Editing for the Internet

"Research by Jakob Nielson and John Morkes indicates that Web users do not like long, scrolling pages; they prefer the text to be short and to the point"

... so the good news is, everyone's blog should be short this week. Just putting it out there. *wink*

Thought I'd share a couple thoughts on this week's readings. These guidelines are a shining light to those who are tired of websites that look like a MySpace page with pink text, a green scrollbar and a background that doesn't seem to move even when you scroll up and down making you dizzy like one of those 3D pictures you're supposed to stare at.

LINEAR PROSE

Lynch & Horton say, “A collection of links cannot create or sustain an argument or deliver a collection of facts as efficiently or legibly as conventional linear prose”. Something that I don't really think about in web writing is how linear/not it is. Since I've (and most of us have) grown up with the web slowly developing around us, it's easy to assume that websites are still just copy+paste text that could well be from books... since, back in the day, often it was, seriously.

"Linear prose" -- ie. books and printed, sequential text -- has the advantage over web writing for me, so I agree with Lynch & Horton. As we've seen from the readings, web writing is (ideally) short & sharp, with many specific pages for bits of information. Your information is in individually-packaged compartments, and there's no end to the possible pages you might or might not visit. It's like a Choose Your Own Adventure.

But books are different. You can flip around a book, but there's always an established order of chapters and pages. The medium is set in sequence and has a specific context -- which the web definitely does not (see Lynch & Horton).

So "linear" argument -- like reading a book or a chapter from beginning to end -- is very difficult on web pages, for two reasons: (1) Complex information needs to be broken up on a website, or the pages get too long and don't get read anyway. (2) People skim & flip around. Very few people go to a website to check out every page, in order, like you're reading a thesis. Ie, from Bowles & Barden, "Editors must think of each story as a package of separate components and structure the package with hypertext links that readers can choose to follow or ignore according to their own needs or interests" (p.42 of the reader). There are of course journal articles online, which may be an exception, but even so those are basically scanned documents which you could buy in hardcopy, you just happen to be reading them online. (Feel free to disagree)

For me, the web is great for introductory or quick information, but I still feel a lot more respect for information in books. Maybe I'm old school.

Which brings me to the big, cliche question...

ARE WE DUMBING DOWN?

The readings repeatedly emphasized that text needs to be "short and to the point", since "Web users do not like long, scrolling pages" (Bowles & Barden, p.40 of our reader). 

I can understand this. Everyone hates scrolling for miles down a page, and it's important to use the medium you have in the best possible way. The Web is a medium for efficient, quick, easy information.

But it also sounds like we're just not wanting to pay attention any more. What if the Web becomes the main source of information for everything? Will we never get an in-depth Web site? Are we going to go into 1984-type speak?  I know these types of concerns are in no way original or novel, but it's food for thought -- especially for our class, since many/most of us are involved in publishing or communications courses. Is the Internet having an adverse effect on us?

What do you think?