Confab | Testing Content

This session from Angela Colter is slam-packed full. Her popular article last year on testing content on A List Apart obviously precedes her, and everyone wants the details.

She’s going to talk about

  • Readability Formulas: Counting the aspects of text that can be counted, and applying a metric. The Flesch-Kincaid formula measures the number of words per sentence and the number of syllables per word to give you a projected grade level of the text.
    Upside: People can understand and act on this metric.

    Downside: You’re only counting what can be counted. Doesn’t explain anything about text clarity. And my favorite downside, it can push you toward really crappy writing.

    Great quote from George Klare: 

    Merely shortening words and sentences to improve readability is like holding a lighted match under a thermometer when you want to make your house warmer.Don’t use a readability formula alone — it’s good as a red flag.

  • Usability Tests: Find out what people actually understand, not what they say they understand. Get the right people in the room. What are the critical issues for the user and for the business? You have to get users to think aloud, but you need to know what the correct answer looks like.Well written tests are critical to evaluating your content properly.Usability testing ends opinion-based arguments.
  • Cloze Tests: These are the content usability tests where you remove every 5th word and see if people can fill in the blanks. Use 125 words or so and 25 or so blanks. If they’re getting 60% or more, your content works. If they’re getting 40% of less, your content is too difficult. In between, you may need revision or more instruction.If you test on the appropriate audience, this tells you clearly if the content is appropriate.

Confab | Curation: Beyond the Buzzword

Following are my notes….

Steve Rosenbaum was a filmmaker in September 2001, and the events of 9/11 taught him that individuals can tell their own stories better than the professionals can. The important part we can add is a filter, a curator, an organizer. He’s also the author of a new book titled Curation Nation.

He says the “me web” is ending — the era of needing something, going to get it. Now, he says we’re entering the “we web” — where everyone contributes.

He’s using everyone’s favorite quote from Eric Schmidt, about how much data was created through 2003, and how now that much is created every 2 days.

Rosenbaum points out that the amount of data flowing past us every day is unmanageable.

Rosenbaum rejects the idea of ‘quality.’ Can that be judged for everyone? Uses the example of Google Places accidentally getting axed by the Panda update — because it was using the same kind of aggregation that Demand Media does. So how do you judge that Places is good, and Demand is bad?

Love this story: Now Rosenbaum is telling about how our definition of sharing and permission are getting tweaked as we move toward more curation. He wrote a post for Mashable recently, and 6 lines of it quickly showed up on another site, with him listed as a “contributor,” and a link back to the full post. His initial reaction was, Hey wait a minute! And then he realized, That’s great!

Rosenbaum says curation has 3 components:

  • Choose your digital clothing. Your endorsements, likes, RTs and posts matter; you’re curating your online persona. This point is so important. People who are indiscriminate in their curation aren’t valued contributors.
  • Listening is more powerful than speaking. Gather, organize and filter good stuff.
  • In a noisy world, customers embrace clarity. Your visitors will make content for you, and curation tools can supercharge your editorial instincts. Lists tools like Pearltrees, Keepstream, curate.us, paper.li, Storify, Scoop.it.

Create your own curation equation for user-generated content. Consider your voice and your sources. What kind of information do your customers need?

I’m at Confab this week

There have been a number of web content conferences over the years, but it’s safe to say that Confab, in its first year, is going to be home to content strategists for years to come. I’ve met so many “people like me” already, and the universal acclaim seems to be that we are all delighted to have an excuse to get together with other content strategists, to commiserate, to share ideas, and to figure out better ways to create and manage content to improve the user experience on the web, mobile and everywhere else.

Sessions I’m planning to attend today:

Curation: Beyond the Buzzword by Steve Rosenbaum
How do we manage the firehose of information? What should humans do, and what should machines do? Great questions here….

How to Create a Data-Driven Content Strategy by Elizabeth McGuane and Randall Snare
How do we manage analytics and data to improve content?

Testing Content by Angela Colter
Colter had a really popular article on testing content on A List Apart at the end of 2010. I bet this session will be packed.

Johns Hopkins and the Health Care Content Conundrum: Aligning Business Strategy with User Goals by Ahava Leibtag and Aaron Watkins

Deserving your audience

Great post this week from well known author Mitch Joel, president of Twist Image in Toronto. He starts from the question of whether it’s better to have a great book or a great existing audience when you publish. But he morphs quickly into asking the same question about marketers using social media or other content marketing channels, as well as offline sources, like services provided by https://fleetwraphq.com/denver/.

The content needs to stand up on its own.

This is an important lesson for Marketers who are quickly realizing that their jobs in a Social Media world force them to act a lot more like publishers and content creators than the traditional Google Advertising roles they are more accustomed to. In order to generate significant levels of success, their content can’t be thinly veiled marketing pieces, but must live and breathe with authenticity and value within the ecosystem.

–Get the rest from Mitch Joel at 6 Pixels of Separation

It’s a question that many marketers haven’t stopped to ask. If you’re not offering value to the market, you are wasting our time  at best. And it’s a very rare situation where your standard marketing materials are what people want from you.

What people do want [for starters]:

  • Instructions
  • Tech support
  • Information they can’t get elsewhere
  • Ideas about making their own jobs easier
  • Entertainment

Every company can’t fill all those needs, but you don’t have to. If your product is serious, you don’t have to be funny. But no matter your market, it almost always helps to be human. This is another area that doesn’t come naturally to companies. It comes naturally to most people, but you put a corporate face on and throw some technology between yourself and your customers, and many of us freeze up.

What’s your best tip for treating your audience well with content?

SXSW: Margot Bloomstein on Creation, Curation and the Ethics of Content Strategy

I’m starting this morning with a session from Margot Bloomstein on content strategy, curation and ethics. I’ve heard her speak before [on a different topic] and she was interesting, so we’ll see how this goes.

OK, right off the bat, this is a hard talk to blog. It’s a very good talk, but hard to synthesize quickly. Bloomstein has talked about creating new content through mashups, and about understanding the point of view of content creators and editors. She seems to argue it’s important for the audience to understand, but hasn’t yet made a judgment on whose job it is to find the info — is it the creator’s to share their perspective and history, or the audience’s to seek it out and then use it to inform their understanding?

Now we’re moving on to curation. Here, Bloomstein argues that point of view is also critical, which I’d agree. She’s talking about museum exhibit curation as a clear example of this.

Interesting point on the difference between curation of a museum exhibition and curating web content. In a museum exhibition, there are usually a very limited number of potential objects available. You make a list of everything you want, and you see what you can get. In web content, there’s often far more available than you could ever use. We often use automated filters with a few parameters and boom! There’s the current top news on X topic.

Pulls up a great example of Skittles pulling everything about Skittles from Twitter onto their site a couple of years ago. They had no human filter, and some of the tweets were NOT brand-appropriate. Human curation is critical to maintain your brand identity and speak appropriately to your audience.

Now talking about how to create, shape the user experience. Apparently there’s a debate in the UX community about how possible this is, since each user brings own baggage, and you can’t control that. Bloomstein says the museum perspective says, there are common human elements that a curator can play on and use to shape our experience.

Bloomstein says it’s important to get clients [your company, whoever you’re working with on content strategy] to focus on their objectives before you start content strategy work.

Current trend in museum curation has museums highlighting the curator and their perspective … very transparent. We don’t always do this in media, web content or other fields. Should we?

Quotes Mandy Brown [editor of A Book Apart, A List Apart] from yesterday: “We need more tools for human curation. We’re trying to replace humans with algorithms.”

My perspective [Pardon how obvious this is]: There are some things that humans do better and some things that algorithms do. We should let each do their best work. [Of course, this doesn’t always happen. I guess that’s Brown’s point.]

Bloomstein says that curation without perspective is aggregation. Where I would argue with this is that she seems to say it isn’t possible to present perspective through an algorithm. I think it absolutely is, if the human designs the algorithm appropriately.

Now talking about the Sarbanes-Oxley requirements on document management — relating to how public companies manage their digital assets, including all online communication. Serious consequences to a lack of a curation/archival strategy.

Really good questions on ethics now. Photo of a yeast bloom that was on the cover of Scientific American — original photo included the petri dish that held the yeast. They wanted to focus on the yeast, so they removed the petri dish from the photo. OK?

Quote from Martin Scorcese on the importance of directing, not just selecting, the right shots to make your movie. What are you setting out to say? Make that happen.

IA vs. UX vs. content strategy vs. your name here

There’s an interesting editorial over at the fall 2010 issue of the Journal of IA, which I do like reading. Eric Reiss spends some time trying to place information architecture, user experience and content strategy in terms of each other. I don’t think it’s an entirely worthless endeavor, but in my opinion, he’s bitten off a ginormous challenge. We’re the people who like to organize, categorize and name things. So no wonder we don’t all agree here. Reiss has certainly put his finger on an ongoing point of contention.

A much more recent post by Erin Kissane tackles the same topic from a different angle, making content strategy more of the umbrella.

I’d draw a bigger picture though. I’d put the business strategy umbrella over the top of the project as a whole. It’s got to define your work, no matter your discipline. To my mind, then, systems, development, UX, IA and content strategy all need a seat at the table to get from strategy through to executed product. There are a number of ways to make the process work — even how to define your business strategy. And depending on which process you use, one discipline or another may take a more prominent role.

In the end, I think the argument is largely academic. The critical thing is that the disciplines of content strategy, IA and UX all seem to get more respect now. When I started working on the web, there was design. And HTML. And then content, but in the “words-go-here” variety. Things have improved a lot since then — consumers have gotten much more sophisticated in what we demand from our web applications, and those of us in the web industry have responded to that. There are still people trying to execute web projects and applications without content strategy or IA or UX, of course. But if you want your work done effectively and well, you need all three.

You might need content strategy if….

  • If you’re liberally using the phrase “Click here.”
  • If you don’t know how copyright law applies to your daily work.
  • If you don’t have a specific plan to deliver the information your customers need to solve their problems.
  • If you don’t know how your content management system works.
  • If you don’t have a content management system.
  • If you aren’t measuring your results and reacting accordingly.

I’m just saying.

Content strategy and agile development: Can they be friends?

Rachel Lovinger started a great thread at the Content Strategy Google Group about agile development. It really hit home with me because I’ve had clients who use both traditional and agile development. From a content strategy perspective, both have their benefits — and downsides.

Best about waterfall:

  • Typically has a well-defined process, and if you get in on the front end, it’s easy to define over-arching business goals
  • Everyone’s role is clear

Best about agile:

  • Fast, fast, fast!
  • Favors user stories, which suss out business goals

You cannot create effective content strategy without knowing your business goals.

Waterfall done poorly exacerbates the human tendency toward bureaucracy, both in the development process and in the long-term operational strategy. Agile done poorly swings from insignificant goal to unimportant goal, making little things happen that actually make no difference. So either has the potential to make your website/software product ineffective.

Done well, agile suits me better. I think we all like to feel progress, and agile delivers progress regularly. But when you dive into agile without the big goals written on the wall, you run the risk of doing stuff because you can, not because you should. And while you can create content for any particular goal, if you don’t know the big goal, you don’t know how to craft taxonomy or style and tone, never mind how to create page flows that deliver useful information to your customers, and deliver on your business needs.

Whatever style development you’re using, you have to start with the business goals, and you need content strategy at the table from day one.

Get some spaghetti on the wall

When people are developing a content strategy, sometimes they run into problems. That’s to be expected with any complex business process, of course. There are many places you could have trouble, but I’m thinking today about two big categories:

  • Trouble with content
  • Trouble with strategy

I’m focusing on this particular dichotomy because it leads to opposite problems: Too much content [strategy issue] and too little [content]. I’ll get you something in the next couple of days on the strategy side of this equation, but you can probably already guess where I’m headed there with spam, content farms and other unwanted content.

I don’t know if the content side is the harder problem or not, but it’s definitely a mental issue. How many times have you thought about your content situation and said, I just don’t know what to say…I’m not sure how to proceed…I don’t see how my information can make a difference…or the worst: Our customers already know everything they need to know?

I’ve yet to meet a business that didn’t need more valuable content. Sometimes we fall short on marketing, sometimes on customer support, sometimes on operations. But no matter what area of the business you touch, you need great content.

When you start a blog, and then stop, you’ve proved nothing. When you open a Twitter account, and don’t tweet, you’ve learned nothing. When you join a community, and don’t post, no one gains. When you add a help section on your site, but don’t actually give good instructions, you aren’t actually helping anyone.

How many times has your organization made a half-assed effort on content and then proclaimed it a failure?

I don’t ask that to judge — I’ve done the same myself. But we can’t expect great results from minimal effort. Great content takes expertise and hard work. Everyone’s got the capacity for both requirements, but it’s often a matter of getting them in the same place at the same time.

So it’s Friday afternoon where I am. It’s a great time to think about what you’re going to make happen next week. Plan now to throw some spaghetti on the wall next week, content-wise. I don’t mean that you should be haphazard about it — find a small project that you’ve been meaning to tackle, or a part of your product or marketing plan that needs a little love, and act on it. Get ready now so you can attack it Monday morning. Figure out now what it will take for you to judge the success of the project — and follow through step by step until you can say for sure whether it worked.