Our Blog

Archive for the ‘Web Writing’ Category

Personal pronouns: It’s okay to own your web copy

by Angie King on March 11th, 2010

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.
 
Personally, I think it’s a great style choice.

 

Comments

Posted in Uncategorized, User Experience, Web Content, Web Writing

Anatomy of a web content document

by Amy Wallace on February 23rd, 2010

For anyone who works with content, knowing how to format a web content document—or simply how to read it—is a crucial step in successful content creation. 

Why? Because without a clearly structured web content document, you run the risk of confusing your content reviewers, designers, and developers. And that confusion can lead to mistakes and frustration—stuff that could end up manifesting itself on your website.
 
Remember, a web content document isn’t just used by web writers, even though they are often the people who create and manage it.
 
Content reviewers use it to make copy edits and review messaging/tone. Designers use it to get the right copy into their design mock-ups. Developers use it to determine which copy appears as links on the actual website, and when to display dynamic content—for example, content that goes live on a specific date.
 
Here are a few of the formatting essentials you’ll need to cover to make sure your web content document (commonly called a “copy deck”) works for everyone on your marketing and/or creative team(s):
 
Links and buttons
You can count on link and/or button copy to be in just about every web content document you work with. As you probably know, this is the content that takes the user to a new page, cross-references relevant information, or helps a user complete a task.
 
You’ll need to choose a style for representing links and buttons in your document. Our standard is to format this copy as blue, underlined text. This tends to be the industry standard, too.
 
Examples:
 
Read the Brain Traffic blog
 
Submit your request
 
If you do decide to format the links and buttons in your document in a different style, make sure it’s clear—and that everyone on your team knows what it is. Keep in mind that straying from the norm might confuse reviewers, designers, and developers used to working with the standard blue, underlined text style convention.
 
Regardless of the style you choose, follow the link and button text in your content document with its destination, which will likely be based on a site map or an external URL.
 
Examples:
 
                Site map page ID:
Submit your request <link to 2.2>
 
External URL:
Read the Brain Traffic blog <link to http://blog.braintraffic.com/>
 
 Descriptive content labels
If your copy isn’t properly labeled within your content document, designers and developers working with the document can have a difficult time figuring out which copy goes where.
 
So, make sure to identify all the content pieces on each page. For example, put the label "Heading" above your page headline, "Body copy" above the main content, and "Right column copy" above content that lives on this part of the web page. Or use whatever labeling convention your agency or organization may already have established.
 
Example:
 
The key is making sure the labels are clear and easy to understand for everyone referencing your document.
 
Dynamic content
Content that may change or is dependent on functionality conditions is often referred to as "dynamic" content. For instance, if you’re working on a project that includes content that launches on different dates or should only be displayed based on certain requirements (maybe after a user logs in, for example), your document will need to specifically state when to display that content.
 
I recommend writing a short note to the developer above the specific piece of dynamic content. Describe the rule for displaying it—for example, "only display this content for California residents."
 
I write these notes in gray text, so it’s easy for developers to skim and find them throughout the content document.
 

Example:
 
<Note to developers: Display this link on 1/1/2010>
See our 2010 plans<link to 3.4>
 
Meta data
Those of you well-versed in web content know what meta data is, but let’s do a quick review. It refers to specific information developers need to make your content searchable.
 
Meta data includes:
 
·         Meta title (the title of the content page, which appears in your internet browser)
·         Meta description (a keyword-loaded description of the content page)
·         Meta keywords (words that refer to specific topics on the content page and make it easily findable)
 
A web writer or SEO expert is usually responsible for creating this information. Whether or not you create ityourself, you’ll need to include meta data in your content document. Which means you might also need to format this content, especially if you receive the meta data in a different type of document, like Microsoft Excel.
 
It’s a good idea to place the meta data in a separate section of your content  document—say, at the top of each page—so it’s clearly distinguished from the actual web copy.
 
Example:

Remember, the web content document you create isn’t just black-and-white. Sometimes it’s blue. And underlined. With notes. Because that’s what works.

Comments

Posted in Content Strategy, Style Guides and Such, Uncategorized, Web Content, Web Writing

Secret’s in the source: Gathering useful source content

by Elizabeth Saloka on February 17th, 2010

We web writers like talking about bulleted lists. And keeping things short. And cake.  

But for whatever reason, we don’t talk much about source content. We should. Because no matter how short our paragraphs, or how bulleted our lists, or how cake-filled our mouths, if we don’t start with good source content, we’re screwed. 
 
Back up. Why’s source content so important?
Source content is to web content as marble is to the Venus de Milo. Or, more deliciously, as batter is to cake (mmm, cake). It’s the material you shape into your final product. If you want to create worthwhile content, you need to start with worthwhile source content.
 
What is “worthwhile” source content, exactly?
Source content comes in many forms—from your client’s current web content to print brochures to testimonials. Worthwhile source content gives you accurate facts and ideas relevant to your client and their users. Now, that’s not to say it doesn’t also contain outdated facts and irrelevant ideas. It probably does. That’s why you’re there—to separate the wheat from the chaff.
 
For example, if your client’s current print brochure says they work with Adobe, Apple, and Hall and Oates, that’s a fact. Arguably, a notable and powerful one. If your client’s current print brochure says they “work with many premier clients” that’s not really a fact. And it’s not a very powerful statement. Wheat. Chaff. See the difference?
 
Now, I know what you’re thinking …
 
But what if your client’s source content is all chaff? In that case, you’re going to have to do some digging. In other words, you’re going to have to ask for more source content. Or …
 
Interview ‘em!
Okay, so. You asked the client for more source content. Turns out, they don’t have any. Now it’s time to dust off the ol’ notepad, hop in your Dodge Stratus, and conduct interviews!
 
That’s right. You’re gonna have to put on your reporter hat. Before you do, read up on how to do so effectively and efficiently:
 
1. Exhaust your resources.
The great thing about being a web writer these days? We have a handy tool called the Internet. Not like when our great-grandmothers were web writers. Back then, web writers didn’t HAVE the Internet.

Not funny? Let’s move on. My point is, the Internet obviously contains a lot of information. So, if you have holes in your source content, it can pay to do a quick Google search or two before approaching subject matter experts. If you get information from third-party sources, be sure to verify it with the client. 
 
2. Prepare yourself.
Don’t go in to interview clients without a basic idea of what you’re looking for. If you’re working with a content strategy, refer to that.
 
If you’re not working with a content strategy, make a list of common questions users will likely ask when they come to a website that the source content didn’t answer. Such as, “How do I contact the company?” Or, “What, exactly, does this company do?” Write these questions down.
 
Then, when you interview stakeholders and subject matter experts, you can be very specific about what information you need from them. By being prepared, you save yourself and your client time. And you increase the likelihood you’ll get exactly the source content you need.
 
3. If you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all.
Source content is a sensitive area for a lot of clients. Because, at some point—maybe even now—it wasn’t just their source content. It was their content. Their home page. Their brochure. They approved it. Maybe (though they might not cop to it) they even wrote it.
 
So, instead of saying, “Holy corn fritters your content’s horrendous!” say, “I’m SO thrilled to work with you. We’re gonna make your website super awesome.” When you show clients you’re on their side, they’ll open up. They’ll trust you. Which means they’ll be in a better position to answer your questions. And they are more likely to clearly, fairly judge your work once you start writing.

4. Don’t be afraid to ask dumb questions.
My kindergarten teacher used to say, “There’s no such thing as a dumb question.” What a liar!
 
But as a web writer—and, OK, just as a regular human—I ask dumb questions all the time. Questions like, “So, what do your customers do with your toasters after they buy them?” Or, “What do you mean by ‘good,’ exactly?”
 
Dumb questions can get you really far for two big reasons. First, dumb questions loosen clients up. They’re so blown away by your sheer stupidity, they forget to be self-conscious. Instead of saying, “We’re an experienced team of technologists,” they say, “We fix computers. We’re computer fixers. You do know what a computer is, right?” They break things down in plain, direct, unmistakable terms—the same thing you’re trying to do for users.
 
Dumb questions also shake things up. They make people really think. By doing this, they open up all kinds of potential avenues. “Hey, do we need an FAQ section?” And, “Why exactly do we have fourteen paragraphs about our CEO on the About Us page?”
 
You ask dumb questions. They start asking dumb questions. The content gods smile.
 
And there you have it, chief. You’re now a source content rock star. Please, use your skills for good. And to score free cake for yourself and your loved ones (hint: me).

Comments

Posted in Content Strategy, Editorial Strategy, Uncategorized, Web Content, Web Writing

You Are Not Alone

by Kristina Halvorson on February 9th, 2010

Every time I give a content strategy workshop, there are two things I hear from participants.
 
The first is this:
 
We’re still doing content wrong in our company, and I’m really embarrassed about it.
 
Even if these aren’t the exact words attendees use, it’s the message they’re sending loud and clear every time they raise their hand to ask a question. “Sorry my company is so behind the curve, but…” or “I realize everyone else knows what they’re doing, but…”
 
Let me tell you something: There are very, very few organizations that actually have their acts together when it comes to content. Furthermore, no one knows where to start fixing their content. Tools? People? Time? Nonexistent.
 
Yet.
 
If you’re sitting in a content strategy workshop, you’re an early adopter. If you’re participating in the content strategy Google Group, attending (or starting) a Meetup, planning to come to the Content Strategy Forum in Paris … you are, quite literally, a pioneer in this field.
 
You’re not late to the party. The conversation has only begun.
 
Here’s the second thing I hear:
 
            This is hard.
 
Well, HELL YES, it’s hard. You’re not going to leave a workshop or a one-hour talk and go back to your company and suddenly find yourself with funding and staff and group hugs. (If that were the case, I would charge a lot more. Booyah.)
 
There’s a reason content strategy is The Next Big Thing, and it’s not because it’s easy or cheap. It’s because content is a huge, pain-in-the-ass, expensive, out-of-control problem. And, as with any big messy problem, getting to a solution is going to take time. Creating a smart plan for the creation, delivery, and governance of your web content means research and reflection. Trial and error. And selling your plan to The Powers that Be—winning attention, approval, and resources—is going to take even longer.
 
Be. Patient.
 
Ask smart questions. Be brave about sharing your insights. Don’t hesitate to point out what’s broken, or how your competition is doing it better. Use SEO results (or lack thereof) and content inventories and workflow analyses and anything else you can think of to frame your content problem.
 
Remember: While content strategy isn’t new, the conversation is. And it’s early. Don’t be in a huge rush, and don’t lose hope. 
 
Patience. Persistence. A sense of humor. You’ll need them all if you want content strategy. Now, get to it.

Comments

Posted in Content Strategy, Web Content, Web Writing

Sorting through the digital debris

by Christine Anameier on February 5th, 2010

As I sit here sniffling and coughing, I’m thinking, how can I get rid of this cold?

Let’s ask Google!

“How to Cure a Cold” is at eHow.com. The author, ranked as an “Authority,” advises me to inhale a lot of steam and avoid dairy products. Her credentials? “I have an English degree and love to write for fun, but I’ve never made a profit yet!” 

“How to Cure a Common Cold Naturally” also appears on eHow.com. This piece advises me to wash my hands a lot: “Studies show by doing this step once you have a cold will shorten the cold’s duration.” Drink water, drink green tea, rest, exercise (?), cut out sugar, add garlic tablets … Huh. The author’s background? Apparently she’s a freelance writer and certified Pilates instructor.

Another “How to Cure the Common Cold,” anonymously written, counsels me to become an infectious-disease expert and secure a massive research grant. There’s a raging flame war in the comments section, but the article got 2 stars out of 5 in their ratings system … so somebody liked it.

 “Cure for Common Colds” is brought to you by essortment.com. They list the symptoms of the common cold and observe that a cold lasts from 2-7 days “depending upon the virility of the strain.” (Oh my.) They admit, “there is no real fast cure for this condition,” recommend a bunch of OTC meds, and end with a butt-covering admonition to “contact your doctor.”

“How to Get Rid of a Cold Without Using Medications” on wikiHow.com says:

    • Don’t take medications.
    • “Keep your resting area clean and sanitary.”
    • Suck on zinc lozenges.
    • Take regular baths… 

Right.

Seriously?

    • ezinearticles.com recommends hypnosis
    • associatedcontent.com says “cut all dairy out of your diet”
    • bukisa.com (tagline: “Share your Knowledge, Earn Money”) says to put peroxide on a Q-tip and stick it up my nose
    • answers.yahoo.com provides off-the-cuff remarks from random people with no credentials whatsoever

All is not lost
If I know where to look, there’s reputable, scientifically supported advice out there. Luckily, I’ve heard of the Mayo Clinic (where an actual doctor neatly debunks the anti-dairy angle). I know I can trust WebMD or the Merck Manual. Otherwise, I might be wondering how to tell the reliable information from the opinions of random passersby.

Turn on your BS detector
I’ve started ignoring all search results pointing to eHow.com and its ilk.

A simple guideline: If the whole idea behind the site is “We know all sorts of stuff about everything,” beware. (Except for Wikipedia, which has enough critical mass to make its own rules much the way Amazon does.)

The content farms have learned to game the system, and dubious content is clogging up the works. If you do internet research and don’t know any better, you can wind up relying on content that’s based on somebody’s vague recollections or urban legends. Come on, Google. Find a way to make expert-written content float to the top. Otherwise, using your search engine will be the equivalent of polling the checkout line at the supermarket.

Comments

Posted in Content Strategy, Uncategorized, Web Content, Web Writing

Members vs. guests: how to label users on authenticated sites

by Angie King on January 12th, 2010

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.
 
Elizabeth:  We’re Vulcans!
 
Twitter says…
 
Address logged in members by name. Everyone else, guest. Internally, use whatever labels you like. Just be consistent, please!
 
Yeah, we heart Amazon. But nobody’s perfect.
When not logged in, Amazon covers all of the bases—member, non-member, logged in, or not logged in. Check it out:
 
 
  • Hello—greets the user, whether a member or not.
  • Sign in—invites members to log on.
  • Start here—gives non-members the opportunity to create an account.
 
When you’re logged in, Amazon greets you by name and gives you the option to log off. Nice.
 
 
However, when I used our company’s login to do some office supply shopping the other day, “Not Brain?” had me giggling for hours.
 

Comments

Posted in Around the Office, Content Strategy, User Experience, Web Writing

Behold, the mighty hive

by Kristina Halvorson on January 8th, 2010

 Happy New Year!

 
(My New Year’s resolution was not to resolve anything this year. So far, I’m doing great.)
 
Say, I’ve gotten several requests for the "hive" diagram I use in presentations. It’s a simple, visual example of how web project team roles interact with one another.
 
This is it:
 
 skillset org_webprojectroles
(click to see full-sized image)
 
I found the diagram on Skillset.org back in ‘08, but apparently they’ve pulled it down since then. So, as my gift to you, here it is. Wield it within your organizations at will.

Comments

Posted in Content Strategy, Editorial Strategy, Uncategorized, User Experience, Web Content, Web Writing

Don’t gamble with automatic feedback copy

by Angie King on January 5th, 2010

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:
 

StratmoAFC

(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. 

 

Comments

Posted in Content Strategy, Editorial Strategy, Web Writing

“Hand-Crafted Content” vs. the Machine: Betting on the People

by Kristina Halvorson on December 14th, 2009

 I just finished reading Michael Arrington’s "The End of Hand-Crafted Content " (also published elsewhere as "AOL’s New Fast-Food-Content Strategy Means the End of Journalism You Actually Enjoy").

How. Depressing.

Since reading Wired’s apocalyptic article,  "The Answer Factory: Demand Media and the Fast, Disposable, and Profitable as Hell Media Model," I’ve certainly spent plenty of time bitching about the lowering of our already low standards for web content.

Here’s a summary of how mass-produced content works: 

Pieces [(content to be created)] aren’t dreamed up by trained editors nor commissioned based on submitted questions. Instead they are assigned by an algorithm, which mines nearly a terabyte of search data, Internet traffic patterns, and keyword rates to determine what users want to know and how much advertisers will pay to appear next to the answers.
 

Then, the assignment is posted to a ginormous database; it’s accepted by a freelancer somewhere, who then throws something together as quickly as possible because he’s only getting paid, like, four dollars to create it. (Want to know what the best vodka in the world is? A random bartender from a random bar in Florida KNOWS THE ANSWER!) (Uh, you’ll have to sit through the ad first.)

So, in one fell swoop, Demand Media—and now AOL—are both flooding the search engines with awful, terrible content and gleefully commodifying the work of writers, videographers, editors, and other media professionals around the world.

I hate them. Oooooo, how I hate them.

But, you know what?

McDonald’s didn’t put La Belle Vie out of business.

Does McDonald’s make more money than La Belle Vie? Of course they do. They’re freakin’ McDonalds. But La Belle Vie is running a very fine, profitable business, thank you very much, turning out exquisite French food that makes me want to weep with joy. (Even their cocktail menu is extraordinary.) (No, I do NOT say that about every cocktail menu.)

You don’t have to eat at La Belle Vie to appreciate the metaphor. Not everybody wants McDonald’s, and nobody wants McDonald’s all the time. People go out of their way to find what will satisfy, even delight, their appetites. 

AOL and Demand Media (and dozens more competitors, I’m sure) are anathema to pretty much anyone who wants an even slightly obscure question answered online. But in the long run, I’m betting on people, not algorithms. Just because I clicked on your stupid video doesn’t mean I can’t use my back button.

p.s. Google, get on this.   

 

Comments

Posted in Content Strategy, Editorial Strategy, Uncategorized, User Experience, Web Content, Web Writing

A little label love goes a long way

by Christine Benson on December 2nd, 2009

I’m currently seven months pregnant. Rather than developing nesting tendencies and actually cleaning my home, I have developed an addiction to reading craft blogs.

On many of these blogs, I’ve noticed the trend of labeling the comments section with something more customized than the standard "comments."
 
Here are a couple of examples:
 

not talking to myself

superCool

It’s a great combination of being human and still being useful. This small change demonstrates an individual’s voice, but also clearly communicates the goal of the section.
 
I also thought it was a great example of how content (rather than design) can show brand and personality. These are blogs that are built on standard templates, but with this one little change, I suddenly felt a connection to a human on the other end.
 
Added bonus? People seemed to comment on these blogs more than the ones simply labeled "comments" or "leave a reply".
 
Many companies are locked into template designs that they feel constrained by, resulting in lamentations about being unable to add a lifestyle image or change a font. These projects are often time-consuming and expensive. Neither of those terms are popular, especially in the current economic climate.
 
So, when half of the room is screaming for a redesign while the other half is screaming back about time and budget, consider focusing on how the content can improve your site.

Comments

Posted in Content Strategy, Editorial Strategy, User Experience, Web Content, Web Writing