1 Beautiful Read

I have been pondering some of the same thoughts lately. I have read Steve Krug’s book, I have read Jakob Nielsen’s book, but still something inside says that it is a matter of quality, not quantity. I believe that is the difference between copy (mindless quantity) and true content (quality).

I, for one, don’t mind reading on the web (or anywhere). I try not to scan as I don’t want to mis-quote or mis-understand what the writer is trying to convey. I think there are people that scan, but I am not always sure if it is the writer’s fault. I think, as you said, it has been so pushed for the culture of the web that everything be short, that writer’s cut out the heart of their content. Are we as readers that impatient? Is it because we have 200 other feeds to read and we have to rush to the next one?

Excellent article and content. I hope we can start to see more articles like this one around the web.

posted at 01:26 pm on July 31, 2007 by Nate Klaiber

2 Web Writing

What a great article. I love reading, I read everything I come across and wish more websites gave me more to read.

I especially like the idea of needing the heart of the proposed website before the designer can build the body. How true!

posted at 01:27 pm on July 31, 2007 by Terry Corum

3 The horror

I am just amazed that I actually read all of this article without single hasitation. And equally shocked to realize how true this is and how poorly this has been thought in the schools I was (am) at. Great article, thanks.

posted at 02:05 pm on July 31, 2007 by Wilco Fiers

4 Buried Words

It’s funny that the web started as a way to host long documents containing oodles of content. When people search for a particular subject they expect content. And yet companies constantly build stock-standard brochure websites, thinking they’ll hit the big scene for having done so.

Let’s make a move toward making the web not just beautiful—but keep to the original charter; let’s fill it with valuable content.

posted at 03:06 pm on July 31, 2007 by Matt Stevenson

5 I'm guilty

I can’t tell you how many alt tags I’ve written like “photograph of the university tower.” No more though, I have been inspired. Thanks!

posted at 03:29 pm on July 31, 2007 by Guy Schmidt

6 But do people read?

All good and well… I also believe in quality… but do people read it? Here, i’m talking about a commerce site (not a blog or an online publication).

Someone put it very nicely, which caused us to approach our soon-to-be-relaunched site, along the lines of, “The sooner you get over the fact that people don’t read your content, the sooner you can start writing good content.”

Anyhow, I wish all the usability experts had your line of thinking (which i also share) as it would give me more confidence to stick to my ground.

posted at 03:53 pm on July 31, 2007 by Fahed Bizzari

7 To Read or Not to Read...

I read your article straight trough, as well… even taking the link to see the footer on Emily Gordon’s blog. Obviously, your writing won me over.

I agree 100% with your article. I think we need to draw a better distinction on the web between “reference” material and true writing. I think it’s a blurring of these two that is causing a lot of headaches.

We don’t have this problem in print. Most people would not pick up a dictionary or a product catalog and complain about the quality of writing. Even though the web is a source of information, it is not just a dumping ground for reference material. As you pointed out, web content is the literature of the future.

posted at 04:21 pm on July 31, 2007 by Reece Conrad

8 Untitled

I have run into this issue so many times that it is not even funny.

When I was doing freelance, it almost seemed that clients were insulted by my insistence that content development proceed design and layout. I may have even lost a few jobs from companies who thought that a good developer should be willing to design in a vacuum.

Now that I work in Higher Ed, you would think that things would be different…

posted at 05:05 pm on July 31, 2007 by Gabriel McGovern

9 Good article

We all read it from start to finish. But that was because of its purpose and our goals as users (and it was well written).

We were at the end point in our task and that task was to read an article that looked interesting. Most user journeys are not like this.

Also many people who write content that appears on the web are (sadly) incapable of writing in such an entertaining manner. Unfortunately they are outnumbered by those who think they can.

I agree that it’s not all about writing things briefly. But in my opinion, the instances where anorexic content is the best option far outweigh those opportunities that exist to write a nice full piece of text.

posted at 05:20 pm on July 31, 2007 by David Hamill

10 Untitled

We were at the end point in our task and that task was to read an article that looked interesting. Most user journeys are not like this.

I think my end in reading this article was – yes, to read something interesting – but moreover, to read something interesting that I identified with. The point, as Amber puts it, is for writers to “think of themselves as central to the user’s experience, and to treat their own content not merely as king, but as heart, soul, and breath.”

On a related note, I’ve been toying with the idea of writing first and designing later as an interface designer. In other words, writing my interface as a sentence, paragraph, or short essay to help myself fully grasp what needs to be communicated. From there I would begin making decisions about graphics, layout, and typography. I dunno – would at least be an interesting exercise.

posted at 05:47 pm on July 31, 2007 by Matt Donovan