July 12, 2002, 4:36 PM ET
Strange section titles
I've just posted a comment to Poynter's online-news list-serv about some news sites' strange section titles. Someone had asked whether online news staffs could benefit from attending usability conferences. My reply:
You bet your bippy online newspaper staffs can benefit from usability conferences. Steve Y. nailed it: Most newspaper sites' designs try to replicate a print product. And it's disgusting.
I can't tell you how many times I've happened upon a newspaper site for the first time and been mystified by its strange section titles. Take a look at some of these and see if you can guess what kind of content lurks behind them:
(I don't mean to pick on these sites in particular; they're just the first few I stumbled upon.)
"FYI"? Isn't *everything* on a newspaper site supposed to be FYI? "PageSix"? That's very relevant in a newspaper, but online, it's meaningless. I'm from Chicago, so I'm familiar with "Metromix" -- but who's to say an outsider will know what that is?
Etc, etc, etc.
Producers of these sites might make the argument that repeat users will eventually *learn* the meaning of these vague terms. But what's the percentage of Internet users who just happen upon your site, say via a search engine, at any given time? I recall hearing it was a relatively high number.
Anyway, yes, newspaper sites have a long way to go in terms of usability. I've only mentioned a single usability problem above, but there are way too many others.
Since posting, I've found a few more:
Thoughts? Seen any really wacky section titles? Post a comment.
July 12, 2002, 12:50 PM ET
Helping the uninitiated 'get it'
Here's a great cause that's worth helping: A few members of evolt.org's thelist list-serv have begun a campaign to put together an informational kit that explains, in plain English, why sites should adopt Web standards. In theory, it'd be an explanatory white paper -- complete with charts, laws and real-life case studies -- that Web designers could take to their bosses/managers/clients and say, "This is why our site should be standards-compliant. Here's the proof."
All right! I can't wait to see what they come up with. The best part is, anyone can help. They've set up a Yahoo Group and have begun preliminary discussions on where the group is going and who's helping out with what. Do the Web a favor and check 'em out.
July 12, 2002, 8:43 AM ET
USATODAY.com hacked
USATODAY.com reports hackers "penetrated the site and vandalized the homefront" late last night. Ananova reports bogus stories appeared on the site's home page. Matt Drudge reports the bogus stories included "Bush proposes another new Cabinet post," "Opps says the Pope; Christianity a Sham!" and "Donald Rumsfeld: An American Beauty?"
USATODAY.com was taken offline and restored a few hours later, according to the note on its Web site.
Post a comment:
Comments on this entry are closed.
Don't see any comments? That's because my Web hosting provider has made a server upgrade that broke the commenting feature on this site. I'm working to restore that; please check back later.