Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox, March 2, 2009:

Write for Reuse

Summary:
Users often see online content out of context and read it with different goals than you envisioned. While you can't predict all such goals, you can plan for multiple uses of your text.

No matter your medium, it's fairly standard advice to simply write for your readers and their tasks. For old media, reader goals are well known, ranging from being entertained (when reading a mystery novel) to getting investment ideas (when reading the Wall St. Journal's "Markets" section).

Writing for the Web differs, however, because various users might approach a given piece of content in different ways:

In some of these scenarios, users see only a small portion of the content displayed out of context. They might, for example, see only a headline, or perhaps a headline, summary, and a thumbnail photo.

Writing for Different Contexts

The first challenge is to write content that will make sense when taken out of context. Fortunately, you can personally assess your content's usability in the most common out-of-context scenarios:

Writing for Different User Goals

A second challenge is harder: Is your content helpful to users whose goals differ from those of the main task you wrote for?

We're currently testing how people read weblogs and other alternative Web genres, in preparation for our upcoming seminar, Writing for the Web 2. Our study illuminates the usability problems created when readers and writers approach the same content with conflicting tasks in mind.

One test user was reading the corporate blog for Whole Foods (a big chain of grocery stores) and became interested in a posting about the recent health scare involving peanut butter.

The user's goal was to find out whether the problem affected Skippy brand peanut butter. Because so many food products had been recalled, and because many readers wanted to comment, the blog posting had grown to 28 screenfulls on the 1280x1024 monitor we used for the test session. Overwhelmed by this long scrolling page, the user quickly turned to the within-page search and entered "skippy."

The following screenshot shows what happened: Our test participant quickly found user-contributed content asking, "is Skippy Peanut Butter okay?"

Screenshot from Whole Food's company blog

The test participant proceeded to further browse the blog and again searched for "skippy," which led to another user-contributed comment. Ultimately, the test participant concluded that Whole Foods didn't have an answer about Skippy peanut butter.

Wrong.

As the above screenshot shows, a store team member's response appears immediately below Chryl Smith's question about Skippy. So, why did the user overlook this official information, despite the fact that it was (a) adjacent to the question, (b) highlighted, and (c) marked as an official response?

Two reasons:

Modularizing Content for Task Reuse

Although you can't predict what any individual visitor to your site will be looking for, you can write in ways that support alternate goals.

The three most important guidelines are:

Beyond all this, the top guideline of all is to simply recognize the nature of the Web: People will use your copy differently than you expect, and you should try to write with this fact of online life in mind.

Learn More

Two full-day courses on content usability (Writing for the Web 1 and Writing for the Web 2) at the Usability Week 2009 conference in Washington DC, San Francisco, London, and Sydney.


> Other Alertbox columns (complete list)
> Sign up for newsletter that will notify you of new Alertboxes

Copyright © 2009 by Jakob Nielsen. ISSN 1548-5552