Differences in writing for the web
- Paragraph length - Writers should stick to shorter paragraphs using plain simple language. There is no need to be verbose. Get to the point or you’ll lose your readers.
- Use visuals - Writers need to make use of relevant visuals. This includes more than just images or photos. Users now expect to see embedded video or listen to embedded audio.
- Link to relevant information - Unlike printed writing, writing on the web doesn’t exist alone on a page. Writers must link to outside content relevant to the topic. Users will expect to be able find further information on topics they are interested in.
Writing for Web 2.0
- Effective tags/labels for information organization - Bloggers need to provide relevant tags or labels for their entries. This is an extra step for writers, but it is necessary in order for information to be found again and not lost in the internet shuffle.
- Expect comments - Web 2.0 users are accustomed to talking back to writers through the comment function that is part of many blog software packages. This will make a writer’s job more interactive than ever before. Commenters can either add to the discussion, provide relevant links or can disagree wholeheartedly with the writer. It is up to the writer to figure out how much attention he or she wants to give to these comments.
- Web 2.0 applications -Writers need to be aware of the latest technologies. A blog without an RSS feed is out of touch. Writers need to keep up with other interactive web 2.0 tools such as digg, del.icio.us and sites like facebook and twitter, otherwise they’ll be left behind.
- highlighted keywords
- meaningful subheadings
- bulleted lists
- one idea per paragraph
- start with the conclusion
- use half the world count of conventional writing
An example of what not to do
The State of New Jersey’s governor’s office merely posts press releases in the same format as they would go out to the print media. This fails as good web writing for a number of reasons. There are long complicated paragraphs. There are sub-headings, but they are not meaningful. There are no links to outside web pages. There are no visuals, even though photos, audio and video are apparently available through the governor’s site, but no one would know that until they scrolled all the way to the bottom of the page. This media should be incorporated directly into the press release.
On the other hand, this article from Slate does things right. It too is a lengthy article, yet the paragraphs are short and readable. There are extensive links to outside information. The graphics uses are appropriate. And it takes advantage of web 2.0 applications, allowing users to recommend the page using technology like digg and facebook.
Disadvantages
Not all of the items I’ve discussed are advantages. Sure it’s great to include embedded video and audio, but it’s not always available. Some topics cannot be distilled down to short sound-bites. And comments can turn into spam or offensive trolls. Writing for the web has its own unique set of challenges. A savvy writer needs to keep up to date with changes in technology and use them to his/her advantage.
No comments:
Post a Comment