One Web site that is a great example of online writing skills is Slate.com. This site features original journalistic content, but the writing is clearly made for the Internet.
First off, Slate's navigation is very easy to use. The navigation bar is broken up into categories, such as "News & Politics" and "Arts & Life." Each category then brings the user to a list of recent articles. Some of these articles appear to be a little long, which isn't really a good thing, as readers don't read on the web, they SCAN. However, Slate makes up for this breach in length in other ways.
According to Jakob Nielsen, one writing skill Web sites should employ is highlighting key words. In the case of an article on Slate titled "What's Wrong With British Cattle?", keywords and important phrases are highlighted and linked in blue. This allows readers to scan and get the general idea of a story instead of having to read the whole thing on a computer screen. Another piece of advice Nielsen gives is to have meaningful subheadings. Slate does this as well, as seen with the same British cattle story. The subhead reads: "Why Do They Get So Many Diseases?" This lets the reader know what he or she is about to get into, better preparing them for the story.
Slate is very aware that readers can't always focus on a story when reading online. To remedy this they incorporate other media aspects into their stories. For example, a story about public sculpture is reported on, but also features a slide show so the reader can see the sculptures for themselves. This is part of the layering of information that Jonathan Dube discusses.
In addition, Slate employs the use of discussion boards on each article to better incorporate readers into the story. Slate is one Web site that definitely knows how to write for an online audience.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Monday, September 24, 2007
Campaign 2008
One news item that is virtually inescapable is the 2008 presidential race. The actual election is still more than a year away, but the media (online and otherwise) just can't stop talking about it. However, online outlets are unique in their ability to give even more information about the race than newspapers or television or radio could ever dream of.
The Washington Post is an ideal site for politics (hey, it's based in D.C, right?). One thing striking this about their Website is the organization they have on all of the 17 major Democrat and Republican candidates. Each candidate has his or her (in the case of Hillary) own profile complete with a campaign tracker for appearances, biography, photos and videos, links to relevant Post articles, a tracker on where the candidate stands on issues, financial summary, and links to relevant Web sites. This site is definitely one of the top to visit for up to date campaign coverage and everything presented is almost wholly unique to online journalism, meaning that most of it could not be accomplished by other forms of journalism so succinctly in one location.
Meanwhile, The New York Times focuses more on the issues and less on the candidates. This doesn't mean that the candidates aren't given adequate coverage. In fact, the Times offers profiles similar to that of thewashingtonpost.com. However, the Website gives more area to articles and issues relevant to campaign 2008. This coverage is unique to online journalism because of the archives that are readily available. Readers can easily access the latest articles on the campaign, including articles titled "Bush Says Clinton Will Win Nomination" and "Education and Schools Are a Focus for Edwards."
Taegan Goddard's Political Wire is more of a blog and differs much from the Post and Times sites. Because it doesn't have the resources of a large newspaper the coverage of campaign 2008 isn't as extensive. However, Political Wire does have its strengths. Each post offers relevant news in addition to the original link. The posts are short and easy to follow, making the site not as overwhelming as that of the Post and Times. This site definitely would not be possible without online journalism. The blog gathers stories from numerous sources and can even categorizes posts by Southpaw (liberal) and Wingers (conservative) commentary. Also, be sure to check out the campaign 2008 "Quote of the Day" along with "Bonus Quote of the Day."
Outside the Beltway in another blog, and while it may not be very fancy it gets the job done. Items are taken from various news outlets and posted together for a complete look at the 2008 race. The blog gives easy access to its archives and recent comments are shown on the main page, giving readers an idea of what they can expect.
One thing is certain with these four completely different sites:
The amount of coverage would not be possible if it wasn't for online journalism. Perhaps because information is so readily available even more people will be motivated to vote in the upcoming election. Only time will tell, but online journalism is doing its part.
The Washington Post is an ideal site for politics (hey, it's based in D.C, right?). One thing striking this about their Website is the organization they have on all of the 17 major Democrat and Republican candidates. Each candidate has his or her (in the case of Hillary) own profile complete with a campaign tracker for appearances, biography, photos and videos, links to relevant Post articles, a tracker on where the candidate stands on issues, financial summary, and links to relevant Web sites. This site is definitely one of the top to visit for up to date campaign coverage and everything presented is almost wholly unique to online journalism, meaning that most of it could not be accomplished by other forms of journalism so succinctly in one location.
Meanwhile, The New York Times focuses more on the issues and less on the candidates. This doesn't mean that the candidates aren't given adequate coverage. In fact, the Times offers profiles similar to that of thewashingtonpost.com. However, the Website gives more area to articles and issues relevant to campaign 2008. This coverage is unique to online journalism because of the archives that are readily available. Readers can easily access the latest articles on the campaign, including articles titled "Bush Says Clinton Will Win Nomination" and "Education and Schools Are a Focus for Edwards."
Taegan Goddard's Political Wire is more of a blog and differs much from the Post and Times sites. Because it doesn't have the resources of a large newspaper the coverage of campaign 2008 isn't as extensive. However, Political Wire does have its strengths. Each post offers relevant news in addition to the original link. The posts are short and easy to follow, making the site not as overwhelming as that of the Post and Times. This site definitely would not be possible without online journalism. The blog gathers stories from numerous sources and can even categorizes posts by Southpaw (liberal) and Wingers (conservative) commentary. Also, be sure to check out the campaign 2008 "Quote of the Day" along with "Bonus Quote of the Day."
Outside the Beltway in another blog, and while it may not be very fancy it gets the job done. Items are taken from various news outlets and posted together for a complete look at the 2008 race. The blog gives easy access to its archives and recent comments are shown on the main page, giving readers an idea of what they can expect.
One thing is certain with these four completely different sites:
The amount of coverage would not be possible if it wasn't for online journalism. Perhaps because information is so readily available even more people will be motivated to vote in the upcoming election. Only time will tell, but online journalism is doing its part.
Saturday, September 15, 2007
Useful Links
Some good places to go for information on Web design:
1. Web Sites That Suck:
http://www.websitesthatsuck.com
This Web site offers tips on how to build a good Web site. Specifically, it gives advice on what NOT to do. The site gives examples of some of the worst Web sites out there. Included on the list for 2007 are the Web sites for Brita, the Department of Energy and the Department of Architecture. It's obvious that something is "off" when I visited each of these sites, but it was hard to point out just what, but I guess that's why they're on the worst Web site list.
Additionally, websitesthatsuck.com offers checklists to make sure your own Web site doesn't suck and some interesting videos of bad Web sites.
Unfortunately, this Web site is a little confusing and hard to read because of poor design and annoying ads. Maybe this site needs to follow its own advice.
2. Top Ten Web Design Mistakes of 2005
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/designmistakes.html
Among the top ten web design mistakes are legibility problems, content that's not written for the web and bad searches, all of which I've experienced first hand while browsing (especially legibility problems...very frustrating). This site is brief and to the point and offers some really helpful tips. I found this to be one of the better sites of Web design because it was so easy to read and understand.
3. Dmitry's Design Lab
http://www.webreference.com/dlab/
Dmitry Kirsanov offers 25 tutorials on Web design. These tutorials are aimed at educating Web designers on font, color, animation and other design issues. These tutorials come with titles such as, "Designing with Chaos", "Logo Design Revisited" and "The World of Color." Each tutorial goes in depth about a specific design issue, making it a great site to visit for the Web designer who wants history and theory, as well as tips.
4. Prioritize: Good Content Bubbles to the Top
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/991017.html
Jakob Nielsen gives advice on how to put the most important items and stories at the top of the Web site. One excellent piece of advice he gives is "When everything is emphasized, nothing is emphasized." Nielsen also offers important tips on how to bring out content hidden within a site and to use server traffic to see where users are going the most.
5. Is Navigation Useful?
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20000109.html
Another site by Nielsen, this one dealing with the all important subject of Web site navigation. According to Nielsen's research, users tend to be more concerned about a Web site's content rather than its navigation. In fact, in most cases, users don't even understand the basic idea behind Web site navigation. I didn't really see an explanation to Nielsen's question of "Is navigation useful?" but he does raise some interesting points.
6. Resources for Web Workers
http://plaza.ufl.edu/mmcadams/design.htm
Myndy McAdams' Web site is perhaps the most useful to consult for Web design issues. McAdams discusses seemingly boring issues, such as font, color and layout, but makes them seem interesting and presents her information in a way that is easy to understand, especially for a first time Web site designer. She breaks down information on design issues and what she has to say really makes sense. I found that this Web site summarizes a lot of the other Web sites listed, so you may want to start with McAdams' site first, as it gives a lot of general information.
All in all, the above mentioned Web sites offer great advice on what to do and what not to do in terms of designing a Web site.
I don't know much about computers and Web sites, but after browsing these sites I'm finding that I'm starting to get a better grasp on to dos and don'ts of Web design.
1. Web Sites That Suck:
http://www.websitesthatsuck.com
This Web site offers tips on how to build a good Web site. Specifically, it gives advice on what NOT to do. The site gives examples of some of the worst Web sites out there. Included on the list for 2007 are the Web sites for Brita, the Department of Energy and the Department of Architecture. It's obvious that something is "off" when I visited each of these sites, but it was hard to point out just what, but I guess that's why they're on the worst Web site list.
Additionally, websitesthatsuck.com offers checklists to make sure your own Web site doesn't suck and some interesting videos of bad Web sites.
Unfortunately, this Web site is a little confusing and hard to read because of poor design and annoying ads. Maybe this site needs to follow its own advice.
2. Top Ten Web Design Mistakes of 2005
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/designmistakes.html
Among the top ten web design mistakes are legibility problems, content that's not written for the web and bad searches, all of which I've experienced first hand while browsing (especially legibility problems...very frustrating). This site is brief and to the point and offers some really helpful tips. I found this to be one of the better sites of Web design because it was so easy to read and understand.
3. Dmitry's Design Lab
http://www.webreference.com/dlab/
Dmitry Kirsanov offers 25 tutorials on Web design. These tutorials are aimed at educating Web designers on font, color, animation and other design issues. These tutorials come with titles such as, "Designing with Chaos", "Logo Design Revisited" and "The World of Color." Each tutorial goes in depth about a specific design issue, making it a great site to visit for the Web designer who wants history and theory, as well as tips.
4. Prioritize: Good Content Bubbles to the Top
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/991017.html
Jakob Nielsen gives advice on how to put the most important items and stories at the top of the Web site. One excellent piece of advice he gives is "When everything is emphasized, nothing is emphasized." Nielsen also offers important tips on how to bring out content hidden within a site and to use server traffic to see where users are going the most.
5. Is Navigation Useful?
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20000109.html
Another site by Nielsen, this one dealing with the all important subject of Web site navigation. According to Nielsen's research, users tend to be more concerned about a Web site's content rather than its navigation. In fact, in most cases, users don't even understand the basic idea behind Web site navigation. I didn't really see an explanation to Nielsen's question of "Is navigation useful?" but he does raise some interesting points.
6. Resources for Web Workers
http://plaza.ufl.edu/mmcadams/design.htm
Myndy McAdams' Web site is perhaps the most useful to consult for Web design issues. McAdams discusses seemingly boring issues, such as font, color and layout, but makes them seem interesting and presents her information in a way that is easy to understand, especially for a first time Web site designer. She breaks down information on design issues and what she has to say really makes sense. I found that this Web site summarizes a lot of the other Web sites listed, so you may want to start with McAdams' site first, as it gives a lot of general information.
All in all, the above mentioned Web sites offer great advice on what to do and what not to do in terms of designing a Web site.
I don't know much about computers and Web sites, but after browsing these sites I'm finding that I'm starting to get a better grasp on to dos and don'ts of Web design.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)