Karen McGrane

User experience professional, content strategist, information architect, interaction designer.

December 14, 2011 • 8:55 am 5

Mobile content strategy link-o-rama 2011

A List Apart asked some very smart people (and me) what they learned about the web in 2011.

I wrote about my realization that the problems we face with a multi-device future, the problems we’re trying to solve with responsive design or with other interaction design strategies, these problems are just as much about content strategy, and the solution lives way down in the CMS:

What blew my mind this year was when I realized that the problems we have with mobile and the problems we have with content management systems are the same problem. It’s been clear to me for a while that we need to provide better interfaces and workflows to content creators—if we want to publish great content, we’ve got to give people the tools to do it. What I didn’t realize until this year is doing that solves a lot of problems for mobile, too.

If we’re going to succeed in publishing content onto a million different new devices and formats and platforms, we need interfaces that will help guide content creators on how to write and structure their content for reuse. When we talk about mobile, we often focus on the front-end interactions, design, and code, but what I realized this year is that the solution to many problems with mobile lives way further down the stack, in the CMS.

This didn’t come to me as a lightning bolt out of the blue. I learned it the honest way: by researching and reading people who have smart things to say about our editorial processes across print, web, and mobile, content management interfaces, workflows, and APIs, and what that means for the future.

You might want to learn this too, so here’s a roundup of some of the best sources.

Structured Content + Responsive Design

If you think responsive design is just for designers and developers, then you’re missing out on the most exciting thing to happen to content strategy since the Excel spreadsheet.

A Richer Canvas
You know, I think we’re on to something when very respected graphic designers like Mark Boulton start arguing for content strategy. Actually, go ahead and smack me for saying that—of course great designers want great content, and skilled writers respect excellent design. The challenge is for us to work together to figure out what it means to think from the content out rather than the canvas in. What kind of structure do we need to put into our content so that designers can embrace the “unpredictable, fluid, fragile” nature of the web?
See also: Mark Boulton on designing websites using “content out” in .Net Magazine
See also: Content First by Jeremy Keith

Structured Content First
Stephen Hay gets this party started with a presentation that explains how content should be platform-agnostic for content, and platform-aware for user experience. Because layout and responsive design is only part of the problem, he explains that structured content is the baseline we need for responsive design. This is a Slideshare presentation, but don’t fret—there’s an audio track available and video too!

Structured Content, Shifting Context: Responsive Design, Content Strategy & the Future
Sara Wachter-Boettcher gives a great introduction to why responsive design isn’t just about design—it’s a content strategy problem, first and always. Content has to be ready for a future that’s fluid, shifting, and adaptive to change. To do so brings together the best of information architecture and the best of content strategy: people who are effective at structuring and describing content because they deeply understand the message and the meaning.
See also: Content First?: Semantics, Structure, and Why We Should Care by Sara Wachter-Boettcher

Nimble Report
Rachel Lovinger showed me a draft of this report when we were at the first CS Forum in Paris a couple years ago. It blew my mind then, not just because of the smart writing and appealing design, but also because it neatly synthesized a complex topic and made it accessible to mere mortals. It still blows my mind today, for being years ahead of its time. If you haven’t read it yet, it’s a classic. If you’re wondering why it makes my 2011 roundup even though it’s been around for a while, it’s because no discussion of this topic would be complete without it.

CMS + API

Mmm, alphabet soup. Once thought to be strictly the domain of hard-core techies, content management systems and application programming interfaces are now topics that should matter to every content strategist.

4 ways content management systems are evolving & why it matters to journalists
A better title might be: “… and why it matters to every business.” Publishers may be the most demanding users of a content management system, but the challenges they face in distributing and managing content across the entire social ecosystem are shared by many. The solution is to think of CMS as set of technologies, not a one-stop-shop, and to embrace open-source projects like WordPress, Drupal, and Django. The most benefits are gained when businesses think of the CMS as a platform that requires constant development and refinement to make it both useful and appealing to its content creator users.

COPE: Create Once, Publish Everywhere
Daniel Jacobson of NPR (now at Netflix) describes NPR’s approach to content management and API development, which aims to separate content from display to ensure content modularity and portability. NPR credits its API with increasing page views by 80%, largely because they’re able to get their content onto a variety of mobile devices without custom programming.
See also: Notes from NPR’s 2011 SxSW Session, by Scot Hacker

Your WYSIWYG Editor sucks
The title says it all: WYSIWYG CMS editors are the enemy of both structured content and standards-based web design. Let’s rise up and defeat them! Rachel Andrew details the many, many ways that they suck, and explains how we can do better. She notes, wisely, that there are technology components to this solution, but the real challenge lies in getting content authors to give up their familiar Microsoft Word editing model.

Make It Semantic from the Start
CMSes are vertically integrated, combining content editing + management with display + publishing. Their production model is still print-centric, thinking about how to get content online only later in the process. This might (sort-of) work when going from print to web, but it breaks down when going from print to our crazy multi-device future. Dan Willis says the answer is a semantic publishing system that chunks content appropriately, allowing it to be recombined in different ways on different platforms.
See also: When Did Print Become an Input? by Ann Michael
See also: Publishers: Structured Data and Content Management Systems by by Andrew Davies
See also: The New, Convoluted Life Cycle Of A Newspaper Story

Add To RSS

If you haven’t heard enough on this subject, then you should be following these writers.

Every Page is Page One
With topic categories like “Metadata Matters,” “Objects vs. Chunks,” and “Every Page is Page One,” Mark Baker’s blog reads like a rallying cry for the future of content. Of course, the future of content isn’t new: he’s a 20-year veteran technical communicator.

CMSish
A blog “where web content management and user experience collide.” Fortunately, the collision is less like a car accident and more like a streamlined knitting of perspectives. Michael Kowalski has worked with tons of publishers and believes “editorial staff should be given great tools to work with, that offer every bit as good a user experience as the best consumer apps.”

The CMS Myth
Hear veterans of the interactive space tell you why your web CMS isn’t a silver bullet. It’s about more than just the technology: it’s about people and process too. Sounds good, right?

The Rockley Group
Ann Rockley has been talking about what she calls “Intelligent Content” for years. Her book, Managing Enterprise Content, is an out-of-print gem; fortunately for all of us a second edition is on the way.

Me Me Me Me Me

Forgive the shameless self-promotion, but I’ve said a thing or two about these subjects in 2011.

5by5 Podcasts
5by5 is a fantastic set of podcasts, a few of which I’ve appeared on recently.
The Web Ahead with Jen Simmons
Content Talks with Kristina Halvorson
The Big Web Show with Jeffrey Zeldman and Dan Benjamin

Web Content 2011
Jeff Eaton and I gave a presentation called “Making the most of mobile,” where we talked about our favorite subject, the “reusable content store.” How will it help us deal with the proliferation of new devices and platforms, and what are the challenges that prevent us from getting there?
Interview
Slides
Video Part 1
Video Part 2

Drupalcon Chicago
Eaton and I again co-presented, this time talking about how to use familiar practices from user experience to customize the interface and workflow of Drupal, in a presentation titled “Baby Got Backend: Content administrators are users too.”
Slides
Audio

CS Forum 2011
I gave one of the keynotes at this international content strategy event. This talk, called “The way forward: what’s next for content strategy,” was aimed squarely at the content strategy profession and talked about what we as a community need to do next.
Slides
Video
Notes by Martin Belam

Do It With Drupal
This was the first draft of my latest “stump speech,” called “Adapting ourselves to adaptive content.” In this talk, I pull together everything I’ve learned this year, and identify what we need to do next to adapt our content to the new world of fragmented devices and platforms we now live in.
Interview
Slides
Video (requires subscription)

An Event Apart
I couldn’t be more excited to be taking my “Adapting ourselves to adaptive content” talk on the road with An Event Apart this year and next. I’ve already spoken in DC but you can see me in Atlanta, Seattle, or Boston in 2012.
DC October 24-26, 2011
Atlanta February 6-8, 2012 (register)
Seattle April 2-4, 2012 (register)
Boston June 18-20, 2012 (register)

Filed under: Content Strategy

January 14, 2011 • 6:32 pm 10

To those with money to burn on captioning lawsuits

I am almost entirely dependent on captioning to understand recorded media. I can only watch TV and movies with captions. I don’t go to movies in theaters. I can’t listen to the radio. I can’t listen to podcasts.

As you might imagine, I am positively thrilled to learn that there’s an organization out there threatening legal action against organizations that don’t provide captions or transcriptions.

I just have a brief note about strategy that I hope this group will take under advisement.

You seem to be focused on threatening small volunteer organizations providing free content to a niche audience, like ASIS&T and Boxes and Arrows. If your goal is to prevent hardworking volunteers like Jeff Parks from creating audio recordings at conferences, mission accomplished! Why, if we can’t have it, no one can!

Since you’ve got money to spend on lawsuits, please let me suggest some alternatives that would have a more meaningful impact on the world:

  • File suit against Netflix for not providing captions on the vast majority of their streaming movies—and for not providing any way to find streaming movies that are captioned. Netflix is particularly hostile to hearing-impaired customers, refusing to provide customer service via any channel other than the phone.
  • File suit against Apple for not providing captioning for television shows downloaded from the iTunes store. While you’re at it, sue the pants off of them for the abysmal selection of captioned movies they offer. It’s criminal.
  • Hire a team of lawyers to go after all the television networks that provide captioning in their broadcasts, but not on shows streamed via their websites or Hulu. (You’re going to need a big team of lawyers, because it’s most of the networks.)
  • Hire the most vicious lawyer you can find to go after any movie studio that “accidentally” or on purpose removes the captions from the rental release of a DVD.

The Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act, signed by President Obama on October 8, 2010, is a landmark piece of legislation, updating the 20-year-old Americans With Disabilities Act for the internet age. This bill requires captioning of television programs on the internet, as well as many other requirements that will enable the 36 million deaf and hard-of-hearing Americans to fully enjoy media delivered via the internet.

I’m glad to hear you’ve got money to spend helping to enforce this legislation. How about you leave the IA Institute alone, and focus on getting us some captions on streaming video from Netflix?

Filed under: Bionic Hearing

January 14, 2011 • 12:25 pm 14

How to buy a hearing aid

Do you know someone who needs to buy a hearing aid, but hasn’t yet? I do.

I talk to people all the time about the decision to acknowledge their hearing loss and invest in hearing aids. I know how hard it is for people to come to terms with that decision. While I can’t make the emotional decision any easier, I can offer some advice on how to shop for a hearing aid.

1. Shop for an audiologist

The most important decision you make isn’t which hearing aid brand or model to buy. It’s who will be your audiologist—the person who will dispense and fit your hearing aid.

Your audiologist is like a combination of your family doctor and a salesman at Best Buy. They’re going to evaluate your hearing, but they’re also trying to sell you a piece of technology.

The good ones have all the best qualities of both: able to explain complex concepts, don’t talk down to you, patient with your questions and struggles, give you the information you need but still let you make up your own mind. The bad ones have all the worst qualities of both: patronizing, brusque, use too much technical jargon, become impatient when you don’t do what they want you to. I mean no insult to the many good audiologists out there when I say: I’ve seen some bad ones.

Meet with more than one audiologist before you decide to work with one. Find someone who you’re comfortable talking to, and who seems like he or she will take the time to make sure you get the right fit.

2. There’s no best brand, only the brand that’s best for you

People ask me all the time: What brand should I get? The answer is: I don’t know.

There are many different hearing aid manufacturers: Widex, Siemens, Oticon, Phonak, and Starkey, just to name a few. In the same way that some drivers love Ford and hate Chevy, are passionate about their BMW, or only buy Hondas, audiologists and hearing aid wearers get attached to a particular brand.

Different manufacturers are known for different things. Widex has good noise suppression technology, and they offer a program that may help tinnitus sufferers. Phonak and Oticon offer Bluetooth. Starkey emphasizes its CIC (completely in the canal) model. Each manufacturer has different R&D priorities, so what they’re good at may change over time.

When talking to audiologists, ask them which hearing aid brands they dispense, which ones they prefer, and why. Hearing aid fittings are done using software provided by the manufacturer, and often your audiologist will be better at using one application than another, so it’s good to buy from an audiologist who is experienced with your particular model.

3. Buy for how you’re going to use it, not how bad your hearing is

You might be thinking “I don’t need an expensive hearing aid right now, because my hearing isn’t that bad.” Or you might think “Only the best for my mother! I want her to hear as well as she can.”

Like computers, hearing aids come in different price points. Make your decision about how much to spend based on where and how you’ll use the hearing aid. Buy a high-end hearing aid if you plan to use it in noisy environments, but don’t buy more power than you need.

Someone who mainly stays home and watches TV or has conversations in quiet environments doesn’t need a top of the line hearing aid — any more than someone who uses a computer mainly to surf the web and answer email needs a quad core Mac Pro.

On the other hand, if you’re relatively active, you will place more demands on your hearing aids. Crowded restaurants, conference centers, baseball games and airplanes all require your aids to work harder to filter out background noise and focus on what people are saying to you.

4. Don’t get seduced by features

I have fallen into this trap too. Bluetooth! Tiny! Colors! What you want is the absolute best hearing aid for you in terms of sound quality, noise suppression, and fit. Everything else is just decoration.

Personally, I do not believe it is worth it to get hearing aids with Bluetooth right now. I’m about as tech savvy as they come, and I wasn’t happy with my experience. This area is worth keeping an eye on, but don’t choose a hearing aid just because it has Bluetooth.

As a long-time hearing aid wearer, I also don’t think it’s wise to focus on size over other hearing aid features. I know first-time hearing aid wearers are sensitive about people knowing they have hearing loss, and I am completely sympathetic. But tiny hearing aids can have big problems with wax and moisture. You may also find that changing tiny batteries several times a week is a chore.

5. Try different earmolds for fit

It’s likely that you will consider a behind-the-ear hearing aid. While opinions vary on this, I personally prefer BTEs—I think they’re more comfortable and spend less time in the repair shop than in-the-ear models.

With a BTE, the hearing aid sits behind or at the top of your ear, and a plastic piece sits inside your ear. There are many different configurations for this earmold. You can get a little rubber dome (shaped like a gumdrop). You can get a custom made mold, fitted to the shape of your ear canal. Custom earmolds come in different shapes and can be made from different kinds of hard or soft plastic.

Which earmold is right for you depends on your degree of hearing loss—but it also depends on which feels most comfortable. Ask your audiologist to tell you about the options, and you may need to try different molds in addition to different hearing aids to find the right fit.

Buying hearing aids is not a great experience. The industry could do a much better job of focusing on what consumers need. Take advantage of the trial period offered (here in New York it’s 90 days) and plan to spend 6 months (or more) trying different models.

You will be better off in the end.

Filed under: Bionic Hearing

January 10, 2011 • 7:45 am 2

Why technology history matters

I am a huge nerd for computing history, particularly the history of interaction design. I think the story of how designers figured out ways to make computers easier for people to use is just plain fascinating. I’ve given talks on this subject for about five years now.

When I tell people a little bit about this they say things like “That sounds really interesting, I would love to take that class” and “I wish I you would come over to my house and tell me more about that” or “I would give up my addiction to playing Civilization if only you’d come over to my house and tell me more about that.”

Attendees at my talks say nice things afterward like “You were right, that really was fascinating” and “I didn’t know any of that, and I am better off now that I do” and “That was almost as fun as playing Civilization.”

When I give talks about this at conferences, and I meet people in the hallway before my session, here’s what they say: “I’d love to come, but I should really go to this session about SEO/social media/mobile app development/HTML5.”

I understand.

You’re spending the boss’s (or your own) money, and you want to get something of tangible value out of your conference time. Something you can put to good use when you go back to work. A talk about history just doesn’t seem very practical.

I believe the (short) history of our field is still relevant to our work today, if only we knew more about it. The conventions we follow, the interface metaphors we take for granted, the patterns we rely on—these didn’t spring out of nowhere. They evolved over time. People—people not unlike us—invented and refined them. Learning more about how all these decisions happened helps inform our own work. The story of the history of technology is the story of how we learned to understand our own behavior: how we learn, how we move, how we see, how we make choices. We taught machines to get smarter and friendlier and more responsive because we learned more about ourselves.

This missive is aimed mostly at the people who will be attending IxD11 in Boulder but who haven’t registered for my workshop with Bill DeRouchey, called Interaction Design History for Interaction Designers. Consider signing up, will you? I promise it will be relevant, informative, and inspiring. And entertaining.

But I want to make a point that applies to everyone, even if you’re not coming to Boulder. Take a moment and marvel at how far technology has come in the past hundred years or so. Particularly be amazed at the rapid evolution of digital computing over the past 65 years—and then get dizzy thinking about how much more work we have to do. Pay your respects to all the inventors and pioneers who made the decisions that got us here today. Maybe someday, there will be a designer looking back and giving thanks to you.

Filed under: Machines with Brains

November 22, 2010 • 9:33 pm 13

Cherchez le buyer: Thoughts on UX and advertising

It pains me to have to admit this: I know a lot about the intersection of the user experience field and the advertising industry. Working in New York, I’ve met (and counseled) lots of people who work at both traditional and digital agencies. I’ve been recruited for many agency jobs. I even worked for Razorfish, a company that—much to my chagrin—decided to become an advertising agency halfway through my tenure. I work with many, many publishers, and in order to understand their business, I had to learn the advertising business.

I’ve been poking at the problem of how to integrate user experience processes into advertising agencies for a while. I ran a survey on this very topic last year. I gave a talk at the 2009 IA Summit on what user experience designers need to know about the advertising business model. I’ve consulted with traditional advertising agencies on how to restructure their creative group to better integrate UX (no link there, but I bet you wish you could see my findings.) I talked about how advertising works online at length on my recent Big Web Show interview with Jeffrey Zeldman and Dan Benjamin.

Normally I wouldn’t wade into the murky waters stirred up by a fractious, link-baiting blog post, but unfortunately this muck is the water I stand in every day, and I’ve already got toenail fungus from it, so I guess I might as well engage in a pissing contest in it too.

Follow the money

What I haven’t seen in any of the debate about Peter’s post — the most important thing, and certainly the first question any user experience professional should ask is: Who’s the user of the advertising agency? Who’s the buyer? And what do they want? Advertising agencies exist, in all their dysfunctional glory, because there are still people who choose to pay handsomely for their services.

What are these people thinking? Why don’t they love the internet the way we do, and shift more of their traditional advertising budgets online? Why do they choose to spend their multi-million dollar online budgets on Flash microsites? Why don’t they get that they need to engage customers through better product and service design, not just through glossy campaigns?

Given the economics of our industry, I believe this is the 64 billion dollar question. And we as user experience people should be doing everything in our power to persuade these buyers to consider our point of view. Thinking our potential clients are stupid because right now they choose to work with advertising agencies is probably not a good start.

Hate the ad, love the business model

UX people hate ads. Trust me, I get it. They’re annoying. They’re distracting. Users hate them. So UX people hate them.

I can’t say this strongly enough: if you’re a UX person, and you’re going in to talk to your clients with a snotty, condescending attitude about advertising, then you’re not doing your job. Advertising isn’t the only business model on the internet. But it’s the most important one. Look around you: publishers, startups, Facebook, Google—all based on advertising.

If you hate ads, then figure out a way to make the experience of ads better. That’s your job, isn’t it? (Also, there’s good money in it.)

UX is organizational change

You know what’s the easiest UX job in the world? Running a small UX consultancy. (She says, as the head of a boutique UX consultancy.) Your clients come (mostly) pre-qualified: they seek you out because they know they need your services. Small size means you can be picky about your clients, and picky about your employees. You only have to work with people who already grok your values.

You know what’s the hardest UX job in the world? Trying to change the culture within an entrenched, traditional business. This isn’t just advertising: it’s financial services, healthcare, media, government… any business that isn’t already on board with user-centered design. News flash: this is most of civilization. It’s going to be hard.

To me, being a UX person working in an advertising agency sounds a bit like being a Log Cabin Republican—an admirable attempt to try and change the system from within, though not something I’d personally have the stomach for. But that’s why I have so much respect for people like Abby the IA.

Advertising is no better and no worse than any other traditional industry that doesn’t get UX. But if you want more money to go towards UX design, the best place you can look is to try and take it away it from marketing and advertising budgets. Believe in UX and hate advertising? Fight the good fight, and take their money — even if it means working on the inside.

Filed under: Advertising Business Model

November 8, 2010 • 6:42 am 18

The user experience doesn’t stop at the nav

If you’re reading this blog, it’s likely because you A) know me and want to hear what I have to say about content strategy and user experience design or B) found it by searching for some variant of “hearing aid reviews” on Google. Never let it be said that I don’t understand my audience. But until now, I haven’t been able to speak to the interests of both audiences at once. UNTIL NOW.

I’m doing some research to prepare for an upcoming talk at Busan Design Week in Korea, and found myself at the HTC website. Imagine my surprise when I see this:

Hearing aid compatibility! In the nav! This company is so committed to making hearing aid compatible products that they want to market this capability on the homepage of their website.

Now, if you’ve ever bought a hearing aid before (and, if I know my audience, I can safely say that half of you hope you will never need to, and the other half are trying to do so right now and it’s the bane of your existence) you know that hearing aids don’t work very well with phones. I have a well-rehearsed routine if I ever have to take a call on my mobile that involves removing my hearing aid and hooking it over my thumb. Also, please never call me. That’s why God invented text messaging.

But the promise of having a phone that would work with a hearing aid is a good sales pitch. I’m intrigued. Until I get to this page (click to embiggen):

Um. What?

Here’s my question: Will your phone work with my hearing aid? In no way does this page actually answer my question.

Because I make websites, I know exactly how this happened.

There was a meeting in which everyone agreed that it was important, and valuable, and responsible, that HTC showcase its hearing aid compatibility. Negotiations ensued, and it was decided that Hearing Aid Compatibility would have its very own place in the nav.

Someone set out to make a wireframe for this page. This person was told that there would be some text on the page, and a table of ratings information. This person mocked up a generic page to represent this information (put text here, put table here) and then went about feeling very user-centered and accessible because of the attention given to the disabled.

Someone else (perhaps the engineer or business owner responsible for hearing aid issues) was asked to provide the content. This person knows an awful lot about technical standards for compatibility, but perhaps not much about writing for a reader. The content got populated in the CMS, and everyone felt good about it.

Except me.

No one ever came back to ask if the content that got published actually met the user’s needs. Someone defined a requirement that — in essence — said “have a navigation category for hearing aids.” It didn’t say “ensure that our hearing impaired customers can determine which product will best meet their needs.”

The user experience doesn’t stop at the nav. If the content doesn’t answer the user’s question, you’ve failed.

Filed under: Bionic Hearing, Content Strategy

November 3, 2010 • 3:28 pm 2

We are all content strategists now

Are you feeling left out of the party that is content strategy because you’re not a content strategist? I’ll tell you a secret: I’m not a content strategist either.

And yet, I’m still qualified to talk about why content is important to user experience. And you are too! If you don’t believe me, watch this video of my talk from IDEA 10. You can even follow along with the slides.

We are all content strategists now (on Vimeo.com)

Filed under: Content Strategy

August 5, 2010 • 10:43 am 0

Department of Shameless Self Promotion: FIVE Upcoming Content Strategy Talks

Content strategy is on fire, and I am out there, fanning the flames. Please stay tuned for a promotional message from our sponsor, highlighting four FIVE upcoming events. They’re going to be fantastic. You know what would be even more fantastic? If you came to one of these!

UX Week, San Francisco, August 25

At this amazing event hosted by Adaptive Path, I’ll be leading a full-day, action-packed workshop on how to integrate content strategy into the UX design process. Working off a familiar UX process framework, I’ll show how content strategy fits into the mix with four entertaining, hands-on exercises.
Learn more and register now!

Planning-ness, Brooklyn, September 30

I have a particular fascination with how content strategy fits into advertising and publishing models. So I’m delighted to be leading a workshop at Planning-ness, an unconference aimed at planners and creatives. Branded content? Social publishing? Editorial workflow? See how content strategy enables all of these.
More about Planning-ness

IDEA 2010, Philadelphia, October 1-2

Wow. I am extra proud to be invited to speak at IDEA, a top-notch conference put on by my many friends in the Information Architecture Institute. Expect me to throw down the gauntlet for tighter integration between information architecture and content strategy.
IDEA program announced soon!

Iceweb, Reykjavík, October 7-8

I’m doing not one but TWO talks at this phenomenal conference in Iceland. Hop over to Reykjavík, pay your respects to the volcano, support the Icelandic economy, and see me give both a workshop and a short talk on content strategy. And an extra special bonus level of awesome: more content strategy talk from the inimitable Relly Annett-Baker.
Give it up for Iceweb

Content Strategy Forum, London, September 5-7 2011

It’s more than a year away, and I am already bouncing up and down with excitement. While it hardly seems possible that we could improve on the CS Forum in Paris, we’re going to take it to eleven at the next European event in London. This time with 100% fewer volcanic ash clouds from Iceland (I hope.) Also this time with me as a headliner, sharing the bill with the renowned Gerry McGovern.*
Register for more info

* Elizabeth McGuane, Gerry and I insist that this event is organized by Together London. Any involvement from the nefarious cabal of people whose last names start with McG is entirely imagined. I swear.

Filed under: Content Strategy

August 5, 2010 • 9:54 am 6

Content Strategy at UX Melbourne: Avoiding the 11th Hour Sh*tstorm

One of the most enjoyable events I’ve done recently was a UX meetup in Melbourne. This talk—about how we screw ourselves over by not planning for content—is one of my personal favorites. The audience in Melbourne was a hoot and had some great questions. On the off chance that you weren’t in Melbourne that night, here’s the video.

Karen McGrane on Web Content Strategy or “Avoiding the Eleventh hour Sh*tstorm Problem” from UX Melbourne on Vimeo.

Filed under: Content Strategy

July 12, 2010 • 3:19 pm 74

Widex Mind 440 m4-9 Hearing Aid Review

I finally got around to purchasing a new pair of hearing aids: the Widex Mind 440.

When I was trying to make up my mind I did a search to see if anyone had written a review of this hearing aid. Imagine my surprise when I discovered that I did.

Widex Mind 440 m4-m-CBWhat I originally tried was the m4-m-CB model, which is a micro BTE with a thin tube. I really covet that thin tube, but my hearing loss is just too much for it. My disappointment was compounded by a poorly fitted earmold taken by a less-than-competent audiologist. I sent these back, but your mileage may vary. This model might be a great option for someone with a milder hearing loss, and who is willing to tolerate the smaller batteries in favor of a less-visible aid.

Widex Mind 440 m4-9I still wanted a Widex BTE, so I wound up getting the m4-9 model. These are a larger BTE and so they have the larger size 13 batteries I wanted. They also have the larger tubes, which are ugly, but such is life. I got half-shell earmolds rather than the full (skeleton) shell, which makes them a bit smaller and more comfortable. The smaller shells are really quite nice, though again, someone else’s hearing profile may require a different solution.

So here’s my review of these new aids: they’re fine. Really. Just fine.

Do I like them? Yes, I do. They work just as well as my old ones, and I adjusted to them easily. Do I love them? Eh. Not really. I don’t notice anything groundbreaking about them.

Here’s the deal. When I was doing this research, everyone I talked to emphasized how much better hearing aids had become in the five years since my last purchase. All the audiologists and manufacturers made a point of telling me that the technology had gotten exponentially better in the past five years. I was prepared to have my mind blown.

You know what’s gotten better in the last five years? My iPod. Five years ago I had an iPod with a scrollwheel and a black & white, text-only interface for choosing music. Today, I have an iPhone 4 with a touchscreen that has the sharpest color interface I’ve ever seen, and it can play videos, games, and other apps in addition to playing music. Heck, it will even make phone calls if I stand in just the right place and hold it in just the right way!

Has Widex improved its product over the past five years to the same degree that Apple has? Not even close. Frankly, I can’t even tell the difference between my old hearing aids and my new ones. But the new ones? They’re just fine.

Filed under: Bionic Hearing

January 10, 2010 • 4:49 pm 71

In Defense of Lorem Ipsum

Lorem Ipsum is one of those things like silicone breast implants or orange spray cheese in a can that just seems wrong. It’s fake. It’s unabashedly fake. It calls attention to itself by being so fake, making you look at it in wonder, asking: “What is that? Can that be real?”

We don’t like fake, right? We like organic cheeses, and, well, organic breasts, and we’re 100% in favor of real content in our designs.

What you put in your mouth or have surgically inserted into your body is your business. What you put in your wireframes or your design comps? Well, that’s a heated public debate. With respected thought leaders asking us to pinky-swear that we’ll never, ever use Lorem Ipsum ever again, I want to say a few words in support of greek text.

A Symptom of a Bigger Problem

I’m a word person, okay? I start with the content, and design around it. I often show draft copy in design reviews. And yet, I still use Lorem Ipsum. I believe wholeheartedly that greek text has a place in the interaction designer’s toolkit. Even content strategists can find a place in their hearts for it.

Now, look. if you’re running a project where you mock up designs, get them approved, code them up, build a CMS, hook it all together, and then everyone looks around and says “Who’s got the content? Wait, this content doesn’t match the designs and it won’t fit in the CMS!” then you have a problem. A big problem.

But you know what? Lorem Ipsum is not the cause of your problem. It’s a symptom. The real problem is an overall process that treats design and content as separate tracks without appropriate communication, collaboration, and checkpoints along the way. Thinking you’ll solve your content strategy problem by signing a purity pledge that you’ll never use Lorem Ipsum is like saying “you’re a crapass designer and the solution is you should quit using drop shadows.” A step in the right direction, perhaps, but one that focuses on changing a superficial behavior rather than fixing the underlying problem.

Why They Say You Shouldn’t Use Lorem Ipsum (and Why It’s Okay)

The internet mob is out in force, waving sticks and torches and demanding Lorem Ipsum’s head on a platter. Why so much hate for nonsense text?

Designs can’t be evaluated without real content

I’ve heard the argument that “lorem ipsum” is effective in wireframing or design because it helps people focus on the actual layout, or color scheme, or whatever. What kills me here is that we’re talking about creating a user experience that will (whether we like it or not) be DRIVEN by words. The entire structure of the page or app flow is FOR THE WORDS.

—Kristina Halvorson, Death to Lorem Ipsum & Other Adventures in Content, Adaptive Path

For those who would argue that it’s impossible to evaluate designs without real content, let me ask this: why then, is it okay to evaluate content out of context of the designs? To review copy decks devoid of color, typography, layout, and styling means that readers are missing out on the important signals communicated by design—cues to priority, weight, and hierarchy of information, but also emotional and aesthetic appeal. If content strategists want to ask designers to stop using Lorem Ipsum, maybe designers should insist that content strategists add style sheets to their copy decks that match the proposed design direction.

Or maybe not. How about this: build in appropriate intersections and checkpoints between design and content. Accept that it’s sometimes okay to focus just on the content or just on the design.

Fake data breaks down in real life

Using dummy content or fake information in the Web design process can result in products with unrealistic assumptions and potentially serious design flaws. A seemingly elegant design can quickly begin to bloat with unexpected content or break under the weight of actual activity. Fake data can ensure a nice looking layout but it doesn’t reflect what a living, breathing application must endure. Real data does.

—Luke Wroblewski, Death to Lorem Ipsum, Functioning Form

For better or for worse, websites are templated. Content management systems and other publishing platforms make it possible to display different content in the same template. When you’re publishing thousands of articles, or product pages, or user profiles, each with variable sizes and business rules for different content elements, it’s easy to see how unexpected scenarios can break the design.

This is a complex problem, and the solution isn’t as simple as just avoiding Lorem Ipsum. Using test examples of real content and data in designs can help, but this doesn’t guarantee that every outlier will be caught and fixed. A prototype or beta site with real content published from the real CMS is the only way to really be sure—but you’re not going to get there until you go through an initial design cycle.

I’ve found that Lorem Ipsum actually helps in the design stage, because it calls attention to places where the content is a dynamic block coming from the CMS (as opposed to static content elements that will always stay the same.) A block of Lorem Ipsum with a character count range provides a tangible reminder to double-check that the design and the content model match up.

Or how about this approach?
Consistency from Business Guys on Business Trips

Distracting copy is your fault

If the copy becomes distracting in the design then you are doing something wrong or they are discussing copy changes. It might be a bit annoying but you could tell them that that discussion would be best suited for another time. At worst the discussion is at least working towards the final goal of your site where questions about lorem ipsum don’t.

—Kyle Fiedler, Lorem Ipsum is Killing Your Designs, Design Informer

If the copy becomes distracting in the design it’s because it’s working.

Lorem Ipsum doesn’t exist because people think the content is meaningless window dressing, only there to be decorated by designers who can’t be bothered to read. Lorem Ipsum exists because words are powerful. If you fill up your page with draft copy about your client’s business, they will read it. They will comment on it. They will be inexorably drawn to it. Presented the wrong way, draft copy can send your design review off the rails.

Telling a client to ignore Lorem Ipsum is a one-time thing. They quit reading it because it doesn’t make sense. Telling a client to ignore draft copy can be a never-ending battle. I show draft copy quite frequently, and in every meeting I usually get a handful of confused questions about it. I’ve had terrible situations where work-in-progress showing draft copy gets passed around to client stakeholders who haven’t participated in review sessions, and then fielded angry phone calls about the “wrong” content appearing in the designs. Show draft copy—I’m not telling you to only use Lorem Ipsum—but make sure you’re prepared to handle the questions, confusion, and even meltdowns that can result.

Permission To Use Lorem Ipsum

Lorem Ipsum: a sign that you’re a traitor to all that is good and right and holy in the world of web design, or an occasionally useful tool that, used intentionally, may help solve some problems? I’m going to go with the latter. If you’ve got a problem with content strategy, fix the bigger problem. Otherwise you’re just treating the symptoms, not curing the disease.

Update October 5, 2010:
Now, new and improved! Read it in Belorussian!

Filed under: Content Strategy

January 6, 2010 • 7:30 am 1

Interaction Design History Sources

Want to learn more about the history of interaction design? This is where I started:

Pre-computing History

Early interaction design, from the earliest systems for tabulating and managing information. Starts in the late 1800s with innovations in business information systems, punched card systems, and major wartime innovations in human factors. Ends with the development of the first computing systems during WWII.

Professional Computing, Mainframe, and Command Line History

The role of computing and information systems in professional contexts, including post-war developments in academic, scientific, and corporate environments. Covers early mainframe systems, programming languages, and command line interfaces, the invention of the transistor, as well as early research and theory into hypertext and other support for human cognition.

Personal Computing, GUI, and Internet History

The onset of personal computing, in the form of low-cost computing systems available to individual users. Focuses on the development of the graphical user interface and its impact on personal and professional use, with some review of more recent history, including the internet and mobility.

General Interaction Design History Resources

Resources related to the overall history of user-centered design, including the history of human factors, HCI, and interaction design disciplines.

General Computing History Resources

Resources related to the overall history of computing, including major university and corporate archives.

Filed under: Machines with Brains

January 4, 2010 • 8:53 pm 15

What is Interaction Design History?

The IBM Naval Ordnance Research Calculator

Image Credit: Columbia University Computing History

Learning more about computing history is a sort of professional hobby of mine; I have a fetish for pictures of old mainframes and this research lets me indulge my proclivities. When I tell people in the user experience field about my studies the most common response I hear is “I don’t know anything about the history of computers.”

I think that’s sad. Practitioners in other design disciplines—architecture, graphic design, fashion—would be expected to have some grounding in historical movements and trends. But most people have no formal education in interaction design, and so they’ve never learned the roots of the discipline. I taught a short course in IxD history in the MFA program in Interaction Design at SVA, and I hope that the students in the program know enough now to at least recognize key people and events when they come up, even if their introduction was a whirlwind 5-week tour.

The interesting question, to me, is how you separate interaction design history from the broader scope of computing history in general. User experience people gravitate toward the history of hypertext and the graphical user interface, direct manipulation and the mouse, the work done at Xerox PARC and Apple. In many people’s minds, that era marks the dividing line between the “us” of the design community and the “them” of computer scientists, because it’s the point at which it became possible to draw a separation between the work that was done to serve the needs of the machine, and the work that was done solely to meet the needs of the user.

I’m fascinated by the earlier history of punchcards and mainframes, green screen CRTs and command line interfaces, precisely because that process of shaping the machine to think and talk more like we do was more formative and more raw. And while many (if not most) of the decisions that went into the design of early computing systems were based on the memory and processor requirements of the physical machine, engineers were also making decisions aimed at making the device easier to use. Separate out the aspects that are focused purely on hardware limitations, and the history of punched cards, programming languages and mainframe operating systems is as important to the history of the discipline as the mouse, the GUI, or the touchscreen.

I’ve finally got around to uploading my classroom presentations to Slideshare:

Week 1: Course Overview

This was intended as a high-level flyover of some of the people and topics I covered over the next three weeks.

Week 2: Interaction Design before Computers

Make no mistake: my definition of interaction design is squarely focused on how people communicate and interact with machines. (I know it’s fashionable to talk about interaction design as influencing human behavior, regardless of medium, but that’s an awfully broad scope for a history class.) Of course, people were imagining or using complex information processing devices even before there were computers.

Week 3: Computing Technology in the Workplace

My favorite section; I wish I could spend more time on this era, exploring how early programming languages and operating systems made it easier (and yet harder) to use a computer—in fact, what it meant to “use” a mainframe. This quote always kills me:

Not only would a programmer hardly ever see the computer, he or she might never even see the keypunch on which the programs were entered into the mainframe.
—Ceruzzi, A History of Modern Computing

Week 4: Personal Computing

Seems like everyone has at least a passing familiarity with the history of the graphical user interface across Xerox PARC, Apple, and Microsoft. Equally interesting is the cultural shift from mainframes to personal computing, regardless of the interface metaphor.

Filed under: Machines with Brains, Presentations

November 10, 2009 • 5:27 pm 2

SURVEY: User Experience in Agencies

Take the survey now: UX in Agencies Survey

Do a Google search for “traditional agency” and you’ll find a page of results debating whether and how full-service agencies can integrate digital skills into their mix. As agencies change with the times, they build in new practices and disciplines, hire new people and explore new ways of working.

How agencies embrace digital skills and processes is a big subject, so I’ll limit myself to one area: how do agencies incorporate user experience into their existing toolkit? (If you’re needing a definition of user experience, there are many; Eric Reiss’s is a good one.)

Over the past ten years, many traditional agencies have hired user experience people — from bringing in one lonely information architect or usability specialist, to building whole teams of interaction designers and content strategists. Some even place senior UX pros at the same level as creative directors. How effective has this approach been at integrating user experience principles and values into the agency?

At the same time, digital agencies have grown larger (and more bureaucratic.) Many digital agencies brought UX into the fold early, and it’s likely that a large digital agency also has a large UX team. But digital agencies aren’t immune from challenges in integrating UX, creative, and strategy practices. How does the breakdown of roles and responsibilities work in digital agencies?

I’m working on a benchmarking report to examine how user experience fits into traditional and digital agencies. I’m exploring questions like:

  • How does UX fit into the overall organizational structure?
  • How do UX people work with other disciplines on project teams?
  • What makes for effective collaboration (and what are the barriers that prevent it)?

If you have ever worked for an agency and would like to contribute, here’s a brief survey:

UX in Agencies Survey

If you have a lot to say on this subject, please let me know so we can talk via phone or email.

Filed under: Advertising Business Model

September 30, 2009 • 2:02 pm 81

Widex Mind 440 Hearing Aid Review

I exchanged my pair of Oticon Epoq XW for a pair of Widex Mind 440s. The Widex Mind wasn’t even on my radar to begin with, because I was completely focused on Bluetooth.

Once I realized that Bluetooth integration wasn’t good enough yet for what I wanted to do, and I realized that the Widex family was a good fit for me because it offered superior noise reduction and a sound quality that I liked, I decided to stick with that brand and get their best model.

Problems, Problems

My initial fitting went badly. Widex sent the wrong hearing aids, and then gave my audiologist very specific instructions that caused him to break the earhook. I went home disappointed, but they promised to send the correct pair with a rush order.

CAMISHA Domes

I was told that I would do better if I was fitted with custom-made “CAMISHA” domes instead of regular domes. I spent $150 to have custom domes made that would sit deep inside my ear and connect to a thin, unobtrusive wire. The goal of the custom fitting was to reduce feedback.

These were a disaster. Blame it on my weirdly-shaped head, but the custom domes would not stay in my ears. The left earmold in particular popped out to such a degree that the hearing aid was useless. It was obvious from the second I put them on that they were not going to work, but I was a good sport and tried them out over the weekend.

Open Fit Domes

I then swapped out the custom domes for generic open fit domes. (Does anyone want to buy a pair of barely-used custom-made ear molds? I’ll give you a good deal.) I was pretty unhappy with these as well. I teach a class and when I wore these in class the first time, I couldn’t hear the students talking on the other side of the room.

I was told that the open-fit domes might not work as well for me, given my audiogram, and I’d get feedback. This was true! I had the sensation that the hearing aids were always just about to start feeding back, like an annoying whistle just below my range of hearing. Imagine what a teakettle sounds like when the water is just starting to boil. I was told that these fancy new hearing aids do a better job of recognizing and removing feedback, but that was not my experience here.

Back to the Drawing Board

During my trial with the Widex Mind 440s, I did not feel they were an improvement over my current Widex Senso Divas, which are 5 years old.

I did some research and learned that Widex makes an even newer hearing aid, the Passion 440. I’ve returned the Widex Mind 440s in exchange for the Passion 440s. I haven’t tried the Passion 440s yet, but I’ll tell you right now what my sense of the benefits and drawbacks are:

Benefits

  • Receiver in the canal: I was pretty annoyed that the Mind 440 didn’t offer RIC, but it looks like that’s what the Passion 440 does. In exchange for Bluetooth, it will at least permit me to wear earbuds on top of them, which should make it possible to listen to music or answer the phone. A low-tech solution, which means it will probably work.

Drawbacks

  • Size: Good god, these things are tiny. You might be asking “why is small size a drawback?” To me, this is just baby-boomer vanity. I’ve worn hearing aids for 25 years, I don’t care if anyone sees them, and I don’t need a hearing aid that’s the size of a dime. The smaller aids will have more moisture problems than the large ones, and they’re easier to drop. I’d be happier with a larger aid that I could hold onto more easily.
  • Size 10 Batteries: This goes hand-in-hand with the smaller size of the aid. I’m going to have to change these things twice a week, and the small size means it’s going to be a pain in the ass. I have tiny little fingers and even I don’t relish the challenge of popping these things in and out. I’m looking at my Senso Diva with its luxurious Size 13 battery and thinking I’ll miss it.
  • Remote Control: And yet another drawback because of the size! These aids are too tiny to include a button to switch between programs, so I have to buy a remote control to switch between programs. This is one more thing I have to schlep around in my purse, possibly lose, spill stuff on, etc.

I’m getting super cranky about this process. I think I’ve spent about 40 hours just going to the audiologist, I’ve plunked down over $7500, and right now I have nothing to show for it. I’m genuinely not happy with the options available to me. I hope the Passion 440s provide a great listening experience, and persuade me that the money and time are all worth it.

Filed under: Bionic Hearing

September 18, 2009 • 8:41 pm 49

Oticon Epoq XW Hearing Aid Review

The first hearing aid in my trial was the Oticon Epoq XW. I did a comparison test with it and the Phonak Audeo Yes in the audiologist’s soundproof booth. The Oticon was the clear winner in that test. I liked the sound quality better immediately, and the brief hearing test he gave me scored the Oticon significantly higher in word recognition than the Phonak. I picked both of these hearing aids to test because they offered Bluetooth integration, and I was excited to take the Oticon Epoq home and try it out with my Bluetooth enabled devices.

Bluetooth and the Epoq

I spent about $7500 on the Epoq and its Bluetooth enabling companion, the Streamer. A comparable pair of hearing aids without the Bluetooth would cost around $6000.

In other words, I spent $1500 to get my hearing aids to act like a Bluetooth headset.

If I spent $1500 on a regular Bluetooth headset, I would expect it to work FLAW-LESS-LY.

The Oticon Bluetooth did not work flawlessly. Not even close.

Pairing with multiple devices

I wanted to pair my hearing aids with my iPhone, my MacBook Pro, and my Mac Mini. I ran into immediate problems when trying to connect to multiple devices. Although the documentation says that you can connect up to eight devices, after unpairing and repairing I was only ever able to connect to two at a time. This wasn’t a dealbreaker, but I was frustrated by the troubleshooting I had to do, and disappointed when I realized that I was better off only connecting two at a time.

Wireless Streaming from Computer

I watch TV and movies from a Mac Mini hooked up to my TV. Usually I watch with captions, but when that’s not possible, I sometimes put on headphones so I can listen more closely. Wirelessly streaming audio from the computer to my hearing aids was a compelling prospect, but a disappointing reality. The sound quality was very soft and unacceptably tinny — so much that a Bluetooth connection was in no way better than just normal listening.

Wired Streaming from Computer

I also tried listening to music from my laptop with a wired connection. The wire ran between my laptop and the Streamer (worn around my neck), and then the sound was sent wirelessly between the Streamer and the Epoqs. The sound quality was so weak and tinny that I can’t imagine ever choosing it over listening to music with headphones. My old hearing aids are Widex Divas, and they have a good music program. I was really excited about the potential for wireless music streaming to my hearing aids. The reality was a poor quality, wired connection. Headphones plus hearing aids were still a better solution.

Mobile Phone

I was able to successfully make and receive calls on my iPhone using the Streamer. If this is the only Bluetooth integration you wanted, it would probably suffice. The sound quality was good and there was something magical about being able to push a button and have calls come in via my hearing aids. The downside is that you have to wear the Streamer around your neck in order to make and receive calls. Also, some of the people I talked to on the phone complained that I sounded like I was on a bad speakerphone.

Snatching Defeat from the Jaws of Victory

I really, really, really wanted to love these hearing aids. I was so psyched to get them. But a couple of things pushed me over the edge:

Background Noise

Never have I appreciated my Widex hearing aids so much as the first time I took my Oticons into a noisy restaurant. I am accustomed to being able to hear relatively easily in restaurants, at conferences, and in other noisy situations. I assumed that all hearing aid manufacturers had similar noise reduction programs to the Widex. I was wrong.

Now, I admit that I am accustomed to the Widex and so a shift in manufacturer may have been more disorienting for me. Someone who was not as familiar with Widex may not have experienced the same dissatisfaction that I did. But I was shocked! There was a dull roar of noise in the background of the restaurant that I was used to having filtered out. This extended to other environments — I particularly remember visiting my mother and asking if her birds had always been so loud. I found myself thinking that smarter hearing aids would have made better choices about what sounds to filter out.

Streamer Fail

The last straw for me was the failure of my Streamer, only two weeks into my trial. I went on a ten-day trip and the Streamer stopped working on Day 2. It refused to charge, but it would blink a flashing orange light to let me know that it was still doing something. I couldn’t find any documentation or guidance online about how to fix the problem. The instructions in the user’s manual about how to reset the Streamer didn’t work.

Onward

So back they went. Let me offer some proactive defenses here about why this was a reasonable solution:

  • I had three fittings. I went in for fittings on three separate occasions, and spent a fair amount of time with my audiologist on the noise reduction program in particular. I don’t believe he could have done anything else to resolve that problem.
  • I tried to get help on the internet. Someone might be able to tell me here how I could have fixed my Streamer problem. And if everything else had been great, I might have been willing to sort that one out. But I was not willing to pay a significant premium for spotty Bluetooth on hearing aids that weren’t meeting my basic needs.
  • I’m an expert user. I am probably in the top 95th percentile in terms of technology savvy hearing aid wearers. I am willing to experiment to get things right, and I’m comfortable searching the internet for help. But the balance between cost and effort on one hand, and benefits on the other, was just not good enough with these hearing aids.

    • My next choice was the Widex Mind 440.

    Filed under: Bionic Hearing, TV in the Future

June 16, 2009 • 7:10 pm 2

Content is King, or, if you don’t have a content strategy you’re living in a fairy tale.

This year, I was invited back to Malmö Sweden to give a new workshop at the From Business to Buttons conference. Because I was so close to the home of Hans Christian Andersen, I organized the presentation around a fairy tale. Like most fairy tale people, the ones in my talk made some mistakes.

I’m super excited by all the momentum around content strategy right now. From our local NYC meetups to Kristina Halvorson’s new book, there’s a community of people that I am delighted to be a part of.

Filed under: Content Strategy, Presentations

May 22, 2009 • 6:33 am 9

Why Web Ads Suck

I’ve been researching and writing about the advertising business model for a while now, and for one simple reason: I hate online ads. They suck.

And yet, I’ve come around to believing that despite its flaws, advertising is only chance we have of making any real money off the internet. Or, to paraphrase Winston Churchill, advertising is the worst business model for the internet, except for all the others that have been tried.

Brian Morrissey of Adweek asks Are designers to blame for bad Web ads?

There are any number of reasons that web ads are terrible, but most of them sit far upstream from the beleaguered agency art director asked to churn out banner ads each week.

Advertisers Don’t Spend Enough
If you want better online ads, why not pay more for them? When you pay more for something, you often get better quality. CPMs for online ads are between 1/7 and 1/10 of print ads. That means that for every dollar an advertiser like Chanel will pay to get my attention in a magazine, they’ll pay only a dime to show me something online.  Do you expect to get the same quality from your $10 sushi from Whole Foods as you would get if you spent $100 at Nobu? It’s a chicken and egg problem — advertisers want to see better returns before they will spend more — but the advertisers will have to start paying more before quality will improve. Lower CPMs are the main reason that traditional media businesses are floundering; even if publishers devise a somewhat-palatable way for users to pay for content it still won’t make up the difference.

Measurability is a Double-Edged Sword
The saving grace of web ads — measurability — is also their downfall. Publishers tout measurability as a key reason to shift to online media, yet the metrics used to evaluate success are too simplistic. Click-through is a terrible way to measure people’s interest and engagement. People will click more often on things that are annoying, but that doesn’t mean they like the ads. Take the example from those subscription cards in periodicals (“magazine seeds”) which were previously the most intrusive form of advertising known to man, before the invention of Eyeblaster. Subscription marketers know that if you put five cards in a magazine, you’ll get more subscriptions than if you put four cards in — regardless of how much you annoy the people who don’t subscribe. Similarly, the more irritating you make your ad, the more likely it is someone will click on it. If that seems like a flawed way of doing business, don’t blame the designers who are encouraged to make obnoxious ads. Blame the system that focuses on click-through metrics to the exclusion of more meaningful evaluations. (If you still think that measurability is the end-all-be-all of the internet, and you haven’t read Doug Bowman say Goodbye, Google, now would be an opportune time.)

Industry-standard Sizes are Too Constraining
I’ve designed sites for dozens of newspapers, magazines, and blogs, and I can confidently say that having a limited palette of ad sizes (and thus grid structures) to work with really constrains your creativity. The only ad format anyone wants to buy is a 300×250 rectangle. The IAB and other industry organizations put Soviet-style pressure on publishers and advertisers to force them to conform to a single standard. The argument for standard sizes is that it widens adoption, since advertisers are assured of being able to place their banner on as many sites as possible. In practice, it retards growth, because sites are unwilling to branch out to new formats. I’ve been advocating the half-page ad (300×600) for years now, but few sites have re-architected to support it, and so agencies don’t design for it. I asked one client why they didn’t run more of the larger ad size, and he replied “We can’t run it unless 12 of our competitors run it. And they don’t.”

Advertising is About More Than Awareness
Much has been said about how the traditional marketing funnel has been turned sideways and inside-out by the internet. Not enough has been done to educate clients and creative teams about how to change the way they work to engage and persuade people throughout the transaction funnel. Everyone still focuses on banner ads and microsites, which are the equivalent of bus sides and TV commercials. Says Bob Greenberg of R/GA in Art & Commerce: Funnel Clouding (also from Adweek):

I suspect the reason agencies haven’t tackled consideration and preference is because they are far beyond their capabilities rather than simply outside their comfort zone. Real engagement requires entirely new teams of people—like information architects, data analysts and an army of technologists of various stripes. The traditional teams found at agencies simply do not possess the skill sets needed to tackle areas that are deeper inside the funnel, where purchase decisions increasingly take place.

You get flashy, glossy microsites because you’re dealing with an industry of advertisers and publishers that haven’t had a chance to develop and assimilate a new set of values. The digital agencies are schizophrenic, emulating backwards as often as they strive to set new standards. And the cult of measurement ensures that content, tools, and guidance that go beyond mere banner click-through just don’t “count.”

Is it any wonder that online ads suck? Frankly, I think it’s a wonder that agency designers do as well as they do.

Filed under: Advertising Business Model

May 18, 2009 • 1:36 pm 1

Ad relevance is the next big cash cow

Umair Haque argues that the way to beat Google (and, presumably to be the next internet company with eleventy billion dollars) is to serve ads that are more relevant. Google got part of the way there, can Ad Block Plus go farther?

Ad Blocker Plus is on the verge of turning into an open network that (finally) does the same as Google does: massively boost ad relevance, stripping out the useless junk — by factoring in whether or not people find ads useful or not. Ad Blocker plus is, almost unwittingly, making the world’s first reverse ad network. It doesn’t aggregate more ads to push — it aggregates people’s preferences about ads, so better ads can be chosen.

via How to Challenge Google (And Win) – Umair Haque – HarvardBusiness.org.

Filed under: Advertising Business Model

May 5, 2009 • 9:36 pm 7

Bionic Hearing Wish List

I am kicking off the process of buying new hearing aids, starting tomorrow! My audiologist asked me to make a wish list of what I want. Here’s my advanced, futuristic version of what I want from them.

1. Bluetooth

Bluetooth hearing aids would take me from feeling like someone with a disability to feeling like I’m a superhero. I’m reminded of Geordi La Forge from Star Trek: The Next Generation. He was blind, but he could see with his visor. He couldn’t see the way everyone else sees, but he could see better. Ever since I was in high school and I’d listen to my Walkman with headphones on, I’ve wanted to be able to pipe music in directly through my hearing aids. I’ve spent more money than most people will ever spend on expensive audio equipment, and I expect them to play music directly into my head. Frankly, if you’d asked me about this even 10 years ago, I would have been happy just to listen to music directly through the aids. Now, I also want my my phone calls piped into my aids, and while I’m at it, I plan to connect via Bluetooth to all of my computers, so I can hear movies, TV shows, and videos too. This will change my life.

2. Open Fit

The last time I bought hearing aids, I didn’t even consider buying open-fit models. But in the last few years this new style has taken off, and today more than 50% of new hearing aid sales are of this type. Open fit has a couple of advantages. To me, the best part is that it’s a BTE style with a new kind of tubing that doesn’t need to be replaced every 3-4 months. Open fit also sounds less “plugged-up” or occluded, which is probably more important to someone who hasn’t been wearing hearing aids for 27 years. I am hoping that open fit will be more physically comfortable, otherwise I’ll just stick with BTEs.

3. Data Logging

I don’t know much about this new feature, but it sounds great. Apparently newer models will record information about your different listening environments, which gives your audiologist more data to use in customizing your aids. I have always wanted to have my audiologist trail me around, reconfiguring my hearing aid settings for conferences, airplanes, and noisy bars. This might be even better!

4. Rechargeable Batteries

Battery life is a problem for every small, portable electronic device. My 2.5 year old MacBook Pro now gets about 24 minutes of battery life before it squawks and needs a recharge. But hearing aid batteries hold a special place in my heart for their environmentally-unfriendly neediness. Every purse I own holds a packet of hearing aid batteries, lest I get caught out on the town and wind up suddenly deafened. Every year or so I drop off a ziploc baggie filled with tiny batteries at my local recycler, the sight of which makes me relieved that I don’t have toddlers who might swallow them. I know hearing aids are more demanding than the average Bluetooth headset, but, as a society, aren’t we better than this?

5. Invisibility

I really don’t care that anyone knows that I wear hearing aids (otherwise I wouldn’t be writing about them.) I just don’t want them looking clunky and ugly next to my jewelry. The kids these days seem to be all into having hearing aids in bright colors with contrasting molds. Call me old-fashioned, but my main goal is for them to be as unobtrustive as possible. There’s nothing I like better than someone I’ve known for years telling me “No way! I didn’t know you wore hearing aids!”

Filed under: Bionic Hearing

Twitter

Who am I?


Image Credit: Alison Grippo

I'm Karen McGrane. You can view my resume, add me as a professional connection, or be my friend.

My company is called Bond Art + Science. I teach Design Management in the MFA program in Interaction Design at SVA.

Currently, I'm visiting six cities in six months across the western United States. If I'm coming to your city, maybe we should meet up?

You may also wish to follow me on Twitter, psychoanalyze my dreams, ogle my vacation photos, or learn more about me.
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 52 other followers