. I was sitting next to him as Taehyung went up to buy another muffin and that’s when I noticed Taeji being quiet and how he was breathing heavy. Taehyung ran over and grabbed Taeji;s EpiPen, then ran out to the ambulance after it was called.”

The lawyer hummed. “And what did he do with Taeji after he was released from the hospital?”

“Taehyung brought him home and took care of him until Taeji felt better,” you glanced at Taehyung, “Taeji only wanted his dad. He’d be upset if Taehyung wasn’t in the hospital room with him, and Taehyung even slept with Taeji when we all went home. They’re inseparable.”

The lawyer nodded and gave you a small smile. “No further questions.”

He went and sat back down at Taehyung, who had his eyes on you the entire time.

“I’d like to cross-examine, your honor.” 

The Choi’s lawyer stood up, adjusting his jacket and stepping forward. Taehyung’s eyes got wide, but they never left yours. It was as if he was holding your gaze as long as he could to distract you, to assure you. 

“Ms. Y/L/N. How are you today?” The Choi’s lawyer said, and you looked down at your hands. “Fine.”

“Good, I’d like to ask you a few questions as well,” He said, walking over to one side of the courtroom and back in front of you again. 

“Do you know of..Mr. Kim’s scandal that happened with his hotel chain about a year and a half ago, Ms. Y/L/N?”

You nod.

“As well as his reported frequent nighttime rendezvous’ with various women in the past?”

Scoffing, you reel backwards in your chair, “Excuse me?” 

“Objection, speculation,” Taehyung’s lawyer says, standing up quickly. The Choi’s lawyer waves it off, turning away.

“Fine. No further questions for now.”

The trial went on for another hour before the judge called a short recess, and you stood outside the courtroom for Taehyung. You spotted him as he was exiting, his hand running through his hair and his face wilted like a dying dandelion, plucked from the ground too early.

His hands stay to themselves, but you had expected him to wrap an arm around your waist and hug your body to his, but his fingers stay clasped around various black folders and scratch pads. A pang of guilt covers your chest like a heavy blanket, and you’re tempted to switch sides and lace your fingers with his.

Instead, Taehyung nods to you and you follow him to the edge of the lobby, where he sets his books down and pulls you into a hug that’s quick, but weighted with all the things running through his mind and you can’t help but wish you could erase all his worries.

“You did a good job. They’re probably going to call you again, because the Choi’s lawyer wasn’t expecting to be shut down so quick.” Taehyung said, separating from you and running a hand through his hair again. 

“Do you know when they’re going to bring Taeji out and ask him things?” You ask, shifting on your feet.

Taeji’s part in this was crucial - the deciding factor really, it all depended on him and his answers. He was going to answer honestly; Taeji was a child after all, and there was no way he would have been groomed for the questions they were going to ask. How was Taehyung supposed to tell Taeji to “pick daddy over grandma no matter what”?

“After this recess, I guess. It’s coming to an end so...this is it.” Taehyung said, his voice cracking at the end but also simultaneously cracking your heart at the same time with the way his face fell at the mention of his son’s questioning.

The courtroom was beginning to fill back up, and you spotted the boys all sitting in one row. Quickly, you hugged Taehyung once more before saying goodbye and walking towards the boys, where Hoseok smiled and made room for you on the end.

“We will be continuing Kim vs. Choi in a child custody hearing now.” The judge said, tapping her gavel against the wood of her desk, and a door on the right of the witness stand opened.

Out came Taeji, his wide eyes blowing even wider at the sight of the courtroom in front of him. There was a woman behind him, police uniform on but Taeji seemed content with her, and you wondered if the little boy had grilled her with questions about her cop car and hand cuffs.

You noticed Taehyung sat up in his seat the same time Mr. and Mrs. Choi relaxed in theirs. It was odd how they were acting - relaxed, quiet, unconcerned. They probably told Taeji to do what Taehyung had not - that grandma and grandpa are better, and in that moment you worried for what was going to happen for the first time. The confidence was waning, and for that, the guilt mutiplied.

“Daddy!” Taeji yelled, but before he could run to Taehyung, who was eagerly sitting up in his chair, the cop put a hand on the little boy’s shoulder and whispered something in his ear. Taeji climbed into the witness seat, excited to be up there when he spotted Taehyung.

“Daddy! Look, I’m in a big chair! Can we get one of these at home?” Taeji said, bouncing up and down and smacking his little hands on the table.

The courtroom murmurs with quiet laughter, even the judge. The Choi’s stay stone-faced, but it doesn’t deter Taehyung from chuckling and relaxing back into his seat.

“Yeah, bud. We sure can.”

Taehyung nodded at his lawyer, and he stood up in front of Taeji.

“Hi buddy! Did you get to play with Officer Lim’s hand cuffs?” The lawyer asked, and Taeji eagerly nodded. “I want to be a police man.”

The lawyer chuckled, and continued.

“Does your daddy let you play with your toys a lot, Taeji?” He asked.

The little boy nodded again, “Me and daddy play with my hot wheel cars. He makes funny car noises when we’re racing our cars.”

The lawyer smiled, “Really? What other things do you do with your dad?”

Taeji thought for a moment. “We made dinosaur cookies last week! Daddy takes me to play with my bestest friend Jikyoung, but he’s not my bestest friend in the whole world, you know.”

The courtroom laughs. “Oh, yeah? Who is your bestest friend in the whole world, then?”

Taeji sits up and grins, raising his arm and pointing at finger at Taehyung. “Daddy.”

You want to cry. The happiness that gleams in Taeji’s eyes reminds you of his innocence; undeserving of this fighting and game play while it’s clear that all the little boy wants to do is play with hot wheel cars with Taehyung.

Stealing a glance at Taehyung, he’s stone still but the side view you have of him gives away the fact that he’s sadly smiling, tears threatening to spill down his soft cheeks. It’s noticeable, at least to you, how hard he is trying not to cry in front of Taeji, who just bounces up and down in the red leather chair and grins at everyone watching him.

“That’s good Taeji. Does your daddy ever do anything that you don’t like?” The lawyer said, treading carefully. You watched as Taeji looked up at the ceiling, becoming bored and restless.

“No, but one time, he made us leave the park because I had to go to Grandma’s. I didn’t like that.” 

Your mouth dropped open, and so did everyone elses. You had to contain the urge to snort, because it was obvious what side of this Taeji was on, having been told to be or not. Hoseok leans into you, nudging you with his elbow and pointedly looking at Jimin who had his forehead on his knees and his face red with silent laughter.

The lawyer’s eyebrows shoot up and the warm smile he’d been projecting returned. “Well. Thank you for answering my questions, Taeji.”

Your eyes turn to look the Choi’s lawyer up and down as he makes his way around the chairs and into Taeji’s line of vision. Immediately, Taeji reels backwards and looks confused, staring back at Taehyung with his little eyebrows scrunched up.

“I don’t want to talk to you,” Taeji says, and there Jimin goes again, head in his hands and trying not to laugh.

“Oh - I’m sorry to hear that. I know it’s been a really long day, but one or two questions won’t hurt right...buddy?” The lawyer says, a sheepish smile emitting on his face. Taeji sighs, making the room murmur in quiet laughter.

The lawyer clears his throat. “So Taeji. Do you remember your mommy?” 

Immediately, Taehyung and his lawyer jump out of their seats, “Objection! T-that’s just bringing up past emotional trauma! He’s four!” Taehyung’s lawyer yelps.

The judge looks down at Taeji and the lawyer, giving the man a pointed look to which he raises his hands to in surrender.

“Nevermind that, Taeji, what do you and grandma do when you’re at her house?”

Taeji bounces in his seat, a smile not as bright as it once was appearing on his little face. “We went to the city last time! Grandpa bought me ice cream.”

The lawyer smiles. “That sounds like fun. Does daddy ever talk about grandma and grandpa?”

Taeji thinks for a moment, bringing his hand in back of his head and scratching before looking up at Taehyung, then the lawyer. “No. He never talks about them.”

The lawyer’s eyebrows raise. “Does grandma and grandpa ever talk about daddy?”

Taeji eagerly nods, but goes still and leans forward, his hand cupped around his mouth ready to spill his version of a secret. The lawyer looks surprised, but shuffles his papers around in his arms and leans forward to Taeji’s mouth. 

“Mr. Oh, what did he say?” The judge asks, leaning forward.

Mr. Oh, the Choi’s lawyer, looks very uncomfortable before he clears his throat and steps away from the stand. “He said that “they call my dad a bad daddy and a manwhore.”

The entire courtroom seems to bring in a huge gasp of air, and never breathe it out. It’s as if the whole place is holding it’s breath, and the oxygen has gone stale. There’s no way you can sneak a glance at Taehyung now - is he in tears? Has he finally broken at Taeji’s confession? 

Instead, you turn your head to look at the Choi’s. They look taken aback, not exactly guilty, but Mrs. Choi is staring daggers at their grandson from where she is seated on the other side of a less angry-looking Mr. Choi.

The judge looks wary as she taps her gavel on the stone, and you realize that this is it. They’ve called you, they’ve called Taeji. The two most important aspects in Taehyung’s life, the only two people that could call him out on his real mistakes and real problems, rather than pull fabricated things from the magazines. Taehyung is leaning forward in his seat as Taeji is taken back into the room he came out of, and leans backward before letting out a silent breath of hair.

“At this time..” The judge begins, and the courtroom goes back to holding it’s breath, the seeming lack of oxygen making your head pound in anxiety. This was it. After this moment, Taehyung’s entire life will be altered. To you, there’s no question. Taehyung isn’t the one unfit to be a parent, it’s the Choi’s. Taeji’s mother can only be replaced with his father.

“I am awarding full custody to Mr. Kim Taehyung.”

[danjaleyreblogs]

List-Enabling and Fixing Posepacks - Tips&Tricks

Some know-how I’ve accumulated as a storyteller who can’t work without the ingame poselist. This tutorial is intended to help users and creators alike to optimize posepacks.

! If you tweak another creator’s work, always respect their tou !

1. Making Thumbnails and Poses List-Compatible

See Phantomhive’s tutorial for a detailed explanation how to do this. The Posepack Creator can now be downloaded in the Poseplayer’s MTS thread.

For making thumbnails, I found it easiest to crop my screenshots to a square format and then resize them to 59x60 (60x60 works just as well btw, but don’t make them much larger, or they’ll look awful in poselist view.)

Always give your thumbnails unique names as described by Phantomhive. Otherwise they’ll overwrite each other, and other creators’ thumbnails, in poselist-view.

I use a photoshop action that automatically flattens and resizes an image to pose-thumbnail format. You can download it here, but I don’t know if it will work outside my somewhat eccentric photoshop setup. (It comes with a thumbnail to be installed as an effect in Adobe Photoshop Elements 4, if anyone is crazy enough to use that :)

Advanced Tipp: After you’ve saved your list-compatible posepack, open it in S3PE, and drag-and-drop (import) your CLIP-files from the working folder into it again. They’ll overwrite themselves, but now they display their codes in the ‘Name’ column. Doesn’t change any functionality, but may come in handy. BTW, as long as you don’t change the codes, you can always drag and drop updated CLIPs into a list-compatible posepack without having to make it list-compatible again.

2. Making Already Packaged Poses List-Compatible

Only do this for personal use, unless you know the creator is okay with it!

Open the package in S3PE. You should see the CLIP-resources with their posecodes. (If you don’t see posecodes, continue with Step 2a!) Select the CLIPs and export them “to file”. Save them to your working folder without renaming them. The posecode will appear towards the end of the filename.

Now you need preview pictures of the poses to make thumbnails from. Usually the creator provides some, but you can also view the pose ingame or in Blender (more on that later). From here continue as in Step 1.

2a. CLIPs without Codes

So the CLIPs are unnamed and you want to retrieve the original posecodes?

Go through the CLIPs one by one. Don’t click on the headlines (’Name’, ‘Tag’, Group’ etc.) during the process, so they won’t re-sort. Select the first CLIP. Then click the “Hex” button at the bottom of the S3PE window. A box with number-cereal will appear. Scroll through it slowly, until you see the posecode somewhere. Parts of it usually appear in the emptier column to the right, but may be badly chopped apart. Also note that it appears twice. (Can’t find the code, or aren’t sure it’s correct? See step 2b)

Write the reconstructed code down somewhere (leaving out the .blender file extension). Now close the Hex-window, right-click the CLIP you just selected and do “Export and rename”. Enter the posecode when you’re prompted to give the CLIP a ‘new’ name. You could actually just give any new codes to all the CLIPs, but then you’d have to check in Blender which is which.

Do this for all the CLIPs one by one, then continue as described in step 1.+2.

2b. Finding out Posecodes and Previewing in Blender

For this you’ll need Blender and Sims posing rigs set up according to instructions (or of course pets rigs if you’re viewing pet poses).

If you’re still struggling to find out that CLIP’s code: Do “Export and Rename” in S3PE and enter a temporary code. “a_1″ should be sufficient. You can also export it without renaming, but then you’ll have to remember which CLIP is which.

Open the Sim rig most likely to match your poses - normally an adult human one. Nothing bad will happen if you pick the wrong one, the rig will just look distorted.

In the sidebar (under “Scene” tab) scroll down to the S3PY Animation Tools. Click “Load CLIP” open the CLIP you want to examine.

Now the pose is displayed in 3D view, and the code appears in the sidebar (you may have to scroll down again to see it)

With the retrieved code, continue as described above. If the code still looks weird (I think this happens mostly with Milkshape-made poses), just go back to S3PE and export&rename with a new code. Now you know what the pose looks like, you might also be able to find the original code on the creator’s site.

3. Fixing Problems in Already Listed Posepacks

Some of the S3PE functions in this part may have come with extensions - I'm not quite sure which ones, if any, but I recommend checking out S3PE’s homepage .

For me, the paint-integration only works with the latest version of S3pe found here (other location than the one linked on the homepage). You can also get the functionality by setting Paint as an external text editor in S3pe. Under “Settings -> External Programs”, check “Use an external text editor” and browse for Paint’s .exe in your program files. Now when you right-click an IMAG resource, the option “Text Editor” should open it in Paint.

Reading and editing the XML: In the package right-click the XML, and select “Notepad”. You can edit descriptions there (very useful if you made a typo in a posepack you want to share) Don’t change anything of the technical stuff inside <brackets>. The XML also gives the creator’s name in most cases - don’t edit this unless you are the creator, but it can be useful for finding the download site again. In theory you could also add your own descriptions if the creator only put placeholders, but it’s quite an effort to tell which pose is which.

By the way: The XML can be viewed much more comfortably if you export it and open it with your web-browser, but in that mode it can’t be edited. Probably it’s also easier to edit with dedicated XML editors, but I’m not so much into programming.

Thumbnail too large or wrong format: This doesn’t affect functionality, but I find oversized thumbnails difficult to preview in S3PE and Poselist. Right-click the IMAG resource in the package. Select “Paint”. The thumbnail will open in Microsoft Paint.

Box-select as square an area as you can manage, then right-click and choose “crop”. Resize the images to something like thumbnail format (a few pixels don’t matter - I’m actually too lazy to uncheck “maintain proportions”). Take care though that no side becomes significantly smaller than 60px. Close Paint (Click “Save” and “Yes” on the two pop-ups”). Back in the package the thumbnail is now replaced with a resized version. Repeat with all other thumbnails and save the package.

Thumbnail not showing up at all: Sometimes IMAG resources get corrupted and S3PE shows an error message instead of the picture. In this case, prepare a substitute thumbnail in .png format (ideally using an image of the pose in question), and save it to your working-folder. Right-click the faulty IMAG, ‘Replace’ and select the new thumbnail. Alternatively, pretend to export the faulty IMAG ‘to file’, but in the last step, where Windows asks you to save, copy the suggested filename with Cntrl+C and cancel. Then paste the filename onto your substitute thumbnail and drag-and-drop it into the package. It should overwrite the faulty one.

Thumbnail incorrectly named: This usually comes up ingame, when thumbnails start overwriting each other. Fixing this requires some concentration, especially with large posepacks. It can be very helpful to first export the XML and have it open in a web-browser for reference.

First rename the IMAG’s instance: Double-click the IMAG resource. Tick “Use resource name”, type in a unique thumbnail name, click first FNV64 and then OK. The IMAG should now display its name in the “Name” column.

Now link to the new IMAG name. Open the XML in Notepad as described above. Find the place where this thumbnail’s previous name is displayed between <Icon Key> and </Icon Key>. Replace it with the new name. Save and exit Notepad, save the package and test it ingame. If you’ve linked the thumbnails incorrectly, they won’t show up. Note down which ones are missing and repeat the renaming process on those.

[the-record-newspaper]

The killing of Rhonda Hinson part 48

                                      Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Editor’s note: This is a continuation of a series about the Dec. 23, 1981, unsolved murder of Rhonda Hinson.

 By LARRY J. GRIFFIN

Special Investigative Reporter

For The Record

 Murder is rarely something that isn’t premeditated, at least to an extent.  Usually there is something building up to the moment the decision of [SIC] to kill is made and therefore the events of that night are extremely important.  It is also particularly important in this homicide because of the time and location of the crime making it an unlikely stranger homicide.—Criminal Profiler Pat Brown, in a Monday April 22, 2002 Profile of the Homicide of Rhonda Hinson.

 Early in 2002, Bobby and Judy Hinson contacted The Sexual Homicide Exchange, Inc. (SHE) seeking assistance in identifying the killer of their 19-year-old daughter. Specifically, SHE was asked to ascertain the person who pulled the trigger from a list of possible suspects and suggest any action that law enforcement could take 21-years after the killing of Rhonda Hinson—with little to know actual physical evidence to take to court.

Chief Investigative Criminal Profiler and Executive Officer of SHE, Pat Brown, was the Hinsons’ point-of-contact.  Born in New Jersey, Ms. Brown moved with her family to Virginia when she was but 9-years-of-age.  She attended the University of the State of New York and graduated with a liberal arts degree in 1981—the year that Rhonda was killed.  Subsequently, she achieved a Master’s degree in criminal justice from Boston University.  In 1982, Pat moved to Maryland and has resided in the state ever since.  

In 1996, Ms. Brown founded SHE that eventually evolved into the present-day Pat Brown Criminal Profiling Agency, located in Bowie, Maryland—about 20 miles from Washington, D.C., and 31 miles from Baltimore (www.patbrownprofiling.com). Herself a nationally known criminal profiler, television commentator, and author, Pat—through her agency—provides criminal profiling consultation, education, and training to law enforcement, media, attorneys, universities, corporations, and private individuals.  

And in 2002, Ms. Brown agreed to provide the Hinsons with a profile of the homicide of their daughter murdered during the first hour of December 23, 1981.

Initially, Sheriff John McDevitt was purportedly receptive to the prospect of a fresh perspective and ostensibly agreed to cooperate with SHE as they conducted their inquiry.  However, on Sunday Jan. 6, 2002, Ms. Brown complained to the Hinsons that his promise to forward a package of case information to her had not materialized.  In an email she wrote:

“We still have not received anything from the Sheriff [John McDevitt]. He was very cooperative in our first conversation and actually WANTED our analysis, so I am more than confused over what is going on.  He told you he sent us a package although he never called and asked for the address. He could have pulled it off the [web] site if he went there and clearly, it would have arrived (or if he had addressed it incorrectly) he would have gotten it back.  I called him as he requested and left the mailing address on his voice mail.  To date, nothing.  So, I have no idea what is going on in NC.”

But 15 days later—Monday Jan. 21, 2002—Pat sent another missive to Judy Hinson in which she announce that the promised material had finally arrived at her office:

“Hi Judy! Everything is fine.  I did get the package and I am finding it VERY interesting. I have sent a copy over to my partner, Dr. Sinclair, and we will be getting together to discuss the suspects and see if we are both in agreement and then will will [SIC] write up our recommendations.”  

Within the packet, Sheriff McDevitt included “good crime scene reports, police reports, and an excellent analysis of the bullet trajectory, and the movement of the vehicle.”  Immediately, Ms. Brown ruled out “an accidental shooting as a result of a shot fired from afar or from misbehaving teenagers shooting at taillights from the bridge.”

“This leaves us with a deliberate shooting,” Pat averred in a six-page summary that was completed on Earth Day—Monday April 22, 2002.  

Noting that SHE had been supplied with an “assorted suspects” list for whom there was no significant evidence implicating them, Ms. Brown’s focus fell upon four possibilities—two of which she eliminated almost instantaneously as having neither motive nor opportunity.  One was a “young group of partygoers, some who had stopped and discovered the car and the victim.”  This designation was an obvious reference to the young men who, according to their own statements and those of law enforcement, found Rhonda Hinson’s car and left the crime scene to eventually locate Officer Harry Feimster—Marc Micol, Tim Pons, Todd Garrou, Jerry Baker, and Brent Smith.  Clearly, neither had anything to do with the killing of the 19-year-old.

The second spurious suspect was a young man “who had asked Rhonda out and been refused.”   Initially, investigators considered him a person-of-interest. Judy Hinson identified this youth as Bryan Lowman.  

“Rhonda walked passed an accident involving a tractor/trailer while going toward interstate to catch her ride on the morning of December 22nd.  A crowd had gathered near the accident site; among those there was Bryan Lowman.  He had asked Rhonda out on a date.  For one thing, he was much younger than she, and I don’t even think that he had his driver’s license yet.  Well, Rhonda told him that she had a boyfriend whom she was dating—so that was the end of that.  She called me several times that day; one of those times—and I don’t remember which one—she told me about seeing Bryan.”  

Subsequent to the elimination of the aforementioned suspects, Ms. Brown focused upon the two whom she concluded were the most viable: Greg McDowell and his father, Charles. Of Rhonda’s former boyfriend, the SHE profiler wrote:

“Rhonda’s boyfriend was angry with her for attending a party that he had requested she not attend, and after talking with her after she left the party, it seems they had reached a point of breaking up.  Also the boyfriend had a history of obsessive jealousy of Rhonda and had recently written a letter in which he stated if she didn’t smile and be happy, he would shoot her with his shotgun (even if this is just a joke, it is a strange and concerning ideation).”

Attention then turned to the Rev. Charles McDowell, of whom Pat wrote:

“The father of this boyfriend is suspected of making sexual overtures at Rhonda and possible sexually abusing her.  He has since had an affair while married, divorced his wife, and subscribed to pornographic materials in spite of being a church pastor.”  

At this juncture, Ms. Brown turned attention to the events of the night and early morning of Rhonda’s death—what transpired right before and immediately after she was murdered.  In her summary, she opined that:

“Murder is rarely something that isn’t premeditated, at least to an extent. Usually there is something building up to the moment the decision of [SIC] to kill is made and therefore the events of that night are extremely important.  It is also particularly important in this homicide because of the time and location of the crime making it an unlikely stranger homicide. Someone had to know Rhonda was coming home at that particular time and on that particular route.  Because of the trajectory of the bullet and the position of the shooter, the killer knew exactly the place his opportunity to kill was the best and still protect his identity.”

It has long been debated by investigators and interested commentators as to whether or not the shooter intended to kill Rhonda Hinson.  In her summary, Profiler Brown proffered her insights:

“…Was he aiming at the car, the taillights, or at Rhonda?  Because the car was climbing a hill at the time Rhonda was shot, and the bullet went through the trunk, we can discern that the killer was most likely aiming at Rhonda’s head and he did not take into account the forward movement of the car.  Had he been aiming above the car, he most likely would have shot through the window and had he been aiming at the taillights, he most likely would have shot out a tire or missed altogether.  

“It also would seem that this killer was no sharpshooter, as then he would have taken into account the movement of the car and aimed slightly higher than the intended target. The lack of thought and skill indicate a young, inexperienced, enraged killer.”

Pat also weighed-in on the question as to how long Rhonda lived after she was shot.  She observed that, “the importance of the issue is in the specific behaviors of either Rhonda or the shooter prior, during, and after the shooting.” Her commentary is compelling:

“When Rhonda and the vehicle were viewed by investigators, she was not wearing her seatbelt and her body was outside of the car with the door ajar, the car was in neutral and running, and the window appeared to have been rolled down and up again. Should Rhonda still be alive at the time the car rolled back into the ditch, could she have removed her seat belt [SIC] and opened the car door?”  

Clearly, Ms. Brown surmised that when Rhonda Hinson was struck by the fatal projectile, she was instantly incapacitated and could not remove herself from her Datsun 210.  In her profile, she ventured to describe Rhonda’s final moments of life as she pulled away from the scene:

“…By the time she was hit by the bullet, it appears she would have been shifting into third gear.  This would explain why the car was not in gear when it was found.  The shift from first to second is very quick, but the shift from second to third requires more time and effort, as it must pass through neutral.  Most likely, Rhonda had her left hand on the wheel and was shifting with her right, when she was shot.  She only got halfway to third.  With the car now in neutral and her left hand dragging the wheel to the left, the car wheels would be turned in a direction that would cause the car to roll off into the ditch on the left side of the road and the car would still be running.

Pat Brown hypothesized that if Rhonda Hinson was incapacitated or dead by the time the car backed into the ditch, she could not have removed her seatbelt, opened the door, or rolled down the window. Moreover, she maintained that it was “highly unlikely” that the killer had any reason to roll down the window after Rhonda was dead; nor would he have reason to remove her from the car.  Even if the killer had opened the driver-side door, it is most unlikely that he would have removed her; rather she would have “pitched out” toward him.

Next the profiler applied her considerable expertise toward answering one of the most salient questions of the case:  For whom did Rhonda Hinson stop on the early morning of Dec. 23, 1981?

[jakehglover]

Manufactured Crisis — HPV, Hype and Horror

The HPV vaccine Gardasil was granted European license in February 2006,1 followed by U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval that same year in June.2 Gardasil was controversial in the U.S. from the beginning, with vaccine safety activists questioning the quality of the clinical trials used to fast track the vaccine to licensure.3 Merck, which manufactures and distributes the HPV vaccine Gardasil, has worked with a global health group called PATH4 to get the vaccine approved worldwide.

Lauded as a silver bullet against cervical cancer, the vaccine has since wrought havoc on the lives of young girls across the world.

“Manufactured Crisis — HPV, Hype and Horror,” a film by The Alliance for Natural Health, delves into the all too often ignored dark side of this unnecessary vaccine, interviewing families whose lives have been forever altered after their young daughters suffered life-threatening or lethal side effects following Gardasil vaccination. Says Barbara Loe Fisher, president and cofounder of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC):

“The tragic story of Gardasil vaccine is one that is playing out in real time in the homes of trusting parents, who thought they were doing the right thing to try to make their daughters ‘one less,’ and in the 21st century cyberspace forum of public opinion as well as on television.”

Gardasil, a Global Catastrophe Wrecking Lives Worldwide

Serious adverse reactions reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) in relation to Gardasil include but are not limited to:5

Anaphylaxis

Guillain-Barre Syndrome

Transverse myelitis (inflammation of the spinal cord)

Pancreatitis

Venous thromboembolic events (blood clots)

Autoimmune initiated motor neuron disease (a neurodegenerative disease that causes rapidly progressive muscle weakness)

Multiple sclerosis

Sudden death

According to the film, there have also been cases of 16-year-old girls developing ovarian dysfunction, meaning they’re going into menopause, which in turn means they will not be able to have children. Despite such serious effects, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and FDA allege the vast majority, or even all, of these tragic cases are unrelated to the vaccine, and that Gardasil is safe. In the film, Laurie Powell, a former pharmaceutical marketing executive says:

“I would come home feeling like I just wanted to take a shower, because I couldn’t believe the amount of spin and just utter deception that goes on behind the scenes, all funded by pharma. It’s not about patient well care, it’s about making money.”

Gardasil and Autoimmune Problems

Many of the more serious side effects of Gardasil vaccination are immune-based inflammatory neurodegenerative disorders, suggesting something is causing the immune system to overreact in a detrimental way, sometimes fatally.6,7 One of the leading theories revolves around the use of aluminum as an adjuvant.

Chris Exley, Ph.D., professor of bioinorganic chemistry and a leading expert on aluminum, notes that all the available evidence indicates aluminum is toxic to living systems. He, like many others, suspect it’s the aluminum adjuvant in vaccines that cause the majority of severe adverse reactions.

The filmmakers tested several samples of Cervarix (pulled from the U.S. market in 2016, ostensibly due to low demand8) and Gardasil at two separate laboratories to ascertain and compare their aluminum content.

Interestingly, Cervarix contained 2.6 times more aluminum than stated on the label. And, while the amount of aluminum found in Gardasil was within the range stated on the label, it was 2.5 times higher than the stated amount in Cervarix. In the end, both products were found to contain right around 1,000 parts per million of aluminum.

While government authorities claim this level of aluminum in vaccines is safe — based on estimated safe levels for ingestion — animal research reveals neurological and immune responses can be triggered. When injected, you bypass the filtering system of your gastrointestinal tract, allowing the aluminum access to vulnerable parts of your body far more easily than were you to ingest it.

The high immunogenicity of Gardasil was also addressed in my 2015 interview with Lucija Tomljenovic, Ph.D., a research scientist at the University of British Columbia. In it, she explains that by triggering an exaggerated inflammatory immune response, vaccine adjuvants end up affecting brain function.

In collaboration with a team led by Dr. Yehuda Shoenfeld, a world expert in autoimmune diseases who heads the Zabludowicz Autoimmunity Research Centre at the Sheba Hospital in Israel, Tomljenovic has demonstrated how the HPV vaccine can cause brain autoimmune disorders.

Cochrane Researcher Highlights Problems With Most Recent Safety Review

The filmmakers interview a number of vaccine and medical experts and researchers, including Dr. Peter Gøtzsche, who helped found the Cochrane Collaboration in 1993 and later launched the Nordic Cochrane Centre. Cochrane publishes hundreds of scientific reviews each year, looking at what works and what doesn’t.

Earlier this year, Cochrane published a surprisingly favorable review9 of the HPV vaccine, concluding “There is high-certainty evidence that HPV vaccines protect against cervical precancer in adolescent girls and women who are vaccinated between 15 and 26 years of age,” and, ”The risk of serious adverse events is similar in HPV and control vaccines.”

Two months later, Gøtzsche, along with Cochrane-affiliated researchers Lars Jørgensen and Tom Jefferson, published a scathing critique10 of the review,11 pointing out methodological flaws and conflicts of interest. Shortly thereafter, Gøtzsche was expelled from the Cochrane governing board.12,13

According to Gøtzsche, the review “missed nearly half of the eligible trials,” and “was influenced by reporting bias and biased trial designs.” In the film, he notes that the reviewers simply accepted the conclusions of the studies — all of which were done by industry — and didn’t look at how the studies were actually conducted.

Importantly, all but one of the 26 trials included in the HPV vaccine review used active comparators, meaning aluminum-containing vaccines, which can significantly skew results by hiding neurological and other adverse effects.

Making matters worse, the reviewers incorrectly described these active comparators as “placebos.” By definition, a placebo is an inert substance, and an aluminum-containing vaccine is anything but inert. Results may also have been skewed by the exclusion of women who had a history of immunological or nervous system disorders.

According to Gøtzsche and his team,14 “These exclusion criteria lowered the external validity of the trials and suggest that the vaccine manufacturers were worried about harms caused by the adjuvants.” They also noted the review “incompletely assessed serious and systemic adverse events” and ignored “HPV vaccine-related safety signals.”

Conflicts of Interest May Have Tainted Cochrane’s 2018 HPV Vaccine Review

What’s more, not only were all 26 studies funded by industry, three of the four reviewers also had conflicts of interest. As noted by Gøtzsche:15

“The review’s first author currently leads EMA’s ‘post-marketing surveillance of HPV vaccination effects in non-Nordic member states of the European Union,’ which is funded by Sanofi-Pasteur-MSD that was the co-manufacturer of Gardasil.”

One of the clearest conflicts of interest involves Dr. Lauri Markowitz, one of the authors of the HPV vaccine review protocol,16 meaning the individuals who designed and determined the scope of the review. Markowitz’s history with the HPV vaccine include:

Currently being the HPV team lead for the division of viral diseases at the CDC17,18

Being part of the U.S. Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices' (ACIP) HPV working group in 2006, which recommended Gardasil for routine vaccination of girls 11 to 12 years old

Being the designated correspondent on ACIP’s HPV vaccination recommendation issued in March 200719

Considering the U.S. government’s financial interest in the sale of HPV vaccine, this is about as clear a conflict of interest as you can get, yet Markowitz was allowed to be part of the team that designed the scope and parameters of the review.

Risk Benefit Analysis

In the film, Norma Erickson, president of Sanevax, Inc., an “international HPV vaccine information clearinghouse” in Troy, Montana, points out that while the cervical cancer rate in the U.S. is 12 per 100,000, by Merck’s own admission, Gardasil may cause 2,300 serious adverse events per 100,000.

Is it really reasonable to risk 2,300 serious adverse events — which includes sudden death — in the hopes of preventing 12 cases of cervical cancer out of 100,000?

Trial data from Merck also shows that Gardasil vaccinations may actually increase your risk of cervical cancer by 44.6 percent if you have been exposed to HPV strains 16 or 18 prior to vaccination.20 (The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has made this document inaccessible, but we’ve saved a copy of it for posterity.)

Professor Marcos Mazzuka, a pediatrician specializing in vaccine injuries in Madrid, Spain, agrees that the HPV vaccine is not safe, and is not worth the risk, as side effects are not limited to rash or fever but are severe and long-lasting.

“We’re talking about more than 300 girls who have died, around the world,” he says. “We’re talking about 46,000 girls who have very, very serious side effects.”

Gardasil Is by Far the Most Dangerous Vaccine on the Market

The film also features Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., whose research reveals Gardasil is one of the most reactive vaccines on the market, producing far more adverse reactions than other vaccines given at the same age. For example, in her sampling, Gardasil had a death toll of 35, compared to just seven from other vaccines given to young girls. According to Seneff:

“There’s no way that the risk benefit ratio [for Gardasil] comes out in favor of benefit, particularly since they have not demonstrated that it actually protects against cervical cancer.”

Similarly, in its 2009 Gardasil versus Menactra risk report,21 NVIC compared the number and severity of adverse events for the two vaccines reported to VAERS through November 30, 2008.

Results show that death and serious health problems such as stroke, blood clots, cardiac arrest, seizures, fainting, lupus and challenge/rechallenge cases (i.e., a similar adverse reaction occurs after another dose of vaccine is given) were reported three to 30 times more frequently after Gardasil vaccination than after meningococcal (Menactra) vaccination.

In the film, Robert Verkerk, scientific and executive director of the Alliance for Natural Health International, points out that data obtained via freedom of information requests from the British Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MRHA) also reveal that the number of adverse event reports following Gardasil vaccination is several times higher than for any other vaccine, and that this information was not being shared in any way.

“There were some 8,000 serious adverse events sitting in an MHRA database that were not being communicated to the medical professionals, and certainly not communicated to parents or children who were at the point of making a decision about vaccination,” Verkerk says.

Other Gardasil Facts

These seem like extraordinary risks just to prevent an infection that is cleared by more than 90 percent of people without a problem.22 As noted in the film, the HPV vaccine’s underlying technology was originally developed by National Institutes of Health (NIH) researchers, then sold to Merck23 and fast-tracked to licensure, despite the fact the vaccine failed to fulfill two of the criteria for fast-tracking.

In their paper, “Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccines as an Option for Preventing Cervical Malignancies How Effective and Safe?” Tomlijenovic, Spinosa and Shaw point out questionable surrogate markers for efficacy were used.24,25

It’s also important to realize that Gardasil was approved after being tested in fewer than 1,200 children under the age of 16,26 and that bioactive aluminum “controls” are being used in clinical HPV vaccine trials,27,28,29,30 thereby masking neurological symptoms.

Gardasil is also pushed by pediatricians who are shielded from legal accountability for vaccine injuries and deaths — just like vaccine manufacturers are shielded from civil liability in U.S. courts.31 Many doctors, as noted in the film, are completely unaware of the fact that Gardasil had generated nearly 30,000 adverse reaction reports to the U.S. government, including 140 deaths32 by December 13, 2013.

By October 14, 2018, there had been 54,123 adverse reaction reports made to the federal Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), including 331 deaths following administration of either the four-strain or nine-strain Gardasil vaccine.33

While that sounds like a lot, that’s just a fraction of the real numbers of Gardasil reactions, injuries and deaths that have actually occurred, as most doctors either do not report them to the government, or they instead make reports directly to Merck (which are not made public).34,35,36 In fact, less than 1 percent of adverse vaccine reactions are reported to VAERS.37

The facts surrounding the HPV vaccine are such that they raise many questions. Yet those who dare ask them are unfailingly attacked as “anti-vaxxers” or “vaccine deniers.”

It’s a sad fact that you cannot get an accurate picture of the situation from mainstream media, as the press is “held hostage,” as it were, by drug advertising dollars. They simply won’t report both sides of the story as this will result in the loss of millions of dollars in advertising.

It’s also difficult to get a clear view by looking at the medical literature, as there’s a tremendous amount of censorship going on there as well. In the film, Dr. Sin Hang Lee, a pathologist known for using cutting-edge DNA sequencing for molecular diagnoses and director of Milford Molecular Diagnostics, comments on this, saying most of his papers on the HPV vaccine and its potential adverse effects have been rejected by the medical journals. “It’s editorial censorship,” he says.

Shocking Revelation: Gardasil Safety Trials Were Not Designed to Detect Safety Problems

There are a few rare exceptions to the muzzling of the press though. One of them was a December 17, 2017, Slate article38 in which Frederik Joelving exposed egregious flaws in Gardasil’s testing.

The public was told that the three HPV vaccines marketed in the U.S. were tested on tens of thousands of individuals around the world, without any compelling evidence of serious side effects having emerged. While that reads well on paper, the shocking truth appears to be that these trials were never designed to detect and evaluate serious side effects in the first place.

According to Joelving, “An eight-month investigation by Slate found the major Gardasil trials were flawed from the outset … and that regulators allowed unreliable methods to be used to test the vaccine’s safety.”

Contrary to logic, serious adverse events were only recorded during a two-week period post-vaccination. Moreover, during this narrow window of time, trial investigators “used their personal judgment to decide whether or not to report any medical problem as an adverse event,” Joelving reports.

Importantly, and shockingly, most of the health problems that arose after vaccination were simply marked down as “medical history” rather than potential side effects — a tactic that basically ensured that most side effects would be overlooked. No record was made of symptom severity, duration or outcome.

Even with this gross reporting flaw, at least one Gardasil trial of the new nine-valent vaccine reported nearly 10 percent of subjects experienced “severe systemic adverse events” affecting multiple system organ classes, and over 3 percent suffered “severe vaccine-related adverse events.”39 Joelving writes:

“In an internal 2014 EMA report40 about Gardasil 9 obtained through a freedom-of-information request, senior experts called the company’s approach ‘unconventional and suboptimal’ and said it left some ‘uncertainty’ about the safety results.

EMA trial inspectors made similar observations in another report, noting that Merck’s procedure was ‘not an optimal method of collecting safety data, especially not systemic side effects that could appear long after the vaccinations were given.’”

HPV Vaccine Is Unnecessary

As noted by Hang Lee in the film, cervical cancer is one of the least concerning types of cancer “because it takes 15 to 30 years from the point of infection with HPV to [develop into] cancer, and if you catch the precancerous changes, you can always do something about it.”

In the U.S., cervical cancer declined more than 70 percent after pap screening became a routine part of women’s health care in the 1960s. As of 2018, about 13,240 new cases of cervical cancer will be diagnosed, and about 4,170 will die from it.41

The reason why the mortality rate is so low is because your immune system is usually strong enough to clear up this kind of infection on its own, and does so in more than 90 percent of all cases. According to the film, the vast majority of those who die have not had a Pap smear in the last five years.

According to Shannon Mulvihill, a registered nurse and executive director of Focus For Health in Warren, New Jersey, if you get regular pap smears, your chances of dying from cervical cancer is 0.00002 percent.

Is it really worth sickening thousands at the off-chance the vaccine might save a handful of people from dying from cervical cancer? The fact is, PAP smears prevent cervical cancer deaths far more effectively than the HPV vaccine ever will. In the film, Hang Lee provides the following data, showing just how minuscule the potential benefit of Gardasil really is:

HPV vaccines target 70 percent of HPV strains affecting human populations, though new versions target more strains

IF these vaccines were 100 percent effective, ONE death would be prevented for every 100,000 vaccinated women, or 1.3 deaths out of 100,000 for the newer vaccines covering a greater number of HPV strains

The average cost of Gardasil vaccination in the U.S. is about $700 per person, which means the cost to vaccinate 100,000 girls — in the hopes it will save a single person among them from dying from cervical cancer — is $70 million

That single death can easily be avoided by more regular screening, “So, why add another $70 million for no clear benefit?” Hang Lee says.

HPV — A Manufactured Crisis

As noted by Gretchen DuBeau, executive and legal director for Alliance for Natural Health, USA:

“This vaccine is not safe, it’s not financially rational and it’s not necessary. So, essentially, we’ve manufactured a crisis and created a solution that’s very lucrative for many but harms our children. We’ve looked at over 300 studies that show children between the ages of 3 and 11 have the HPV virus in their bodies.

Some studies show they have it at birth, others, you’re looking at children that are preschool age, but the point is that we have a lot of … unanswered questions about the possibility of this virus being transmitted from mother to child at birth.

This is critical because when one is vaccinated with this vaccine and that person already has the HPV virus, it increases their chances of developing cervical and other cancers.

So, we are putting our children not only at risk in all of the ways we’ve already seen with the adverse events … the autoimmune conditions … but we’re also looking at the possibility of increasing, down the road, the likelihood that many of these children could develop additional cancers because of this vaccine … This is a huge issue. We have to ask these questions; we have to study this more carefully.”

from HealthyLife via Jake Glover on Inoreader http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2018/12/08/hpv-vaccine.aspx

[paullassiterca]

Manufactured Crisis — HPV, Hype and Horror

The HPV vaccine Gardasil was granted European license in February 2006,1 followed by U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval that same year in June.2 Gardasil was controversial in the U.S. from the beginning, with vaccine safety activists questioning the quality of the clinical trials used to fast track the vaccine to licensure.3 Merck, which manufactures and distributes the HPV vaccine Gardasil, has worked with a global health group called PATH4 to get the vaccine approved worldwide.

Lauded as a silver bullet against cervical cancer, the vaccine has since wrought havoc on the lives of young girls across the world.

“Manufactured Crisis — HPV, Hype and Horror,” a film by The Alliance for Natural Health, delves into the all too often ignored dark side of this unnecessary vaccine, interviewing families whose lives have been forever altered after their young daughters suffered life-threatening or lethal side effects following Gardasil vaccination. Says Barbara Loe Fisher, president and cofounder of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC):

“The tragic story of Gardasil vaccine is one that is playing out in real time in the homes of trusting parents, who thought they were doing the right thing to try to make their daughters ‘one less,’ and in the 21st century cyberspace forum of public opinion as well as on television.”

Gardasil, a Global Catastrophe Wrecking Lives Worldwide

Serious adverse reactions reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) in relation to Gardasil include but are not limited to:5

Anaphylaxis

Guillain-Barre Syndrome

Transverse myelitis (inflammation of the spinal cord)

Pancreatitis

Venous thromboembolic events (blood clots)

Autoimmune initiated motor neuron disease (a neurodegenerative disease that causes rapidly progressive muscle weakness)

Multiple sclerosis

Sudden death

According to the film, there have also been cases of 16-year-old girls developing ovarian dysfunction, meaning they’re going into menopause, which in turn means they will not be able to have children. Despite such serious effects, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and FDA allege the vast majority, or even all, of these tragic cases are unrelated to the vaccine, and that Gardasil is safe. In the film, Laurie Powell, a former pharmaceutical marketing executive says:

“I would come home feeling like I just wanted to take a shower, because I couldn’t believe the amount of spin and just utter deception that goes on behind the scenes, all funded by pharma. It’s not about patient well care, it’s about making money.”

Gardasil and Autoimmune Problems

Many of the more serious side effects of Gardasil vaccination are immune-based inflammatory neurodegenerative disorders, suggesting something is causing the immune system to overreact in a detrimental way, sometimes fatally.6,7 One of the leading theories revolves around the use of aluminum as an adjuvant.

Chris Exley, Ph.D., professor of bioinorganic chemistry and a leading expert on aluminum, notes that all the available evidence indicates aluminum is toxic to living systems. He, like many others, suspect it’s the aluminum adjuvant in vaccines that cause the majority of severe adverse reactions.

The filmmakers tested several samples of Cervarix (pulled from the U.S. market in 2016, ostensibly due to low demand8) and Gardasil at two separate laboratories to ascertain and compare their aluminum content.

Interestingly, Cervarix contained 2.6 times more aluminum than stated on the label. And, while the amount of aluminum found in Gardasil was within the range stated on the label, it was 2.5 times higher than the stated amount in Cervarix. In the end, both products were found to contain right around 1,000 parts per million of aluminum.

While government authorities claim this level of aluminum in vaccines is safe — based on estimated safe levels for ingestion — animal research reveals neurological and immune responses can be triggered. When injected, you bypass the filtering system of your gastrointestinal tract, allowing the aluminum access to vulnerable parts of your body far more easily than were you to ingest it.

The high immunogenicity of Gardasil was also addressed in my 2015 interview with Lucija Tomljenovic, Ph.D., a research scientist at the University of British Columbia. In it, she explains that by triggering an exaggerated inflammatory immune response, vaccine adjuvants end up affecting brain function.

In collaboration with a team led by Dr. Yehuda Shoenfeld, a world expert in autoimmune diseases who heads the Zabludowicz Autoimmunity Research Centre at the Sheba Hospital in Israel, Tomljenovic has demonstrated how the HPV vaccine can cause brain autoimmune disorders.

Cochrane Researcher Highlights Problems With Most Recent Safety Review

The filmmakers interview a number of vaccine and medical experts and researchers, including Dr. Peter Gøtzsche, who helped found the Cochrane Collaboration in 1993 and later launched the Nordic Cochrane Centre. Cochrane publishes hundreds of scientific reviews each year, looking at what works and what doesn’t.

Earlier this year, Cochrane published a surprisingly favorable review9 of the HPV vaccine, concluding “There is high-certainty evidence that HPV vaccines protect against cervical precancer in adolescent girls and women who are vaccinated between 15 and 26 years of age,” and, ”The risk of serious adverse events is similar in HPV and control vaccines.”

Two months later, Gøtzsche, along with Cochrane-affiliated researchers Lars Jørgensen and Tom Jefferson, published a scathing critique10 of the review,11 pointing out methodological flaws and conflicts of interest. Shortly thereafter, Gøtzsche was expelled from the Cochrane governing board.12,13

According to Gøtzsche, the review “missed nearly half of the eligible trials,” and “was influenced by reporting bias and biased trial designs.” In the film, he notes that the reviewers simply accepted the conclusions of the studies — all of which were done by industry — and didn’t look at how the studies were actually conducted.

Importantly, all but one of the 26 trials included in the HPV vaccine review used active comparators, meaning aluminum-containing vaccines, which can significantly skew results by hiding neurological and other adverse effects.

Making matters worse, the reviewers incorrectly described these active comparators as “placebos.” By definition, a placebo is an inert substance, and an aluminum-containing vaccine is anything but inert. Results may also have been skewed by the exclusion of women who had a history of immunological or nervous system disorders.

According to Gøtzsche and his team,14 “These exclusion criteria lowered the external validity of the trials and suggest that the vaccine manufacturers were worried about harms caused by the adjuvants.” They also noted the review “incompletely assessed serious and systemic adverse events” and ignored “HPV vaccine-related safety signals.”

Conflicts of Interest May Have Tainted Cochrane’s 2018 HPV Vaccine Review

What’s more, not only were all 26 studies funded by industry, three of the four reviewers also had conflicts of interest. As noted by Gøtzsche:15

“The review’s first author currently leads EMA’s ‘post-marketing surveillance of HPV vaccination effects in non-Nordic member states of the European Union,’ which is funded by Sanofi-Pasteur-MSD that was the co-manufacturer of Gardasil.”

One of the clearest conflicts of interest involves Dr. Lauri Markowitz, one of the authors of the HPV vaccine review protocol,16 meaning the individuals who designed and determined the scope of the review. Markowitz’s history with the HPV vaccine include:

Currently being the HPV team lead for the division of viral diseases at the CDC17,18

Being part of the U.S. Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ (ACIP) HPV working group in 2006, which recommended Gardasil for routine vaccination of girls 11 to 12 years old

Being the designated correspondent on ACIP’s HPV vaccination recommendation issued in March 200719

Considering the U.S. government’s financial interest in the sale of HPV vaccine, this is about as clear a conflict of interest as you can get, yet Markowitz was allowed to be part of the team that designed the scope and parameters of the review.

Risk Benefit Analysis

In the film, Norma Erickson, president of Sanevax, Inc., an “international HPV vaccine information clearinghouse” in Troy, Montana, points out that while the cervical cancer rate in the U.S. is 12 per 100,000, by Merck’s own admission, Gardasil may cause 2,300 serious adverse events per 100,000.

Is it really reasonable to risk 2,300 serious adverse events — which includes sudden death — in the hopes of preventing 12 cases of cervical cancer out of 100,000?

Trial data from Merck also shows that Gardasil vaccinations may actually increase your risk of cervical cancer by 44.6 percent if you have been exposed to HPV strains 16 or 18 prior to vaccination.20 (The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has made this document inaccessible, but we’ve saved a copy of it for posterity.)

Professor Marcos Mazzuka, a pediatrician specializing in vaccine injuries in Madrid, Spain, agrees that the HPV vaccine is not safe, and is not worth the risk, as side effects are not limited to rash or fever but are severe and long-lasting.

“We’re talking about more than 300 girls who have died, around the world,” he says. “We’re talking about 46,000 girls who have very, very serious side effects.”

Gardasil Is by Far the Most Dangerous Vaccine on the Market

The film also features Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., whose research reveals Gardasil is one of the most reactive vaccines on the market, producing far more adverse reactions than other vaccines given at the same age. For example, in her sampling, Gardasil had a death toll of 35, compared to just seven from other vaccines given to young girls. According to Seneff:

“There’s no way that the risk benefit ratio [for Gardasil] comes out in favor of benefit, particularly since they have not demonstrated that it actually protects against cervical cancer.”

Similarly, in its 2009 Gardasil versus Menactra risk report,21 NVIC compared the number and severity of adverse events for the two vaccines reported to VAERS through November 30, 2008.

Results show that death and serious health problems such as stroke, blood clots, cardiac arrest, seizures, fainting, lupus and challenge/rechallenge cases (i.e., a similar adverse reaction occurs after another dose of vaccine is given) were reported three to 30 times more frequently after Gardasil vaccination than after meningococcal (Menactra) vaccination.

In the film, Robert Verkerk, scientific and executive director of the Alliance for Natural Health International, points out that data obtained via freedom of information requests from the British Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MRHA) also reveal that the number of adverse event reports following Gardasil vaccination is several times higher than for any other vaccine, and that this information was not being shared in any way.

“There were some 8,000 serious adverse events sitting in an MHRA database that were not being communicated to the medical professionals, and certainly not communicated to parents or children who were at the point of making a decision about vaccination,” Verkerk says.

Other Gardasil Facts

These seem like extraordinary risks just to prevent an infection that is cleared by more than 90 percent of people without a problem.22 As noted in the film, the HPV vaccine’s underlying technology was originally developed by National Institutes of Health (NIH) researchers, then sold to Merck23 and fast-tracked to licensure, despite the fact the vaccine failed to fulfill two of the criteria for fast-tracking.

In their paper, “Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccines as an Option for Preventing Cervical Malignancies How Effective and Safe?” Tomlijenovic, Spinosa and Shaw point out questionable surrogate markers for efficacy were used.24,25

It’s also important to realize that Gardasil was approved after being tested in fewer than 1,200 children under the age of 16,26 and that bioactive aluminum “controls” are being used in clinical HPV vaccine trials,27,28,29,30 thereby masking neurological symptoms.

Gardasil is also pushed by pediatricians who are shielded from legal accountability for vaccine injuries and deaths — just like vaccine manufacturers are shielded from civil liability in U.S. courts.31 Many doctors, as noted in the film, are completely unaware of the fact that Gardasil had generated nearly 30,000 adverse reaction reports to the U.S. government, including 140 deaths32 by December 13, 2013.

By October 14, 2018, there had been 54,123 adverse reaction reports made to the federal Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), including 331 deaths following administration of either the four-strain or nine-strain Gardasil vaccine.33

While that sounds like a lot, that’s just a fraction of the real numbers of Gardasil reactions, injuries and deaths that have actually occurred, as most doctors either do not report them to the government, or they instead make reports directly to Merck (which are not made public).34,35,36 In fact, less than 1 percent of adverse vaccine reactions are reported to VAERS.37

The facts surrounding the HPV vaccine are such that they raise many questions. Yet those who dare ask them are unfailingly attacked as “anti-vaxxers” or “vaccine deniers.”

It’s a sad fact that you cannot get an accurate picture of the situation from mainstream media, as the press is “held hostage,” as it were, by drug advertising dollars. They simply won’t report both sides of the story as this will result in the loss of millions of dollars in advertising.

It’s also difficult to get a clear view by looking at the medical literature, as there’s a tremendous amount of censorship going on there as well. In the film, Dr. Sin Hang Lee, a pathologist known for using cutting-edge DNA sequencing for molecular diagnoses and director of Milford Molecular Diagnostics, comments on this, saying most of his papers on the HPV vaccine and its potential adverse effects have been rejected by the medical journals. “It’s editorial censorship,” he says.

Shocking Revelation: Gardasil Safety Trials Were Not Designed to Detect Safety Problems

There are a few rare exceptions to the muzzling of the press though. One of them was a December 17, 2017, Slate article38 in which Frederik Joelving exposed egregious flaws in Gardasil’s testing.

The public was told that the three HPV vaccines marketed in the U.S. were tested on tens of thousands of individuals around the world, without any compelling evidence of serious side effects having emerged. While that reads well on paper, the shocking truth appears to be that these trials were never designed to detect and evaluate serious side effects in the first place.

According to Joelving, “An eight-month investigation by Slate found the major Gardasil trials were flawed from the outset … and that regulators allowed unreliable methods to be used to test the vaccine’s safety.”

Contrary to logic, serious adverse events were only recorded during a two-week period post-vaccination. Moreover, during this narrow window of time, trial investigators “used their personal judgment to decide whether or not to report any medical problem as an adverse event,” Joelving reports.

Importantly, and shockingly, most of the health problems that arose after vaccination were simply marked down as “medical history” rather than potential side effects — a tactic that basically ensured that most side effects would be overlooked. No record was made of symptom severity, duration or outcome.

Even with this gross reporting flaw, at least one Gardasil trial of the new nine-valent vaccine reported nearly 10 percent of subjects experienced “severe systemic adverse events” affecting multiple system organ classes, and over 3 percent suffered “severe vaccine-related adverse events.”39 Joelving writes:

“In an internal 2014 EMA report40 about Gardasil 9 obtained through a freedom-of-information request, senior experts called the company’s approach ‘unconventional and suboptimal’ and said it left some ‘uncertainty’ about the safety results.

EMA trial inspectors made similar observations in another report, noting that Merck’s procedure was ‘not an optimal method of collecting safety data, especially not systemic side effects that could appear long after the vaccinations were given.’”

HPV Vaccine Is Unnecessary

As noted by Hang Lee in the film, cervical cancer is one of the least concerning types of cancer “because it takes 15 to 30 years from the point of infection with HPV to [develop into] cancer, and if you catch the precancerous changes, you can always do something about it.”

In the U.S., cervical cancer declined more than 70 percent after pap screening became a routine part of women’s health care in the 1960s. As of 2018, about 13,240 new cases of cervical cancer will be diagnosed, and about 4,170 will die from it.41

The reason why the mortality rate is so low is because your immune system is usually strong enough to clear up this kind of infection on its own, and does so in more than 90 percent of all cases. According to the film, the vast majority of those who die have not had a Pap smear in the last five years.

According to Shannon Mulvihill, a registered nurse and executive director of Focus For Health in Warren, New Jersey, if you get regular pap smears, your chances of dying from cervical cancer is 0.00002 percent.

Is it really worth sickening thousands at the off-chance the vaccine might save a handful of people from dying from cervical cancer? The fact is, PAP smears prevent cervical cancer deaths far more effectively than the HPV vaccine ever will. In the film, Hang Lee provides the following data, showing just how minuscule the potential benefit of Gardasil really is:

HPV vaccines target 70 percent of HPV strains affecting human populations, though new versions target more strains

IF these vaccines were 100 percent effective, ONE death would be prevented for every 100,000 vaccinated women, or 1.3 deaths out of 100,000 for the newer vaccines covering a greater number of HPV strains

The average cost of Gardasil vaccination in the U.S. is about $700 per person, which means the cost to vaccinate 100,000 girls — in the hopes it will save a single person among them from dying from cervical cancer — is $70 million

That single death can easily be avoided by more regular screening, “So, why add another $70 million for no clear benefit?” Hang Lee says.

HPV — A Manufactured Crisis

As noted by Gretchen DuBeau, executive and legal director for Alliance for Natural Health, USA:

“This vaccine is not safe, it’s not financially rational and it’s not necessary. So, essentially, we’ve manufactured a crisis and created a solution that’s very lucrative for many but harms our children. We’ve looked at over 300 studies that show children between the ages of 3 and 11 have the HPV virus in their bodies.

Some studies show they have it at birth, others, you’re looking at children that are preschool age, but the point is that we have a lot of … unanswered questions about the possibility of this virus being transmitted from mother to child at birth.

This is critical because when one is vaccinated with this vaccine and that person already has the HPV virus, it increases their chances of developing cervical and other cancers.

So, we are putting our children not only at risk in all of the ways we’ve already seen with the adverse events … the autoimmune conditions … but we’re also looking at the possibility of increasing, down the road, the likelihood that many of these children could develop additional cancers because of this vaccine … This is a huge issue. We have to ask these questions; we have to study this more carefully.”

from Articles http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2018/12/08/hpv-vaccine.aspx source https://niapurenaturecom.tumblr.com/post/180912962946

[sualkmedeiors]

How to Optimize On-Page SEO to Maximize Your ROI

SEO, or search engine optimization, seems to be an “unpredictable” or “magic” industry to some marketers. However, its elements are straightforward and built on solid ground. Once you know what kind of keywords your customers are looking for, you can start to play with it.

In this blog, you’ll learn about the most important on-page SEO elements and how to apply them to your marketing strategy.

Copy

The content of the page, therefore, its copy, is the most critical part of SEO. Keep that in mind before you start working on more technical stuff. There is no exact formula for how many keywords and in what density to put them into the text. You’ll likely find guides online that tell you otherwise, but in most cases, these formulas don’t make any sense. I recommend you ignore any rules you read and write naturally for your users.

That may seem a bit counterintuitive, because I am telling you to optimize without any specific optimization tricks. But consider the following example to illustrate what I mean: imagine you are selling black and brown kitchen tables, and when you are writing about them, you probably mention the colors a few times. But what if your customers are looking for dark tables instead? Consider switching out some of your instances of black with the word dark to reach customers on their terms.

Title Tag 

The title tag consisting of keywords is one of the elementary ranking factors. The title itself tells users and search engines what the page is about. Even though users don’t see this text directly on the page because it is placed in the code, search engines can read it, and they will show it in search engine results pages (SERPs).

Note: The title tag is not only used by search engines, but also by software that reads to people who have accessibility requirements or otherwise require reading assistance.

Title Tag Best Practices:

Each page should have exactly one title tag set.

The title should be written relevantly to the page.

It should include targeting keywords. However, don’t try to put too many keywords into the title, sometimes called keyword stuffing. One targeting keyword along with the descriptive text for one page is enough.

The maximum length of the title tag is 600px which is approximately 70 to 80 characters. But I don’t recommend focusing on characters, because in some cases, an even longer title might fit into the SERPs. To see if the title fits all search engines, you can use a SERP preview tool.

The title tag shouldn’t be too short, either. If it is only, let’s say, 200px long, you are probably not using its potential fully.

Title Tag Examples:

Let’s take a look at examples of both badly and well-written titles. Let’s say I am looking for coffee shops in Prague. The following titles could be written much better.

Coffee shops Prague —> Title is too short and doesn’t say anything interesting. I don’t even want to click on it.

Places in Prague that serve you the best coffee —> I might want to click on it, but the keyword “coffee shops” is missing, so it might not even show up in the SERPs.

The most beautiful coffee shops in Prague with the best coffee and from the best professionals —> I would really like to click on this one, because there is a relevant keyword, and it is also appealing. But it’s also too long, and I probably wouldn’t see the whole title in the search results.

Here’s what an ideal title looks like:

The example above is neither too short or too long. It includes the keyword that I am looking for, and it says that I will discover the 10 best places. I really want to click on this one.

Meta Description

The meta description has a lot in common with the title tag or meta title that we were just talking about. Here are the differences. First, the meta description is not one of the ranking factors. However, it might influence your click-through rate from SERPs, which will affect the ranking. That’s why I recommend not to neglect the meta description copy.

Another difference from the title tag is that the description is much longer. In December 2017, Google increased the length of the meta description for desktop from 920px to 1,750px, or 320 characters. Now it is almost twice as long, so you have much more space for getting the attention of your potential customers. Sometimes, additional characters can fit into the SERPs which is why I recommend using pixels rather than the number of characters.

Meta Description Best Practices:

With a few exceptions, the best practices of the meta description are basically the same as for the title tag:

Each page should set exactly one meta description.

The meta description should be written relevantly to the page.

It should include targeting keywords.

The maximum length of the meta description is 1,750 px or 320 characters for desktop.

The maximum length of the meta description is 1350 px or 230 characters for mobile. It’s important to know how much of your traffic comes from mobile to properly optimize for where your customers are engaging with your content the most.

The meta description shouldn’t be too short, either. Use its full potential.

You are writing it for your potential customers and not for you. Instead of bragging about yourself, write what is in it for the customers.

Use a call to action in the copy like “Discover, try, experience, see…”

Meta Description Examples:

What does an ideal meta description look like? It’s important to know that again, there is no formula for meta description.

I will return to our example above. Even though it has a pretty sweet title, let’s take a closer look at the meta description:

This description focuses more on describing Prague than the coffee shops that I am looking for. It is irrelevant and too long to fit the SERPs. This occurs because the page doesn’t actually have a meta description set, so Google will pull text from the post to fill in.

I personally like this one below much more.

The length is ideal, it is well-written and creative. It says what’s in it for me and it includes the right keywords for me as the potential customer.

URLs

Setting up URLs for your whole website might be a very complex activity. If you are new to SEO, I recommend asking professional SEO specialists, along with UX specialists, to help you with that. If you have a more complex website, once you set up your URL structure, it becomes challenging to change it afterward, and it can also hurt the rankings.

But in general, there are a few rules that you should follow when creating a new URL:

The URL should be short.

It shouldn’t consist of excessive numbers or symbols.

It should include targeting keywords.

For example, when you create new content on the web regularly, like articles on a blog, you can influence a URL right away.

It is common practice that a URL is set up by default according to the name of the article. If this is your case, you probably end up with an unnecessarily long URL, which isn’t shown fully in the SERPs and might not even include the relevant keywords.

Let’s see some examples below. The URL in the first preview is good enough, and it is shown in the SERPs entirely. The URL in the second preview is unnecessarily long, and the important keywords are at the end.

Headings

The heading structure on the web is represented by tags <h1>—<h6>. It is necessary to have this structure because it helps both search engines and users understand the context of the web.

The most important of these tags is heading h1, which I recommend using for each of your pages. Together with the title, it tells the search engine what a page is about, and is also an accessibility tool for people who are blind or require reading assistance.

Even if you are not using subheadings in the text, you should at least place the <h1> tag there.

H1 Best Practices:

There should be exactly one h1 on each page.

The h1 should be unique.

It should include important keywords.

The h1 should describe what the page is about.

There is no pixel or characters limit but try to keep it short.

Examples of Heading Structure:

The usage of subheadings on level <h2> – <h6> depends on the context.

Incorrectly tagged:

<h1> Main heading of an article </h1>

<h2> Subheading on second level </h2>

<h2> Subheading on second level </h2>

<h1> Main heading of an article </h1>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

Correctly tagged:

<h1> Main heading of an article </h1>

<h2> Subheading on second level </h2>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

<h2> Subheading on second level </h2>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

Internal Links 

Linking internally within the page means that you are making all of the pages accessible for both search engines and users. Internal links also pass the value and authority from one page to another. It’s called link equity (or “link juice”). To simplify, it means that the more internal links lead to the specific site, the more authority it gets for the search engines and the more accessible it is for the users.

Internal Linking Best Practices:

Make sure that all of your pages relate to each other.  This means that there is at least one link referring to it.

Don’t overlink. The more pages you are referring to, the less authority they will get. Consider which pages are really important and link only to them.

It is good practice to write your targeting keywords within the anchor text when referring to the specific page. It will help the search engine better understand what the page is about. But don’t over-optimize it. Write naturally.

Conclusion

These essential on-page SEO elements are something that you should start with when optimizing your site. In general, these rules are very simple. The most important thing to keep in mind is that you are writing for your customers and potential customers.

By following a few simple rules, you will be on your way to optimizing your SEO in no time.

Are there any important tips for on-page SEO optimization that I left out? Tell me about your best practices in the comments.

The post How to Optimize On-Page SEO to Maximize Your ROI appeared first on Marketo Marketing Blog - Best Practices and Thought Leadership.

from https://blog.marketo.com/2018/05/optimize-on-page-seo-maximize-roi.html

[maxslogic25]

How to Optimize On-Page SEO to Maximize Your ROI

SEO, or search engine optimization, seems to be an “unpredictable” or “magic” industry to some marketers. However, its elements are straightforward and built on solid ground. Once you know what kind of keywords your customers are looking for, you can start to play with it.

In this blog, you’ll learn about the most important on-page SEO elements and how to apply them to your marketing strategy.

Copy

The content of the page, therefore, its copy, is the most critical part of SEO. Keep that in mind before you start working on more technical stuff. There is no exact formula for how many keywords and in what density to put them into the text. You’ll likely find guides online that tell you otherwise, but in most cases, these formulas don’t make any sense. I recommend you ignore any rules you read and write naturally for your users.

That may seem a bit counterintuitive, because I am telling you to optimize without any specific optimization tricks. But consider the following example to illustrate what I mean: imagine you are selling black and brown kitchen tables, and when you are writing about them, you probably mention the colors a few times. But what if your customers are looking for dark tables instead? Consider switching out some of your instances of black with the word dark to reach customers on their terms.

Title Tag 

The title tag consisting of keywords is one of the elementary ranking factors. The title itself tells users and search engines what the page is about. Even though users don’t see this text directly on the page because it is placed in the code, search engines can read it, and they will show it in search engine results pages (SERPs).

Note: The title tag is not only used by search engines, but also by software that reads to people who have accessibility requirements or otherwise require reading assistance.

Title Tag Best Practices:

Each page should have exactly one title tag set.

The title should be written relevantly to the page.

It should include targeting keywords. However, don’t try to put too many keywords into the title, sometimes called keyword stuffing. One targeting keyword along with the descriptive text for one page is enough.

The maximum length of the title tag is 600px which is approximately 70 to 80 characters. But I don’t recommend focusing on characters, because in some cases, an even longer title might fit into the SERPs. To see if the title fits all search engines, you can use a SERP preview tool.

The title tag shouldn’t be too short, either. If it is only, let’s say, 200px long, you are probably not using its potential fully.

Title Tag Examples:

Let’s take a look at examples of both badly and well-written titles. Let’s say I am looking for coffee shops in Prague. The following titles could be written much better.

Coffee shops Prague —> Title is too short and doesn’t say anything interesting. I don’t even want to click on it.

Places in Prague that serve you the best coffee —> I might want to click on it, but the keyword “coffee shops” is missing, so it might not even show up in the SERPs.

The most beautiful coffee shops in Prague with the best coffee and from the best professionals —> I would really like to click on this one, because there is a relevant keyword, and it is also appealing. But it’s also too long, and I probably wouldn’t see the whole title in the search results.

Here’s what an ideal title looks like:

The example above is neither too short or too long. It includes the keyword that I am looking for, and it says that I will discover the 10 best places. I really want to click on this one.

Meta Description

The meta description has a lot in common with the title tag or meta title that we were just talking about. Here are the differences. First, the meta description is not one of the ranking factors. However, it might influence your click-through rate from SERPs, which will affect the ranking. That’s why I recommend not to neglect the meta description copy.

Another difference from the title tag is that the description is much longer. In December 2017, Google increased the length of the meta description for desktop from 920px to 1,750px, or 320 characters. Now it is almost twice as long, so you have much more space for getting the attention of your potential customers. Sometimes, additional characters can fit into the SERPs which is why I recommend using pixels rather than the number of characters.

Meta Description Best Practices:

With a few exceptions, the best practices of the meta description are basically the same as for the title tag:

Each page should set exactly one meta description.

The meta description should be written relevantly to the page.

It should include targeting keywords.

The maximum length of the meta description is 1,750 px or 320 characters for desktop.

The maximum length of the meta description is 1350 px or 230 characters for mobile. It’s important to know how much of your traffic comes from mobile to properly optimize for where your customers are engaging with your content the most.

The meta description shouldn’t be too short, either. Use its full potential.

You are writing it for your potential customers and not for you. Instead of bragging about yourself, write what is in it for the customers.

Use a call to action in the copy like “Discover, try, experience, see…”

Meta Description Examples:

What does an ideal meta description look like? It’s important to know that again, there is no formula for meta description.

I will return to our example above. Even though it has a pretty sweet title, let’s take a closer look at the meta description:

This description focuses more on describing Prague than the coffee shops that I am looking for. It is irrelevant and too long to fit the SERPs. This occurs because the page doesn’t actually have a meta description set, so Google will pull text from the post to fill in.

I personally like this one below much more.

The length is ideal, it is well-written and creative. It says what’s in it for me and it includes the right keywords for me as the potential customer.

URLs

Setting up URLs for your whole website might be a very complex activity. If you are new to SEO, I recommend asking professional SEO specialists, along with UX specialists, to help you with that. If you have a more complex website, once you set up your URL structure, it becomes challenging to change it afterward, and it can also hurt the rankings.

But in general, there are a few rules that you should follow when creating a new URL:

The URL should be short.

It shouldn’t consist of excessive numbers or symbols.

It should include targeting keywords.

For example, when you create new content on the web regularly, like articles on a blog, you can influence a URL right away.

It is common practice that a URL is set up by default according to the name of the article. If this is your case, you probably end up with an unnecessarily long URL, which isn’t shown fully in the SERPs and might not even include the relevant keywords.

Let’s see some examples below. The URL in the first preview is good enough, and it is shown in the SERPs entirely. The URL in the second preview is unnecessarily long, and the important keywords are at the end.

Headings

The heading structure on the web is represented by tags <h1>—<h6>. It is necessary to have this structure because it helps both search engines and users understand the context of the web.

The most important of these tags is heading h1, which I recommend using for each of your pages. Together with the title, it tells the search engine what a page is about, and is also an accessibility tool for people who are blind or require reading assistance.

Even if you are not using subheadings in the text, you should at least place the <h1> tag there.

H1 Best Practices:

There should be exactly one h1 on each page.

The h1 should be unique.

It should include important keywords.

The h1 should describe what the page is about.

There is no pixel or characters limit but try to keep it short.

Examples of Heading Structure:

The usage of subheadings on level <h2> – <h6> depends on the context.

Incorrectly tagged:

<h1> Main heading of an article </h1>

<h2> Subheading on second level </h2>

<h2> Subheading on second level </h2>

<h1> Main heading of an article </h1>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

Correctly tagged:

<h1> Main heading of an article </h1>

<h2> Subheading on second level </h2>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

<h2> Subheading on second level </h2>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

Internal Links 

Linking internally within the page means that you are making all of the pages accessible for both search engines and users. Internal links also pass the value and authority from one page to another. It’s called link equity (or “link juice”). To simplify, it means that the more internal links lead to the specific site, the more authority it gets for the search engines and the more accessible it is for the users.

Internal Linking Best Practices:

Make sure that all of your pages relate to each other.  This means that there is at least one link referring to it.

Don’t overlink. The more pages you are referring to, the less authority they will get. Consider which pages are really important and link only to them.

It is good practice to write your targeting keywords within the anchor text when referring to the specific page. It will help the search engine better understand what the page is about. But don’t over-optimize it. Write naturally.

Conclusion

These essential on-page SEO elements are something that you should start with when optimizing your site. In general, these rules are very simple. The most important thing to keep in mind is that you are writing for your customers and potential customers.

By following a few simple rules, you will be on your way to optimizing your SEO in no time.

Are there any important tips for on-page SEO optimization that I left out? Tell me about your best practices in the comments.

The post How to Optimize On-Page SEO to Maximize Your ROI appeared first on Marketo Marketing Blog - Best Practices and Thought Leadership.

from RSSMix.com Mix ID 8217493 https://blog.marketo.com/2018/05/optimize-on-page-seo-maximize-roi.html

[racheltgibsau]

How to Optimize On-Page SEO to Maximize Your ROI

SEO, or search engine optimization, seems to be an “unpredictable” or “magic” industry to some marketers. However, its elements are straightforward and built on solid ground. Once you know what kind of keywords your customers are looking for, you can start to play with it.

In this blog, you’ll learn about the most important on-page SEO elements and how to apply them to your marketing strategy.

Copy

The content of the page, therefore, its copy, is the most critical part of SEO. Keep that in mind before you start working on more technical stuff. There is no exact formula for how many keywords and in what density to put them into the text. You’ll likely find guides online that tell you otherwise, but in most cases, these formulas don’t make any sense. I recommend you ignore any rules you read and write naturally for your users.

That may seem a bit counterintuitive, because I am telling you to optimize without any specific optimization tricks. But consider the following example to illustrate what I mean: imagine you are selling black and brown kitchen tables, and when you are writing about them, you probably mention the colors a few times. But what if your customers are looking for dark tables instead? Consider switching out some of your instances of black with the word dark to reach customers on their terms.

Title Tag 

The title tag consisting of keywords is one of the elementary ranking factors. The title itself tells users and search engines what the page is about. Even though users don’t see this text directly on the page because it is placed in the code, search engines can read it, and they will show it in search engine results pages (SERPs).

Note: The title tag is not only used by search engines, but also by software that reads to people who have accessibility requirements or otherwise require reading assistance.

Title Tag Best Practices:

Each page should have exactly one title tag set.

The title should be written relevantly to the page.

It should include targeting keywords. However, don’t try to put too many keywords into the title, sometimes called keyword stuffing. One targeting keyword along with the descriptive text for one page is enough.

The maximum length of the title tag is 600px which is approximately 70 to 80 characters. But I don’t recommend focusing on characters, because in some cases, an even longer title might fit into the SERPs. To see if the title fits all search engines, you can use a SERP preview tool.

The title tag shouldn’t be too short, either. If it is only, let’s say, 200px long, you are probably not using its potential fully.

Title Tag Examples:

Let’s take a look at examples of both badly and well-written titles. Let’s say I am looking for coffee shops in Prague. The following titles could be written much better.

Coffee shops Prague —> Title is too short and doesn’t say anything interesting. I don’t even want to click on it.

Places in Prague that serve you the best coffee —> I might want to click on it, but the keyword “coffee shops” is missing, so it might not even show up in the SERPs.

The most beautiful coffee shops in Prague with the best coffee and from the best professionals —> I would really like to click on this one, because there is a relevant keyword, and it is also appealing. But it’s also too long, and I probably wouldn’t see the whole title in the search results.

Here’s what an ideal title looks like:

The example above is neither too short or too long. It includes the keyword that I am looking for, and it says that I will discover the 10 best places. I really want to click on this one.

Meta Description

The meta description has a lot in common with the title tag or meta title that we were just talking about. Here are the differences. First, the meta description is not one of the ranking factors. However, it might influence your click-through rate from SERPs, which will affect the ranking. That’s why I recommend not to neglect the meta description copy.

Another difference from the title tag is that the description is much longer. In December 2017, Google increased the length of the meta description for desktop from 920px to 1,750px, or 320 characters. Now it is almost twice as long, so you have much more space for getting the attention of your potential customers. Sometimes, additional characters can fit into the SERPs which is why I recommend using pixels rather than the number of characters.

Meta Description Best Practices:

With a few exceptions, the best practices of the meta description are basically the same as for the title tag:

Each page should set exactly one meta description.

The meta description should be written relevantly to the page.

It should include targeting keywords.

The maximum length of the meta description is 1,750 px or 320 characters for desktop.

The maximum length of the meta description is 1350 px or 230 characters for mobile. It’s important to know how much of your traffic comes from mobile to properly optimize for where your customers are engaging with your content the most.

The meta description shouldn’t be too short, either. Use its full potential.

You are writing it for your potential customers and not for you. Instead of bragging about yourself, write what is in it for the customers.

Use a call to action in the copy like “Discover, try, experience, see…”

Meta Description Examples:

What does an ideal meta description look like? It’s important to know that again, there is no formula for meta description.

I will return to our example above. Even though it has a pretty sweet title, let’s take a closer look at the meta description:

This description focuses more on describing Prague than the coffee shops that I am looking for. It is irrelevant and too long to fit the SERPs. This occurs because the page doesn’t actually have a meta description set, so Google will pull text from the post to fill in.

I personally like this one below much more.

The length is ideal, it is well-written and creative. It says what’s in it for me and it includes the right keywords for me as the potential customer.

URLs

Setting up URLs for your whole website might be a very complex activity. If you are new to SEO, I recommend asking professional SEO specialists, along with UX specialists, to help you with that. If you have a more complex website, once you set up your URL structure, it becomes challenging to change it afterward, and it can also hurt the rankings.

But in general, there are a few rules that you should follow when creating a new URL:

The URL should be short.

It shouldn’t consist of excessive numbers or symbols.

It should include targeting keywords.

For example, when you create new content on the web regularly, like articles on a blog, you can influence a URL right away.

It is common practice that a URL is set up by default according to the name of the article. If this is your case, you probably end up with an unnecessarily long URL, which isn’t shown fully in the SERPs and might not even include the relevant keywords.

Let’s see some examples below. The URL in the first preview is good enough, and it is shown in the SERPs entirely. The URL in the second preview is unnecessarily long, and the important keywords are at the end.

Headings

The heading structure on the web is represented by tags <h1>—<h6>. It is necessary to have this structure because it helps both search engines and users understand the context of the web.

The most important of these tags is heading h1, which I recommend using for each of your pages. Together with the title, it tells the search engine what a page is about, and is also an accessibility tool for people who are blind or require reading assistance.

Even if you are not using subheadings in the text, you should at least place the <h1> tag there.

H1 Best Practices:

There should be exactly one h1 on each page.

The h1 should be unique.

It should include important keywords.

The h1 should describe what the page is about.

There is no pixel or characters limit but try to keep it short.

Examples of Heading Structure:

The usage of subheadings on level <h2> – <h6> depends on the context.

Incorrectly tagged:

<h1> Main heading of an article </h1>

<h2> Subheading on second level </h2>

<h2> Subheading on second level </h2>

<h1> Main heading of an article </h1>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

Correctly tagged:

<h1> Main heading of an article </h1>

<h2> Subheading on second level </h2>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

<h2> Subheading on second level </h2>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

Internal Links 

Linking internally within the page means that you are making all of the pages accessible for both search engines and users. Internal links also pass the value and authority from one page to another. It’s called link equity (or “link juice”). To simplify, it means that the more internal links lead to the specific site, the more authority it gets for the search engines and the more accessible it is for the users.

Internal Linking Best Practices:

Make sure that all of your pages relate to each other.  This means that there is at least one link referring to it.

Don’t overlink. The more pages you are referring to, the less authority they will get. Consider which pages are really important and link only to them.

It is good practice to write your targeting keywords within the anchor text when referring to the specific page. It will help the search engine better understand what the page is about. But don’t over-optimize it. Write naturally.

Conclusion

These essential on-page SEO elements are something that you should start with when optimizing your site. In general, these rules are very simple. The most important thing to keep in mind is that you are writing for your customers and potential customers.

By following a few simple rules, you will be on your way to optimizing your SEO in no time.

Are there any important tips for on-page SEO optimization that I left out? Tell me about your best practices in the comments.

The post How to Optimize On-Page SEO to Maximize Your ROI appeared first on Marketo Marketing Blog - Best Practices and Thought Leadership.

from RSSMix.com Mix ID 8217493 https://blog.marketo.com/2018/05/optimize-on-page-seo-maximize-roi.html

[zacdhaenkeau]

How to Optimize On-Page SEO to Maximize Your ROI

SEO, or search engine optimization, seems to be an “unpredictable” or “magic” industry to some marketers. However, its elements are straightforward and built on solid ground. Once you know what kind of keywords your customers are looking for, you can start to play with it.

In this blog, you’ll learn about the most important on-page SEO elements and how to apply them to your marketing strategy.

Copy

The content of the page, therefore, its copy, is the most critical part of SEO. Keep that in mind before you start working on more technical stuff. There is no exact formula for how many keywords and in what density to put them into the text. You’ll likely find guides online that tell you otherwise, but in most cases, these formulas don’t make any sense. I recommend you ignore any rules you read and write naturally for your users.

That may seem a bit counterintuitive, because I am telling you to optimize without any specific optimization tricks. But consider the following example to illustrate what I mean: imagine you are selling black and brown kitchen tables, and when you are writing about them, you probably mention the colors a few times. But what if your customers are looking for dark tables instead? Consider switching out some of your instances of black with the word dark to reach customers on their terms.

Title Tag 

The title tag consisting of keywords is one of the elementary ranking factors. The title itself tells users and search engines what the page is about. Even though users don’t see this text directly on the page because it is placed in the code, search engines can read it, and they will show it in search engine results pages (SERPs).

Note: The title tag is not only used by search engines, but also by software that reads to people who have accessibility requirements or otherwise require reading assistance.

Title Tag Best Practices:

Each page should have exactly one title tag set.

The title should be written relevantly to the page.

It should include targeting keywords. However, don’t try to put too many keywords into the title, sometimes called keyword stuffing. One targeting keyword along with the descriptive text for one page is enough.

The maximum length of the title tag is 600px which is approximately 70 to 80 characters. But I don’t recommend focusing on characters, because in some cases, an even longer title might fit into the SERPs. To see if the title fits all search engines, you can use a SERP preview tool.

The title tag shouldn’t be too short, either. If it is only, let’s say, 200px long, you are probably not using its potential fully.

Title Tag Examples:

Let’s take a look at examples of both badly and well-written titles. Let’s say I am looking for coffee shops in Prague. The following titles could be written much better.

Coffee shops Prague —> Title is too short and doesn’t say anything interesting. I don’t even want to click on it.

Places in Prague that serve you the best coffee —> I might want to click on it, but the keyword “coffee shops” is missing, so it might not even show up in the SERPs.

The most beautiful coffee shops in Prague with the best coffee and from the best professionals —> I would really like to click on this one, because there is a relevant keyword, and it is also appealing. But it’s also too long, and I probably wouldn’t see the whole title in the search results.

Here’s what an ideal title looks like:

The example above is neither too short or too long. It includes the keyword that I am looking for, and it says that I will discover the 10 best places. I really want to click on this one.

Meta Description

The meta description has a lot in common with the title tag or meta title that we were just talking about. Here are the differences. First, the meta description is not one of the ranking factors. However, it might influence your click-through rate from SERPs, which will affect the ranking. That’s why I recommend not to neglect the meta description copy.

Another difference from the title tag is that the description is much longer. In December 2017, Google increased the length of the meta description for desktop from 920px to 1,750px, or 320 characters. Now it is almost twice as long, so you have much more space for getting the attention of your potential customers. Sometimes, additional characters can fit into the SERPs which is why I recommend using pixels rather than the number of characters.

Meta Description Best Practices:

With a few exceptions, the best practices of the meta description are basically the same as for the title tag:

Each page should set exactly one meta description.

The meta description should be written relevantly to the page.

It should include targeting keywords.

The maximum length of the meta description is 1,750 px or 320 characters for desktop.

The maximum length of the meta description is 1350 px or 230 characters for mobile. It’s important to know how much of your traffic comes from mobile to properly optimize for where your customers are engaging with your content the most.

The meta description shouldn’t be too short, either. Use its full potential.

You are writing it for your potential customers and not for you. Instead of bragging about yourself, write what is in it for the customers.

Use a call to action in the copy like “Discover, try, experience, see…”

Meta Description Examples:

What does an ideal meta description look like? It’s important to know that again, there is no formula for meta description.

I will return to our example above. Even though it has a pretty sweet title, let’s take a closer look at the meta description:

This description focuses more on describing Prague than the coffee shops that I am looking for. It is irrelevant and too long to fit the SERPs. This occurs because the page doesn’t actually have a meta description set, so Google will pull text from the post to fill in.

I personally like this one below much more.

The length is ideal, it is well-written and creative. It says what’s in it for me and it includes the right keywords for me as the potential customer.

URLs

Setting up URLs for your whole website might be a very complex activity. If you are new to SEO, I recommend asking professional SEO specialists, along with UX specialists, to help you with that. If you have a more complex website, once you set up your URL structure, it becomes challenging to change it afterward, and it can also hurt the rankings.

But in general, there are a few rules that you should follow when creating a new URL:

The URL should be short.

It shouldn’t consist of excessive numbers or symbols.

It should include targeting keywords.

For example, when you create new content on the web regularly, like articles on a blog, you can influence a URL right away.

It is common practice that a URL is set up by default according to the name of the article. If this is your case, you probably end up with an unnecessarily long URL, which isn’t shown fully in the SERPs and might not even include the relevant keywords.

Let’s see some examples below. The URL in the first preview is good enough, and it is shown in the SERPs entirely. The URL in the second preview is unnecessarily long, and the important keywords are at the end.

Headings

The heading structure on the web is represented by tags <h1>—<h6>. It is necessary to have this structure because it helps both search engines and users understand the context of the web.

The most important of these tags is heading h1, which I recommend using for each of your pages. Together with the title, it tells the search engine what a page is about, and is also an accessibility tool for people who are blind or require reading assistance.

Even if you are not using subheadings in the text, you should at least place the <h1> tag there.

H1 Best Practices:

There should be exactly one h1 on each page.

The h1 should be unique.

It should include important keywords.

The h1 should describe what the page is about.

There is no pixel or characters limit but try to keep it short.

Examples of Heading Structure:

The usage of subheadings on level <h2> – <h6> depends on the context.

Incorrectly tagged:

<h1> Main heading of an article </h1>

<h2> Subheading on second level </h2>

<h2> Subheading on second level </h2>

<h1> Main heading of an article </h1>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

Correctly tagged:

<h1> Main heading of an article </h1>

<h2> Subheading on second level </h2>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

<h2> Subheading on second level </h2>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

<h3> Subheading on third level </h3>

Internal Links 

Linking internally within the page means that you are making all of the pages accessible for both search engines and users. Internal links also pass the value and authority from one page to another. It’s called link equity (or “link juice”). To simplify, it means that the more internal links lead to the specific site, the more authority it gets for the search engines and the more accessible it is for the users.

Internal Linking Best Practices:

Make sure that all of your pages relate to each other.  This means that there is at least one link referring to it.

Don’t overlink. The more pages you are referring to, the less authority they will get. Consider which pages are really important and link only to them.

It is good practice to write your targeting keywords within the anchor text when referring to the specific page. It will help the search engine better understand what the page is about. But don’t over-optimize it. Write naturally.

Conclusion

These essential on-page SEO elements are something that you should start with when optimizing your site. In general, these rules are very simple. The most important thing to keep in mind is that you are writing for your customers and potential customers.

By following a few simple rules, you will be on your way to optimizing your SEO in no time.

Are there any important tips for on-page SEO optimization that I left out? Tell me about your best practices in the comments.

The post How to Optimize On-Page SEO to Maximize Your ROI appeared first on Marketo Marketing Blog - Best Practices and Thought Leadership.

from RSSMix.com Mix ID 8217493 https://blog.marketo.com/2018/05/optimize-on-page-seo-maximize-roi.html

[scribero-blog]

What’s the difference between editing and proofreading? Jan. 10

The discussion about the definition of proofreading and its difference from editing is pretty long. Here is what Leah McClellan thinks:

“A lot of beginner writers and even more experienced writers wonder: What’s the difference between editing and proofreading?

And what’s copyediting?

Then there’s developmental editing, substantive editing, and stylistic editing. Structural editing, line editing, project editing, technical editing, and fact checking. Even proofreading is sometimes (erroneously) called editing, although there is such a thing as editorial proofreading.

Gah! What’s a writer to do?

If you Google “types of editing” you’ll get all sorts of confusing information. On top of that, in the blogging world an “editor” is sometimes more of a WordPress geek or administrative assistant than anything.

But it’s not really all that complicated. And every writer should have a good understanding of the editing and proofreading process. Even if you never hire or work with an editor or proofreader, you should be taking care of these steps yourself.

And chances are good you already are.

Stages of writing

Editing is probably the most confusing concept whereas copyediting and proofreading are fairly specific. Let’s take a look.

Any type of writing ideally goes through four stages in order: writing, editing, copyediting, and proofreading.

We know what writing is, so let’s skip that part and move on to editing.

Editing definitions are confusing partly because of the overlap with writing early in the editing process. And later, a bit of a blur occurs between final copyediting and proofreading.

Plus, professionals use terms in their own way, and that might be different from the ways others use them. Publishing houses, editorial service companies, and freelancers all have their own definitions within certain boundaries.

For example, developmental and substantive editing are often used interchangeably. Stylistic editing can be performed as a separate step, but it’s more often part of some other editing process. And copyediting is usually synonymous with line editing—but not always.

Let’s look at editing as improvements made after the writing is in fairly good order but before focusing on small details.

This stage is most often called developmental or substantive editing.

The big picture: Developmental or substantive editing

Think of a novel. The first step in the editing process is developmental editing, sometimes called substantive editing.

During this process, editors review the entire manuscript from a broad perspective and suggest improvements in organization, structure, and consistency. They might also point out problems with characterization, point of view, tension, or conflict. Or maybe the story has too much dialogue or the setting needs more detail.

At this stage, editors don’t focus on fixing awkward sentences, misspelled words, or punctuation. Instead, a developmental editor’s job is to improve the story itself—the big picture—from beginning to end. This applies to non-fiction writing as well.

And bloggers, by the way, do the same thing with their blog posts, especially the lengthy epic posts. The big picture has to be in place before detailed editing can begin.

Developmental editing can blend into substantive editing, which focuses on the finer points of structure: chapter or paragraph organization, transitions, and even sentences. It all depends on the company or organization and how they’re defining editing.

Substantive editing can also refer to heavy copyediting (discussed below), and it can mean almost a complete rewrite at the sentence and paragraph level. As you can see, there’s an overlap in each direction.

In your own writing—let’s say a blog post—developmental editing includes deciding on details you want to include or delete. Organizing your information and refining your focus is also a part of this stage. And if you’re using an extended metaphor, you’ll want to be certain it’s carried through the entire blog post, as in this case.

When the blog post is in 100% solid shape—or you think it is—it’s time for copyediting.

The fine-tuning: Copyediting

Also called line editing, copyediting takes place mainly at the sentence level.

It means correcting grammar, spelling, and punctuation. Awkward sentences are reworded, and verbiage is eliminated for conciseness. Excess passive verbs are exchanged for active verbs, and transitions might be added in between and within paragraphs.

Style issues can also be a focus during this stage. In my own writing, for example (even in this blog post), I have a tendency to use formal, academic language even when I want a casual tone. By reading out loud, I can spot it and improve it since I don’t talk that way (far from it).

Consistency issues are also checked such as capitalization, hyphenation, and numbers spelled out or represented as numerals (four vs. 4). Plus, lists are checked for parallelism; each item should have similar structure and start with the same part of speech (nouns, verbs, etc.).

Think of it this way:

Copyediting isn’t the big picture, but it doesn’t require a microscope.

You can break it down into three different types: heavy, medium, and light copyediting.

Heavy copyediting is the kind that blurs into substantive editing as described above. It can mean almost a complete rewrite at the sentence level.

But it could also mean working with a non-native, non-fluent English writer. The content might be fantastic from a developmental perspective, but sentences are cumbersome, paragraphs need better organization, and word choices aren’t the best. And that means heavy copyediting.

Light copyediting means the writing has little need for improvement. Wordiness is corrected here or there, punctuation or a subject-verb agreement mistake is corrected, or a few sentences are broken up or joined for clarity.

In some cases, light copyediting is what the writer has requested of a freelance editor regardless of actual existing issues. In this case, only the most glaring or problematic issues are corrected.

Medium copyediting, of course, comes in between light and heavy.

And by the way, you might see copyediting spelled copy editing (with a space) or even copy-editing (British). I prefer copyediting since it’s a single concept just like copywriting, which is always spelled as one word.

The goal of copyediting is to produce writing that’s as close to perfection as any writing can ever be. But one final step is critical, and that’s proofreading.

Now put it under the microscope: Proofreading

No matter how skilled a copyeditor is, proofreading requires a different focus. And even if a copyeditor is an excellent proofreader, the two tasks should be done separately.

And that applies to writers doing all the work on their own. When you’re thinking about grammar and style, you won’t see that extra space or missing quotation mark.

It’s like using a different part of your brain for writing and copyediting and another part for proofreading.

Proofreading is science, editing is art.

CLICK TO TWEET

Here are two ways to remember what proofreading is about:

1. Proofreading proves the article or manuscript is ready to be published.

Everything else is—or should be—done.

2. Proofreading makes tiny adjustments and corrections, not big changes.

A proofreader scrutinizes the writing for minor spelling errors, extra or missing spaces, missing or double end punctuation, margin consistency, fonts, numbering, and so on. With website copy, links are checked for accuracy, and a proofreader might even examine keywords and meta data behind the scenes.

If copyediting errors are found, professional proofreaders check back with the copyeditor (if one exists) rather than make the changes themselves.

Proofreading can overlap into copyediting

Like types of editing, proofreading doesn’t have strict boundary lines. Proofreaders don’t ignore misspelled or incorrectly used words (peak instead of pique, for example) that a copyeditor missed.

But whether a proofreader has liberty to make changes depends on the job definition within a publishing house or other company. Sometimes a large company employs editorial proofreaders who have more leeway with copyediting than typical proofreaders. Other times, only one or two editors do all the editing and proofreading work.

At a small local newspaper, for example, a freelance writer might submit articles to the only person who sees them before they’re published: the editor. That editor might be one of several department editors, but if the budget is tight, copyeditors or proofreaders don’t exist. And in that case, editors either approve articles as they are or handle copyediting and proofreading themselves (or pass it on to an assistant editor).

For your own proofreading:

If you’re reworking convoluted sentences or replacing technical jargon with more common words, you’re not proofreading. You’re still in the copyediting stage, and it’s best to start fresh with proofreading or you’ll miss something.

If you do find a bigger problem while proofreading, you could highlight it and return to it later. That way, you won’t lose your proofreading focus.

But be sure to re-proof the entire paragraph when you make changes during this last stage. It’s very easy to introduce new errors when switching between proofreading and copyediting. (Ever see a double or missing word in a blog post? Yep, that often happens at this stage.)

~~~

Remember, developmental and substantive editing are the main types of editing, and they’re all about the big picture.

Copyediting is a separate entity, and it focuses on fine-tuning at the sentence level.

Proofreading is a completely different step. It requires a microscope (so to speak), and it’s done only when all other editing is complete.

Your turn! What challenges have you faced while editing or proofreading your own writing? Have you worked with an editor or proofreader? What was your experience like? Comments and questions are always welcome.”

Source: http://simplewriting.org/whats-the-difference-between-editing-and-proofreading/