The Move From Paper
Regular readers will have followed the paper theme this last week or so. Now that I’m done with newsprint, I draw my, and your, attention to news websites.
I regularly read NYTimes.com, AJC.com, Creativeloafing.com and Slate.com. Less regularly, LATimes.com, Washingtonpost.com and ReviewJournal.com (the last a guilty pleasure and the worst site I’ve seen in a long time.)
What should a news website have and not have?
Pop ups and unders – a big no for me, though I don’t get many (because my software blocks them or the sites have given up on them?).
Interstitial ads – if I’m using the wrong word, what I mean is the “pop up” that you get when you first get to the site (AJC.com) and the “pop up” that you get when you click on an article, and are sent to an ad. Both are self-defeating, at least for me, as I spend my time looking for the “click here to close” icon, which the AJC continually moves. Who thinks that I, or anyone else looks at the ad? A minor irritation, when NYTimes.com gives you an interstitial and you want to click back to the home page, you have to click twice to get there. Get an intern to fix that in the software. Thank you.
“Hover” icons. Again, this is my word. I’ve learned not to move my cursor over words that are underlined. Why do they think I’m going to go to an ad in an article that’s entrance is the word auto, Chicago, or some other “key word” the ad people think I might be interested in? I’m not.
Having to click again after having “clicked” to the article, which turned out to be a tease. Creative Loafing here in Atlanta is bad about this. I find an article I want to read. I click it. I then get a paragraph or two and have to click again to get to the full article. The NYTimes does this too. There I’m assuming that article length is part of the problem. Or, in both or either case, are they looking for “clicks” to build their traffic; or, to speed up the site? Whatever the reason, it’s annoying.
Having gotten to the end of the article, especially if I’ve had to click several times to get there, why isn’t there an icon to take me back to where I started on the home page, rather than having to click back page by page?
I said that the Las Vegas Review Journal site is the worst. I probably is. The graphics are terrible. It duplicates almost all of the articles under categories that to really match up with the subjects. The list goes on. But the most annoying site is Slate.com. Go there if you like. As you move your cursor, the page changes in ways you don’t want it to change. Clicking on an article can be an adventure if you don’t move the cursor exactly ninety degrees right and then exactly south. It re-headlines articles to make you think you’ve not seen them before.
I’m not a Webmaster; but, these glitches seem obvious to me. How to make web news pay isn’t obvious. That will be the challenge to all of these sites over the next few years, not my ergonomic bitches. Yes, I know that isn’t the right word, but it seems to work for what I’m thinking.
4 comments:
You have hit some good points here, but let me add one. I don't mind banner ads or ads in the sidebar, but I despise the ones have flashing colors or moving content. It is really, really annoying to see that when you are *trying* to read. And probably seizure-inducing for some...
What should the website have? A clean, easily navigable, well organized, attractive front page is a plus. It is hard to read articles if you cannot find them.
You're right about banner/sidebar ads. One thing I didn't put into the post was that they and those I mention, I've learned to ignore. I don't "see" them, other than the flashing things that I either wait out or look for the exit button.
You have to study for another hour, get to it.
what you call "glitches" are probably intended, and therefore not glitches. I wish I could count how many times my firm has developed a solid site structure, a design that adheres to all the latest user experience guidelines, and has the user testing data to back it up, only to have someone at the client - usually an executive or someone in marketing - tell us that we aren't representing them the way they want to be represented, forcing us to compromise everything.
They say that the customer is always right. But they're not. They merely have the final say. A vital distinction.
Post a Comment