Our Blog

I love this sign.

I pass by it every day on my way to work. It’s hard to tell from the picture, but this sign is huge. I’d guess it’s six or seven feet tall.

I love it because it communicates information that’s useful to me (store name and hours) in a manner that is conscious of how I will be reading the information (quickly, from a bus, bike, or car).

Everything works together. It has both good information and an easy- to-read design. It’s a good reminder to not forget the how and when, in addition to the what, when looking at content for your site.
 

View Comments

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

A while ago, our fearless leader blogged about how technology can’t fix your content problems. Of course, I agree.

Sure, the CMS is important – the right one makes content publishing easier and the published pages more consistent. But it can’t ensure that your content is useful and usable. Only a person or team of people can do that.

Consider this smaller-scale example:

I just read a blog post by Ben Parr on mashable about an online resume builder tool – JobSpice – that he describes as shockingly simple to use.

It does look pretty darn easy to use, making it a great way to create a dapper dandy resume. It’s as easy as filling in the blanks. Cool. It’s sorta like a CMS. Just enter your content, check some boxes, add some parameters, and ta da: Content. Published.

But, the person building the resume still needs to think about what content goes in the blanks. Right? The shockingly simple tool can’t do that. Neither can a CMS. A person has to determine:

• Who is the resume for?

• What kind of job am I looking for?

• What will the employer care about?

• What do I want them to do after reading my resume?

Real, live people are the key to content that meets users’ needs and drives results. And that’s where content strategy comes in. It answers the questions that help ensure your content – however it gets published – hits the mark.
 

View Comments

Posted in Content Strategy, User Experience, Web Writing

At lunch the other day a friend asked me, "Where can I find somebody smart, but really cheap, to be my ghost-tweeter?"  A guy next to her obviously thought she was loony.  Not me; I’m used to it.

Twitter-as-content-commodity was a new twist, but her conundrum was very familiar. What she was really saying was, "I know I need smart content, but I don’t want to pay for it." On a grander scale, many organizations have the same attitude.

Most people understand that content has value. Big value. They just can’t prove or measure the ROI. And, therefore, they have no concept of how much content is worth.

Proving and measuring the value of content is complex. But, as content professionals, we have to do it. I have some ideas about how to do it, but before I even go there, let’s talk about why everybody is so confused in the first place.

Brace yourselves, content folks. We’re going to talk economics. I promise there will be no math involved.

1776: Defining product value, Adam Smith style

I’m no expert in economics, but I know this much: Adam Smith was a smart dude. Back in 1776, he wrote The Wealth of Nations, a book that basically defined economics as we know it. His ideas still influence the way we assign value to things today.

For the market economy to work, Smith said products of value have three characteristics:

• Excludability: The seller can "exclude" you from owning or using the product unless you pay for it; the product is difficult to replicate so you have to buy it from the seller.

• Rivalry: It’s more expensive for two people to use the product then one person (So, I can buy a pair of shoes for $10, but if we both want to have shoes it’ll be $20).

• Transparency: Customers can see exactly what they’ll get before they buy the product.

These rules work pretty darn well for things like apples, shoes, or kazoos.  Those are the kind of tangible products people bought in 1776. (Well, kazoos weren’t invented yet, but apples and shoes surely were.) 

1956: A funny thing happened on the way to the factory
Smith’s theories worked pretty well for 180 years, but in 1956 something happened that would have surprised Adam – in the U.S. the number of white-collar jobs surpassed blue-collar jobs. 

So, instead of people working in factories and farms making tangible products, people were sitting behind desks making  …  information. Accountants creating reports, lawyers creating legislation, advertisers creating TV spots, etc., etc. In 1956, content/information was red hot. The first computers were up and running (Check out the photo below of a home computer in 1956 for proof).  Heck, Marilyn Monroe even married Arthur Miller, a playwright (you may have heard of him).

The industrial age was over. The information age had begun. Information was in demand in a way it had never been before — and Smith’s three pillars of economic value had started to blur.

1990s: Content breaks all the rules
Until the 1990s, Adam Smith three pillars seemed to be adequate, if not perfect, even for content. Before then, if you wanted some information, you bought a book or newspaper (tangible items). Sure, you could lend your book to a friend, who would get the content for free, but content creators were largely paid for their work.

But, with the advent of the internet, the pillars of value for content collapsed. 

• Excludability: Content is now easy to create, use, and replicate.

• Rivalry: When content is posted online – even if you make me pay for access – I can easily share it with millions of friends without paying a cent.

• Transparency: Once you’ve looked at content in-depth, you really don’t need to buy it, do you?

Simultaneously the business importance of good content went sky-high AND the value of content tanked (according to Adam Smith). On top of it all, the internet movement suggested that all content should be free. And society agreed. 

2009: Classical economics is toast
So, let’s recap. Today, content is one of the most important business assets in the world. AND, according to traditional economics, content has little value. AND people expect to get it for free (see newspaper industry stats). AND we’re experiencing the worst recession in 80 years.

The economic system is just plain out of date.

I wish I could tell you about the economic model of the future. (Not only would that be nice for you, but I’d make zillions.) Lots of brilliant economists have been trying to figure it out for years.

No wonder people are confused about what to pay for content strategy and creation. 

COMING SOON: The Value of Content, Part 2 (The Sequel)
Here’s what I do know. Content makes money. Content saves money. And, ROI of content can be measured.  That’s what my next blog post will be about in a few weeks.  (It’s just like when the Brady Bunch went to Hawaii – two whole episodes of non-stop fun! Just. Like. That.)

Until then if you have any great examples or ideas about content ROI, send them my way (melissa.rach@braintraffic.com). I’d love to hear about them, and I’ll include them in the blog when I can.

View Comments

Posted in Content Strategy, Editorial Strategy, Information Architecture, Web Content, Web Writing

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.
 

View Comments

Posted in Content Strategy, Editorial Strategy, Web Writing

When used correctly, your style guide can be a helpful tool.  When used incorrectly, it can cause confusion and suck up time.

Don’t let your style guide derail your sane train! Bone up on these tried-and-true tips:

1.    Don’t put it off. Always have your style guide set before you start writing.  A style guide will help you establish, guide and rein in all stakeholder expectations over the course of the project.

Whatever you do, don’t fool yourself into believing you can write now and create your style guide later. You probably won’t. And if you do, rest assured, it’ll be a painful and messy process.

Tip: If you already have a style guide, give it a good once-over. What should change, if anything? What should remain the same? If you’ve found yourself ignoring major sections of the style guide in the past, consider updating it. A tight, clean style guide is a happy style guide!

2.    Make sure you “get it” get it. Don’t make assumptions about your style guide. If anything seems wonky, illogical, or even just “off,” clarify it. That goes double if other people are going to be using it, too.

Tip: Everything’s relative. Words especially. Nail down slippery terms by defining what each one means to you. If you’re going for a “conversational” tone, put together a comparison chart:

 Conversational is …

3.    Bob for phrases. Okay, so, you’ve nailed down the definition of conversational. Great. Now, go a step further.  Hunt down real-world examples of conversational copy. Websites, blogs, Twitter feeds—they’re all easily accessible content mines. When you see a turn of phrase you like, copy and paste that baby into a spreadsheet.

In a nutshell, build out the left-hand column of the diagram above.

Tip: The word bank is supposed to serve as inspiration. You should not copy phrases verbatim from your word bank into your content. In other words, don’t plagiarize.

4.    Check in. After you’ve revised your style guide, run through it again. Make sure you’re on board before proceeding. This might seem tedious. And time-consuming. That’s because it is.  But, it’s the only, only, only way to stay on point.

Tip: When revising a style guide (especially if you’re not the person who created it) give justifications for your changes. This can be a short intro paragraph, or comments in the word document. Or, it could simply be verbal. Whatever you do, though, justify.

5.    Honor and obey your style guide. Inevitably, maybe after a few happy years with your style guide, you will see another one. It will appear fancy and wonderful. And you will think, “Hey, no fair! I want a fancy and wonderful style guide.”

You will be tempted to stray. DON’T. Stay the course. Ditching your style guide mid-project, or—dread of all dreads!—near the end of a project, will only lead to heartbreak. 

Tip: If you’re working on an ongoing project, and you’re not happy with the style guide, consider revising your style guide for the next major content rollout. 

View Comments

Tags: Add new tag
Posted in Content Strategy, Editorial Strategy, Uncategorized, Web Writing

When I found out that my dog Sam might have a brain tumor, I went straight to my computer to learn everything I could. A Google search led me to a pet website with articles ranging from light-hearted topics, such as pet costumes, to serious subjects, such as health conditions.

The article on canine brain tumors was very informative and left me feeling a little sad, but hopeful. And then, I reached the last line. It read: "I hope you found this article enjoyable."

My mouth dropped and I said out loud to no one, "What? Are you serious? No, I did not enjoy this article, you oompa loompa. My dog might be dying."

I knew, because I understand some things about content management systems and re-usable page templates, that this line appears at the end of every article on the site.

Aside from it being completely inappropriate for the topic at hand – especially when the reader is likely a pet parent on an emotional roller coaster – it’s just not good practice. What’s the benefit to the user in this little pat-yourself-on-the-back, lazy approach to ending the article? Give me something I can use – what’s my next step, where can I get more information?

If you absolutely must use static content on a page template that will be re-used, make absolutely sure it fits for every possible content type or topic, or risk losing your credibility and your users. Better yet, think carefully about whether it serves the users’ needs in the first place.

View Comments

Posted in Content Strategy, Editorial Strategy, Web Writing

Fake celebrity Tweeting is web writing. On crack.

Web writers have to adopt appropriate voice and tone while remaining pithy. Fake celebrity Tweeters have to adopt appropriate voice and tone while remaining super pithy—and telling pudding jokes. It’s a hard job.

Here are some of our favorites:  

• “Economy?… TRASH!” @OscarTheeGrouch

• “Even though he looked like a wax figure, Mr. Jackson could do a strange backward jig, the likes of which I’ve never seen. He will be missed!” @HalfPintIngalls

•  “Hulk smash!” @incredible_rawr
•  “zippity hippity dop! zooba shawow! with the people, and the places, and the ohhh try some jello pudding. it’s such a good snack SHEBOP!” @JelloPudding
• “Hey twitter.” @HeyBrotherBluth

Would YOU like to be a fake celebrity Tweeter? Last we checked, these celebrities weren’t taken:

•  William Howard Taft

•  Jessica Tandy

•  Zach Morris (for real!)

•  Kevin Costner

• Rudy Huxtable

View Comments

Posted in Around the Office, Web Content, Web Writing

Like many information architects, I come from a design background. That’s why I am very familiar with the tasks and process involved with design. While I have always worked closely with writers throughout my career, I have never been a writer myself.

I know that in past lives I have made a terrible assumption. Working at Brain Traffic I have seen daily proof that I am not the only person to make this mistake. And while I have seen the light, this assumption still runs rampant thorough the industry.  I’m here to set the record straight.

Here it is … ready?

It’s the information architect’s job to find the source content.

Many information architects and designers try to draw a parallel between writing and design. Finding and selecting the colors, fonts, images, etc., is an engaging and exciting part of creating a great visual design. Searching for or creating the source imagery is why many designers get up everyday and go to work. 

Conflicts often arise between information architects and designers when the interface is involved. It’s understandable, then, that the IA might assume that writers don’t want the IA to have anything to do with choosing the source content they’ll use to write a website. Wrong.

The writer loves it when an IA points out the relevant source content so he or she can read it, decipher it, and consolidate it into a clear and useful message. They want to focus on the tone and voice of the content. They want to turn nonsense into plain language, often on a tight timeline.

With all respect to the design process, locating source content for every single page of a site is much more time-intensive than finding source assets for representational pages of visual comps. And, digging into the source content is something that should never be skipped when you’re creating the architecture for a new site. From my experience, it’s the only way to plan for a great site that has meaningful content on all of its pages.

So, make sure you know what source content will be used for every page on your site and document it for your writer. Your writer will thank you for it. Trust me.

View Comments

Posted in Content Strategy, Editorial Strategy, Information Architecture, Web Writing

The simplest sentences and websites take the most thought. Ruthlessly revising and deleting is the hallmark of great writing — and how you keep readers on your site. Jakob Nielsen reports that readers read at most only 20 to 28 percent of the contents on a web page. Many stay for less than FOUR SECONDS.

To reiterate: You have FOUR SECONDS OR LESS to show a user that you have the information that he or she is looking for. Anything that’s not entirely relevant or usable has got to go. Or your user’s gonna leave your site.

Knowing that, here’s some advice from the pros that I rely upon when I’m getting too wordy:

“Poor Faulkner. Does he really think big emotions come from big words? He thinks I don’t know the ten-dollar words. I know them all right. But there are older and simpler and better words, and those are the ones I use.”
Ernest Hemingway

“Words, like glass, obscure when they do not aid vision.”
Joseph Joubert

My favorite book on writing is On Writing Well, by William Zinsser. The lessons are incredibly relevant, even if the bulk of the book was written before the dawn of the internet. There are a million golden rules on every page, but it’s not overwhelming. I’ve highlighted nearly everything in the book.

Here’s what’s most relevant in terms of the work we do every day:

“Clutter is the official language used by corporations . . .

Beware, then, of the long word that’s no better than the short word:
•    assistance (help)
•    numerous (many)
•    facilitate (ease)
•    individual (man or woman)
•    remainder (rest)
•    initial (first)
•    implement (do)
•    sufficient (enough)
•    attempt (try)
•    referred to as (called)
•    and hundreds more

Beware of slippery new fad words: paradigm and parameter, prioritize and potentialize. They are all weeds that smother what you write. Don’t dialogue with someone you can talk to. Don’t interface with anybody.”

View Comments

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

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.)
 

View Comments

Posted in Content Strategy, Editorial Strategy, Information Architecture, Resources, User Experience, Web Content, Web Writing