Using personal pronouns may sound like a simple, common-sense web writing best practice. Speaking directly to users with the word “you” is something most companies get on board with easily enough. But those same clients often ask us to avoid self-referential pronouns like “we,” “our,” and “us” in their web copy.
Granted, sometimes there are legitimate legal considerations that keep companies from getting personal with their web copy. (I’ll get into these legalities later.) Other times, it’s simply a matter of being overly cautious or old-fashioned.
Why use personal pronouns in web copy?
In my experience, many larger corporations have trouble breaking free from the formal business communications style they’ve been using for years. But guidelines that limit the use of personal pronouns should be reconsidered now that we’re in the digital age. These days, content needs to speak to users clearly and directly. It needs to compete for their attention.
A simple way to grab your users’ attention is by using personal pronouns in your web copy. Why? Personal pronouns reflect the way real people write and speak.
For example, most of us don’t refer to ourselves in the third person. We use first-person (me, we, our, us) and second-person (you, your) pronouns in our email exchanges, Facebook statuses, and Twitter feeds—channels that compete for your users’ attention every day.
Using these first- and second-person pronouns on your corporate website will:
Help users connect with the content
Help users understand the content
Identify who owns the content
Make writing the content easier
What happens if you DON’T use personal pronouns in web copy?
Not using personal pronouns forces you to repeat your company’s name throughout your website. This approach creates awkward sentences that are tedious to read and to write. The repetition can also set off keyword stuffing alarms. At the very least, your website ends up sounding unnecessarily formal and stuffy.
Worse yet, the bland third-person pronoun “it” may creep into your web copy and force you into using awkward sentence constructions. For example, something simple like “Content strategy is all we do. And we do it well” becomes “Brain Traffic believes its focus on content strategy is an advantage.” Blech.
Coupled with company name repetition, “it” creates confusion around who is speaking. It’s hard to tell who owns the content when it’s written so generically. (Right?) And if you want your users to feel connected to your brand, it’s important they know you stand behind your content.
When legal reasons prevent personal pronouns
Of course, sometimes there are legitimate legal grounds for not using personal pronouns. For example, we work with a few clients who sell cobranded products. Their legal departments strictly forbid the use of personal pronouns in order to avoid making sweeping statements about the collective “we.”
To illustrate what I mean, let’s say White Castle partnered with Holiday station stores on a special line of slider-scented gasoline. (Ok. That’s gross. But it’s the first thing I came up with from a quick glance out the office window.)
Anyway, if White Castle/Holiday created a website dedicated to this cobranded product, legal teams may advise against using “we/our/us” in the content. Value statements and “about us” sections get a bit more complex when cobranding. Maybe Holiday wouldn’t like being lumped together with White Castle on general statements about what “we” as a company believe in. Or, vice versa.
Large corporations with many divisions may also have legal concerns about using personal pronouns. Insurance companies are a good example. While Division A offers products similar to those of Division B, the products may have completely different rules and regulations restricting their features and use.
Let’s say Acme Insurance Company uses personal pronouns on their website when describing their products. If a Division B customer purchases a plan based on benefits they saw on a Division A product page, the customer may have grounds for a legal complaint. But by avoiding personal pronouns and only using the specific division name in product descriptions, Acme reduces their chances of getting sued.
So, to be safe, it’s better not to make broad “we/our/us” statements when there’s this type of product overlap.
How to prevent legal issues with personal pronouns
To avoid finding out the hard way, ask your client for any legal restrictions surrounding the use of personal pronouns at the start of the project. Because I can tell you from experience, going back and rewriting copy decks to eliminate all “we/our/us” statements is not fun.
When to use personal pronouns on your website
Unless legal guidelines prevent you from using personal pronouns, go ahead and get personal with your web copy. Using this type of plain language will make your web writing process easier. Even better, your users will more quickly connect and engage with your web content.
Recently, Brain Traffic Twitter friend Taj Moore (@tajmo) asked us for some advice about copy for authenticated websites, or websites that require registration in order to log in for firewalled content and/or functions.
Taj wanted to know our thoughts on what to call members vs. non-members, and logged in members vs. non-logged in members.
Taj’s question inspired quite the philosophical discussion around here. And by “philosophical discussion,” I mean: “really long email chain.”
We like Amazon’s approach to labeling members.
In short, we side with Amazon’s way of doing things. But, as it is with anything of value, it was the ride that mattered. Here’s how we came to our conclusion.
Are there terms to diff. bw member logged in and member not logged in? "Guest" not useful bc conflates w/ non-member.
…Or another tack: how about a word for guest/visitor who is not a member?
…b.c. I am leaning toward "logged-in," "logged-out," & "non-member" but thought you might have better insight.
Kristina: Let’s discuss. Who wants to go first?
Katie D.: Just call everyone Earthlings. We’re all just people, after all.
Christine A.: Is he asking about a user-facing label? I’d question whether there is any value in showing those terms to users.
I like Amazon’s approach. They use a cookie to identify users who have accounts, and ask them to log in only when they do something significant like go to their shopping cart.
Amazon doesn’t tell people they’re logged in, logged out, non-member, etc. They just put the person’s name up there if the cookie is in place, or show a generic login link if it isn’t. They don’t need users to keep track of their own status.
If he’s asking about what the developers/UX people/etc should call it, it doesn’t much matter as long as they’re consistent and the labels identify clearly defined roles.
Elizabeth(her email passing Christine’s on the information superhighway from NYC):
I’d say, the first question is, how are these terms going to be used? Are they internal or user facing?
If they’re meant to be user-facing, they don’t really seem necessary. If the user is logged in to the site, you’d address them by name. If they’re not logged in, you’d probably call them a guest. If they’re a member who isn’t logged in, you can’t really know that. Not sure why it’d be necessary to label each separately, unless he’s talking about terms to be used internally …
Angie K.: Whoa. It’s like Elizabeth and Christine A. had a cross-country mind meld.
As a writer or a content strategist, it’s your job to advocate for useful, useable, and on-brand web content. Like it or not, that responsibility includes unsexy stuff like error messages, functional copy, and automatic feedback copy.
Like most users, I never thought twice about automatic feedback copy until I ran into some bad examples of it. But since my experience on StratosphereHotel.com, I’ve done a lot of thinking about it.
What is automatic feedback copy?
Automatic feedback copy—also known as “automatic validation copy” or “real-time inline help”—is content that displays immediately after a user interacts with online content. It’s meant to guide the user’s actions to help them complete a task.
For example, it’s the “invalid email” message you get when you forget the “@domainname.com” part of your email address.
When automatic feedback copy goes awry
I recently signed up for email alerts from the Stratosphere hotel in Las Vegas, where I planned to stay. Filling out the contact form should have been a quick, easy task. Instead, I spent minutes struggling to understand their automatic feedback copy:
(click to see full-sized image)
What makes it bad automatic feedback copy?
They may seem harmless, but “Good Email” and “33 is perfect!” interrupt instead of support the user experience.
Here’s why. The copy:
Doesn’t fit tone of the site
Doesn’t move the user toward a goal
May alarm the user
Using the wrong tone
Automatic feedback copy can be sassy—as long as it matches the site’s overall tone. A departure in tone makes for an inconsistent—and therefore unprofessional—website.
Missing the user goal
“Good email” is probably the Stratosphere’s way of saying “valid email address.” But what’s the point of patting your user on the back for their data entry skills?
“33 is perfect!” is equally problematic. I’m not sure the message is the appropriate response for age verification. A “thank you” or simply removing the default message—“You must be 21 to sign up”—would suffice.
Alarming the user
For many users, red font screams: Caution! Danger! Error! But instead of a warning, the red text gave me a compliment. “Good Email” just didn’t make sense to me in that context.
Why automatic feedback copy matters
Like every piece of content on your website, automatic feedback copy is an extension of your brand. Be mindful of how your online brand reflects—or detracts—from the brick-and-mortar customer experience.
If our rooms hadn’t already been booked, I may have reconsidered staying at the Stratosphere. But in contrast to a frustrating online encounter, my in-person experience at the hotel was more satisfying than busting a blackjack dealer. I’m glad I took the gamble.
Many of our first-time clients come to us in the eleventh hour of a site redesign, looking for web writing triage. They unload sitemaps, wireframes, and piles of source content (we’re talking PDFs, outdated web pages, print collateral, email copy—the works). It’s our job to turn this ugly mess into a beautiful, content-rich website.
Sound familiar? If you’re a web writer, it’s likely you’ve run into this scenario more often than not. And if you’re going to meet your deadlines, there’s not a lot of time to get to know your source material.
No problem. Just take what we like to call the “speed-dating approach.” In doing so, you’ll be able to quickly weed out the duds (aka nice-to-know, “filler” information) and find the studs (meaty content that addresses your users’ needs).
This approach may not be the most romantic beginning to your “happily web-er after,” but it’s efficient.
Get ready to meet your source content!
Before you start making eyes at all this material, you’ll want to do a little pre-date grooming. Let’s assume your client has prepped the source content for you–made it presentable by organizing and prioritizing it into usable content strategy documents.
Post these content strategy documents nearby for quick reference:
Business goals and user needs
Content inventory
Wireframes or page tables
Got all that handy? Good. Like wearing your favorite little black dress to a singles mixer, these documents are the trusted staples of your web writing strategy.
Now you’re ready to speed date your source content. Here’s how, in four easy steps.
STEP ONE: Scan-read source content and highlight the most important points.
There’s no need to spend countless hours reading over every page of your source content. In fact, the longer you linger over it, the more likely you’ll become immune to all its flaws.
Instead, follow the tried-and-true speed-dating guidelines. In other words, spend just a few minutes per page, scanning for important information and recurring themes. When you see a key point, highlight it. Repeat.
Not sure which information to look for? Refer to your content strategy documents. They’ll tip you off to what’s important and what’s not.
STEP TWO: Copy and paste highlighted messages into your content document.
Meaningful relationships don’t develop on first sight. And awesome web copy doesn’t auto-magically appear after a single review of your source content. So don’t rush your writing process. Matter of fact, don’t even write right away. It’s tempting, but trust us on this.
Start off by simply copying and pasting your highlighted content into the appropriate pages of your content document. Go ahead and organize the source content into an outline that fits the page’s content needs. But hold off on the actual writing until you’ve transferred all of your highlighted source content.
STEP THREE: Write, edit and refine your key content.
Just like you wouldn’t lay it all out there on a first date, don’t try to perfect your copy in your first draft. Do keep web writing best practices and style guides in mind as you write. Just don’t kill yourself with the details on the first go-round.
So, go ahead. Write that first draft. Just do it. But don’t edit while you write. Now set your draft aside. Sleep on it. Refer back to your web writing best practices and style guidelines. Then you can edit and refine until you’ve created killer web content.
STEP FOUR: Deliver irresistible web copy to your client.
Before you commit to your content document, have an editor take a look at it. He or she will be the strategic equivalent of the therapist you hire to smooth out all your relationship issues before saying “I do.”
After a few rounds like this with your editor-therapist, your web copy should be suitable to introduce to your mother. Er, client.
Now that the social media tools that define Web 2.0 have moved into the mainstream—and believe me, it’s mainstream now that our moms are on Facebook—the interactive community has moved on to the next big thing: Web 3.0.
Recently I’ve seen an increase in tweets and blogs about the topic. After trying to follow the conversation, I had to admit to myself I didn’t really know what “web 3.0” meant. So I decided to see what the buzz was all about.
Here’s your crash course in Web 3.0, in case you were wondering, too.
What is Web 3.0?
The first thing you should know is that the definition of Web 3.0 is still a little murky.
Here’s what some people are saying about it:
"Web 3.0 is about making the web a more personal web. [It’s] an internet that can anticipate my needs, understand my meaning and even allow me to find information better than ever. " Judy Shapiro, Ad Age
" The core idea behind Web 3.0 is to extract much more meaningful, actionable insight from information. The goal of Web 3.0 is to reorganize information so users can capture what things are and how they are related." Web 3.0 Conference site
"… Web 3.0 is about open and more structured data – which essentially makes the Web more ‘intelligent’. The smarter the data, the more things we can do with it. The current trends we’re seeing today – filtering content, real-time data, personalization – are evidence that ‘Web 3.0′ is upon us, if not yet well defined." Richard MacManus, Read Write Web
Web 3.0 is also sometimes called the semantic web. But sometimes the semantic web is referred to as a component of Web 3.0. Like I said: murky.
Why could Web 3.0 be awesome?
According to the various definitions out there, we’re on the verge of the BEST INTERWEBS EVER. In a nutshell, it sounds like Web 3.0 aims to be a customized information delivery system that intuitively caters to your every want and need—wherever you are.
Yes, this includes more and better mobile apps. And not just for the iPhone. (Please? Thank you.)
According to the Web 3.0 Conference people, the benefits of Web 3.0 are totally rad:
This seemingly simple concept will have a profound effect at every level of information consumption, from the individual end user to the enterprise.
Web 3.0 technologies make the organization of information radically more fluid and allow for new types of analysis based on things like text semantics, machine learning, and what we call serendipity — the stumbling upon insights based on just having better organized and connected information.
Why might Web 3.0 Suck?
Besides the inherent fear that a “smart” web is the first step to a Terminator-style robot revolution, some valid concerns have been raised about Web 3.0.
Recently, Advertising Age’s Judy Shapiro wrote a blog to express her concerns. Her post “In Web 3.0 We Trust – or Not” explores the need to integrate the human element of trust into the forthcoming “intelligent” web.
She writes that Web 3.0 risks disaster:
"… because as our dependence on the internet grows, a lack of trust will unravel any or all of the marvelous innovations being conceived now.
What good is more linked data when we have no idea which data to trust? Wouldn’t you rather get a product recommendation from a trusted friend than a "paid" digital butler, ah, I mean agent?"
Besides wondering whether we can trust the content Web 3.0 serves up, we’ll also struggle with issues of privacy. In order to make the data more customized, Web 3.0 gadgets will need to gather more of our personal information. Which begs the questions:
What will they do with our personal information?
Will it be protected?
How will we know?
Will we like Web 3.0?
I think that depends, on many factors. And of course it will be heavily influenced by personal choice.
Factors to consider:
Will the technology deliver what it promises? Gadgets are cool, but only if they work.
How will the technology change our lives, in a tangible way? It has to be intuitive and easy-to-use to improve our everyday lives.
Can we overcome the feelings of mistrust brought on by an “intelligent” web? We have to be able to trust the content it serves up—and trust that our private information is protected.
How does Web 3.0’s focus on technology affect the need for publishing useful, useable content? This last factor is the most important, in my opinion.
Here’s what Rachel Lovinger, Content Strategy Lead at Razorfish, has to say about the influence of Web 3.0 on content:
“The promise is that [Web 3.0 is] going to help make content more readily accessible. So, the call-to-arms for content strategy is a big one. Like my tweet quoting Tom Tague [from his keynote at the Semantic Technology Conference on June 16], there’s a lot of content, not enough information.
Web 3.0 is going to help the good stuff rise to the top, but in order for that to happen, there has to be good stuff.”
Exactly. We need to continue planning for content the same way we’ve always needed to—but with more urgency. But don’t worry. Brain Traffic can help. Just give us a call. (The telephone may be so Web 0.0, but it’ll still work in Web 3.0. Promise.)
First, I admit it. I have a not-so-secret crush on John Hodgman. Don’t know him by name? Picture the cuddly geek who plays the PC on those Mac commercials. Yeah, this guy:
My crush is not physical. It’s intellectual. John Hodgman is one of the smartest, funniest men on earth right now. Plus, he knows a thing or two about content strategy and information architecture.
The organized truth of a fictional reference book In his book, More Information Than You Require (the second in a trilogy of almanacs about fake facts), Hodgman realizes his lifelong dream of writing a page-a-day calendar.
Each page includes a date and “an interesting historical fact that did not occur on that date.” Pure fiction.
Besides being hilarious, the facts are perfectly placed on the page. They appear as insets—a sidebar of sorts. It works because the facts:
Do not interrupt the flow, nor have anything to do with, the chapter in which they appear
Do not need to be read chronologically
Are there for those who, indeed, require more information
For example, in the chapter “Even More More Information Than You Require, With a Special Emphasis on Food and Animals (A Kind of Food),” we find this gem:
July 3 1983, NEWTON, MA: The first suburban white child breakdances.
This fake fact has nothing to do with food. Or animals. Yet there it is. And I love it.
Typically, I wouldn’t applaud an author for providing aimless fodder, but each one goes perfectly with the book’s overall theme. It just doesn’t fit neatly into a chapter.
How I applied Hodgman’s genius to web content I thought of Hodgman’s book during a client meeting recently. While reviewing the client’s sitemap, I was having trouble understanding the position of a particular page. It seemed out of place.
After asking a few strategic questions about the page’s planned content, it became clear to me that it included “nice to know” information. The content was related to the site’s main purpose, but did not fit the overall story.
So, I took a page—not literally, though he encourages it—from Hodgman’s book. I suggested placing this content outside of the site’s main navigation, perhaps as a sidebar throughout the site. That way, the information would be there, but it wouldn’t get in the way.
My client loved this suggestion. They created a new sitemap and new wireframes to reflect this direction. And I wrote a little sidebar that linked to the “nice to know” information.
I doubt my copy will crack people up the way Hodgman’s phony historical tidbits do, but his approach worked on my client’s site.
More information about John Hodgman I encourage you to develop your own crush on my little Hodgy. Perhaps you will discover more ways to apply his methods to web content.
Here are some links to help you stalk him from afar:
A suburban New York man said the personalized license plate he obtained for his car—XXX PERT—causes many people to ask him about buying pornography.
Henry DeRossi, 78, of East Meadow, N.Y., said the plate on his Mercedes-Benz is a reference to his business, Expert Metal Slitters of Long Island City, N.Y., but the triple-X on the plate causes many to confuse him for a porn seller, the New York Daily News reported Monday.
"You’d be surprised how many people stop me when I am at a light and want to buy porn," DeRossi said.
He told the Daily News the number of people confused by the plate has grown to the point where his auto dealer has him park the vehicle in a back lot when he brings it in for service.
Clearly label content, or risk user interpretation DeRossi may be an expert at metal slitting. But next time he chooses a vanity license plate, he may want to get a second opinion. Perhaps even from a web writer.
DeRossi’s unintentionally kinky license plate makes me think about poorly written navigational and page links. Since most users skim and scan web content while they’re looking for useful information, it’s important to clearly label your navigation and page elements.
Even if your users carefully read every bit of content on your site, they’re not likely to click a link unless they think it will take them where they want to go.
So when writing links, be sure to use words that are meaningful to your users. NOT corporate jargon or internal slang. And especially not the cutesy labels your marketing team cooked up.
Keep your links in context
Ginny Redish gives us a great example of how not to write web links in her book Letting Go of the Words. In chapter 2, she talks about how we all interpret as we read. For instance, your users may not know the same words you know. Or the same word might mean different things to them than to you.
Her example refers to an old version of the official Transport for London website. Two users are looking for information about special deals on tickets, which is found under a link labeled “Oyster.”
p. 11, Letting Go of the Words, Ginny Redish.
Call your content what it is
Let’s all learn from DeRossi’s dirty little mistake. If you label a section of your website “XXX PERT”—but what you really mean is “read tips from our knowledgeable staff”—be prepared to field lots of questions about porn from some very frustrated users. Or, you could just call it what it is: “Expert Advice.”
Oh, hai! Here’s another list of links we’ve been grooving on.
Minnesota smart Why are the Twin Cities a great place to work on the interwebs? Because of all the smart, passionate people we get to work alongside.
Rethink genius Elizabeth Gilbert's TED talk on having vs. being a genius. It’s long, but we highly recommend taking the 20 minutes to watch it.
Social Media, Inc. Tom Smith explores why big brands struggle with social media. All companies should ponder before signing up for "MyFace," "Twckr," etc.
Around 3 p.m., Brain Traffic takes a break (coordinated by Angie 1.0). It doesn’t happen every day. And not everyone can always participate. But those of us without pressing deadlines step away from our desks, often to pick up miniature containers of Play-Doh. (Thoughtfully supplied by Katie.)
Not many of us are expert sculptors. (Except Christine, who’s good at everything artistic and crafty. She’s our resident Martha Stewart, and she makes delicious toffee, too.) But creating works of art is beside the point.
The main goals of Play-Doh time are simple:
Relax. Taking time away from our desks to recharge, breathe, and de-stress.
Chat. We happen to enjoy each other’s company, and chatting often leads to laughter, and laughter is contagious—especially for Katie.
Play. Mashing colored clay in our hands gets our creative juices flowing. Play-Doh’s tagline states it best: “Imagination Taking Shape.”
Play-Doh time usually only lasts around 15 minutes. It’s not a huge investment of our time. But it is a creative investment in our quality of work.
A little playtime gets those brain cells moving again, energizing our creative process. And once they’re moving, there’s no stopping them. After our Play-Doh break, we knock out more great work. And just a couple hours later, we go home with a feeling of satisfied accomplishment, and some fun memories.
From left: Italian Dinner by Elizabeth (including a bottle of Chianti and spaghetti with meatballs), BT Skull by Angie 1.0, and Frog-Man with Bow Tie by Angie 2.0.
When using the phrase "design strategy" in relation to a website, here's how I’ve seen it defined (and I’m paraphrasing here):
Design strategy is determining how to make a website that meets business objectives and user needs through analysis of user research, business goals, source content, brand guidelines, and identified competitive differentiation.
So, here's my question: Is "design strategy" really the best moniker for this effort? To me, the term by itself conjures up a visual, graphic design association.
But if you Google "What is design strategy," here are a few other definitions:
A discipline which helps firms determine what to make and do, why do it and how to innovate contextually, both immediately and over the long term. (Wikipedia)
A process developed by designers to efficiently find a visual solution to a stated business need or problem. (Design Council, UK)
Using design research (such as consumer observation and fast prototyping) strategically to help identify new product categories and extend core brands into other markets. (Business Week)
This is getting really confusing.
At Brain Traffic, we just call it "website strategy." Because, really. Isn't that what it is?
After defining our project's strategic foundation (informed by business objectives, user goals, research, analytics, source content, and so on), we then focus on three primary components of the website strategy, itself:
Content strategy—The messy process of wrangling, analyzing, and governing the words, images, and transactional features of a website. For a better and more detailed definition, see Kristina’s A List Apart article: The Discipline of Content Strategy.
Visual design—Although I dislike the visual association of the term “design strategy,” I do believe in the importance of good visual design. Without it, websites suck. But that doesn’t mean going all flash on users' arses, either. Good design can be simple.
Functionality—What is it that users are supposed to DO on a website? How can we design the site to make their tasks easy and intuitive?
Together, these three components deliver a comprehensive website strategy.
Let's get aligned on this, can we? By calling this approach “website strategy” instead of “design strategy,” we can provide a better frame of reference for our clients and our industry.
