All Annotations of Write Articles, Not Blog Postings (Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox)[Preview]

saved by23 people, first byAdele on 2007-07-09, last byPaulo Simões on 2008-08-06

• Blog postings will always be commodity content: there's a limit to the value you can provide with a short comment on somebody else's work. Such postings are good for generating controversy and short-term traffic, and they're definitely easy to write. But they don't build sustainable value. Think of how disappointing it feels when you're searching for something and get directed to short postings in the middle of a debate that occurred years before, and is thus irrelevant.
• To demonstrate world-class expertise, avoid quickly written, shallow postings. Instead, invest your time in thorough, value-added content that attracts paying customers.
• I recently served as a "consultant's consultant," advising a world leader in his field on what to do about his website. In particular, this expert asked me whether he should start a weblog. I said no.
• You probably already know my own Internet strategy, so it might not surprise you that I recommended that he should instead invest his time in writing thorough articles that he published on a regular schedule. Given limited time, this means not spending the effort to post numerous short comments on ongoing blogosphere discussions.
• he should instead invest his time in writing thorough articles that he published on a regular schedule
• this means not spending the effort to post numerous short comments on ongoing blogosphere discussions
• You probably already know my own Internet strategy, so it might not surprise you that I recommended that he should instead invest his time in writing thorough articles that he published on a regular schedule. Given limited time, this means not spending the effort to post numerous short comments on ongoing blogosphere discussions.
• Blogs are also fine for websites that sell cheap products. On these sites, visitors can often be easily converted and the main challenge is to raise awareness.
• Blogs are also fine for websites that sell cheap products
• the main challenge is to raise awareness.
• a site that sells pistachio nuts should post as much content about pistachios as possible in the hope of attracting quick hits by people searching for that information. Some percentage of these visitors will buy the nuts while visiting the site.
• For example, a site that sells pistachio nuts should post as much content about pistachios as possible in the hope of attracting quick hits by people searching for that information.
• sites need to build up long-term customer relationships based on respect
• I expect to wait 3-5 years before meeting new readers of my site in person
• there's a limit to the value you can provide with a short comment on somebody else's work
• sustainable value
• Such postings are good for generating controversy and short-term traffic, and they're definitely easy to write. But they don't build sustainable value.

• I am referring to the user experience and to the style of the content in this analysis; not to the technology used to serve up this content. Thus, what I call "articles" might be hosted on a weblog service. What matters is that the user experience is that of immersion in comprehensive treatment of a topic, as opposed to a blog-style linear sequence of short, frequent postings commenting on the hot topic of the day. It doesn't matter what software is used to host the content, the distinctions are:
  

  
  
  • in-depth vs. superficial
    
  • original/primary vs. derivative/secondary
    
  • driven by the author's expertise vs. being reflectively driven by other sites or outside events

• What matters is that the user experience is that of immersion in comprehensive treatment of a topic, as opposed to a blog-style linear sequence of short, frequent postings commenting on the hot topic of the day. It doesn't matter what software is used to host the content, the distinctions are:
  

  
  
  • in-depth vs. superficial
    
  • original/primary vs. derivative/secondary
    
  • driven by the author's expertise vs. being reflectively driven by other sites or outside events
• the user experience is that of immersion in comprehensive treatment of a topic
• • in-depth vs. superficial
    
  • original/primary vs. derivative/secondary
    
  • driven by the author's expertise vs. being reflectively driven by other sites or outside events
• Blog postings will always be commodity content: there's a limit to the value you can provide with a short comment on somebody else's work. Such postings are good for generating controversy and short-term traffic, and they're definitely easy to write. But they don't build sustainable value.

• What matters is that the user experience is that of immersion in comprehensive treatment of a topic, as opposed to a blog-style linear sequence of short, frequent postings commenting on the hot topic of the day. It doesn't matter what software is used to host the content, the distinctions are:
  

  
  
  • in-depth vs. superficial
    
  • original/primary vs. derivative/secondary
    
  • driven by the author's expertise vs. being reflectively driven by other sites or outside events

• it's reasonable to assume that posting quality is more variable than expertise for several reasons:
  

  
  
  • Sometimes people toss off a posting in a minute. Other times they spend hours.
    
  • Sometimes a writer happens to know a lot about the topic at hand, possibly because they've just spent several months working on that exact problem. Other times people know nothing -- which doesn't keep them from voicing their opinions :-)
    
  • Sometimes people are lucky and get a blinding insight. Other times they post more out of duty than anything else.
• If you do start a blog despite my advice, at least screen your postings: wait an hour or two, then reread your comments and avoid uploading any that are average or poor.
• Even if you're the world's top expert, your worst posting will be below average, which will negatively impact on your brand equity. If you do start a blog despite my advice, at least screen your postings: wait an hour or two, then reread your comments and avoid uploading any that are average or poor. (Even average content undermines your brand. Don't contribute to information pollution by posting material that isn't above the average of other people's writings. Plus, of course, follow guidelines for blog usability.)
• If you do start a blog despite my advice, at least screen your postings: wait an hour or two, then reread your comments and avoid uploading any that are average or poor. (Even average content undermines your brand. Don't contribute to information pollution by posting material that isn't above the average of other people's writings. Plus, of course, follow guidelines for blog usability.)
• The beauty of the blogosphere is that it's a self-organizing system. Whenever something good appears, other blogs link to it and it gets promoted in the system and gains higher visibility.
• It's almost impossible to fight the Internet: you're up against millions of people who are willing to work for free.

• 
  If you're an expert who wants to live from adding to the world's knowledge, you must go beyond the mainstream Web model of single page visits driven by search traffic. It's easy enough to build a website that freeloaders will use, but that shouldn't be your approach. You must change the game and create content that's so valuable that business users are willing to pay for it.
  

  
  You should also focus on material that lower-ranked content contributors can't easily create in their spare time.
  

  
  Both of these needs are met when you produce in-depth content.

• create content that's so valuable that business users are willing to pay for it.
• It might take you only an hour to write a blog posting on some current controversy, but a thousand other people can do that as well
• when you're the duke, you can't trade in coffee beans, because the bazaar dealers will always undercut your price. You should build a cathedral, because a thousand tents can't compete with the Notre Dame.
• In contrast, in-depth content that takes much longer to create is beyond the abilities of the lesser experts.
• in-depth content that takes much longer to create is beyond the abilities of the lesser experts. A thousand monkeys writing for 1,000 hours doesn't add up to Shakespeare. They'll actually create a thousand low-to-medium-quality postings that aren't integrated and that don't give readers a comprehensive understanding of the topic -- even if those readers suffer through all 1,000 blogs.
• in-depth content that takes much longer to create is beyond the abilities of the lesser experts.
• Why are paying customers (the people who matter) attracted by detailed information? Because systematic and comprehensive coverage is more actionable. It also protects them against the risk of losses caused when something important is overlooked.
• Why are paying customers (the people who matter) attracted by detailed information? Because systematic and comprehensive coverage is more actionable. It also protects them against the risk of losses caused when something important is overlooked.

• 
  If you're an expert who wants to live from adding to the world's knowledge, you must go beyond the mainstream Web model of single page visits driven by search traffic. It's easy enough to build a website that freeloaders will use, but that shouldn't be your approach. You must change the game and create content that's so valuable that business users are willing to pay for it.
  

  
  You should also focus on material that lower-ranked content contributors can't easily create in their spare time.
  

  
  Both of these needs are met when you produce in-depth content.

• In-depth content provides more value in less time than numerous superficial postings.
• People looking for the quick hit and free advice are not your customers. Let them eat cake; let them read Wikipedia
• Recommending in-depth content flies in the face of all guidelines for Web writing, which call for fewer words and scannable information.
  

• The content usability guidelines are correct: they are indeed the way to make a site easier for most people. Thus, you should follow the guidelines -- rather than emulate this article -- for normal business websites and intranets. (When I say "business sites," I include government sites and non-profits, as well as e-commerce and corporate marketing sites.)
• For most sites, the content is not the point. Instead, you want to answer customers' questions as rapidly as possible so that they'll advance in the sales cycle and start buying (or donate, or sign up for your newsletter, or whatever else you want them to do).
• so-called Web 2.0 movement
• Elite, expertise-driven sites are the exception to the rule. For these sites, you don't care about 90% of users, because they want a lower level of quality than you provide and they'll never pay for your services. People looking for the quick hit and free advice are not your customers. Let them eat cake; let them read Wikipedia.
• he small percentage of users who are qualified prospects still read in an F-pattern, so a headline's first words are more important than its last words, just as they are for normal sites.
• Why are paying customers (the people who matter) attracted by detailed information? Because systematic and comprehensive coverage is more actionable. It also protects them against the risk of losses caused when something important is overlooked.
• In-depth content provides more value in less time than numerous superficial postings. That's why business customers have empirically been willing to pay, and that's why you should emphasize fewer, better pieces as your content strategy.
• For most sites, the content is not the point. Instead, you want to answer customers' questions as rapidly as possible so that they'll advance in the sales cycle and start buying (or donate, or sign up for your newsletter, or whatever else you want them to do).
• People looking for the quick hit and free advice are not your customers. Let them eat cake; let them read Wikipedia.
• Still, even if you run an expertise-driven site, you should comply with the bulk of content usability guidelines: be as brief as you can; use bulleted lists and highlighted keywords; chunk the material; and use descriptive headings, subheads, and hyperlinks. The small percentage of users who are qualified prospects still read in an F-pattern, so a headline's first words are more important than its last words, just as they are for normal sites.

• on 2007-07-09 Web-wahm
  Why you should write in-depth content and NOT blogs, even if you really ARE an expert in your field...interesting piece from the Usability Expert Jakob Nielsen.