Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
Forum Moderators: not2easy
The main variables would be technical expertise (as related to the review), publishing history, and location (offshore would be cheaper).
Can you find a college student familiar with your topic? This kind of one-off, moderately lucrative task might be perfect.
OTOH, journalism is not the path to riches in most cases. I was flabbergasted when I found that some newspaper reporters don't make much more than fast food workers or store clerks. To someone like that, your deal would no doubt be attractive.
I guess one thing to ask yourself is how long a review is likely to take. If one has to set up/install a product, test out features, perhaps compare it to some familiar products, do a bit of research, and then write the review, one could be looking at a fair number of hours.
If the review process won't take long and the whole thing could be completed in an hour or two, then your rate doesn't sound bad for, say, a technical writer or freelancer. The fact that it's a repeating gig will be attractive, too.
After their first few test series, pretty much everyone figures out that the "free gear" is far from free (three reviews over a 6 month testing period). But they keep at it mostly out if interest in helping people and improving the products.
I have no idea if this would work with a commercial site, but it works incredibly well for a community review site.
Does your site has a specific reviewer guideline? If I pay these people, I can enforce them into following my policy... (eg. submission deadline, write in a specific style.) Not sure though if these are important for your reviews. It seems like they just submit whenever they feel like it... Correct me if I'm wrong.
We do have requirements for certain information that must be included in each review, but in general, we encourage that theywrite in their own style and concentrate on those features that concern them most. That is the reason that manufacturers have to supply at lest 3 different reviewers with the gear, so there can be a variety of opinions.
The main guideline is that they have to be polite and they have to justify any opinions. They cannot say "this thing is a piece of junk" or "this thing is the best" without justifying it.
Before they become qualified to get any gear to test, they have to write two reviews of gear they already own, and go through the editing process to make sure they meet our minimum standards and understand the process.
We definitely do not allow people to just upload whatever they write up the way epinions does.
I suspect that such an open model would not work in all areas, but you could certainly hand pick some volunteer reviewers that seem to be able to meet your requirements, that would be willing to work for the gear + pocket change. The enthusiasts will often turn in better reviews than any professional writer you could get.
Whether they are paid or not reviewers should follow the basic guidelines you give them. It also helps to explain why you have the guidelines and how they contribute overall to the site's success.
I've noticed that overtime reviewers nhave improved the basic guidelines I gave them. So you have to be open to their input too.
As for paying less for shorter reviews, I disagree. Good and thorough shorter reviews take more time to write than long aimeless "commentaries." You should reward quality, not quantity.