Writing for the Web: Some newbie insights

by Kelly Wheeler

Let me start by saying that this is the end of my second month at Quirk… and my first blog post. I am not a bad employee (hopefully) but have just managed to fly under the blogging-radar for quite a while. I do appreciate blogs, I just hesitate to assume that I have anything of importance to say.

So, imagine my delight when, as the topic of “what I have learnt about writing for the web” popped up, I was the obvious choice. Being the new copywriter, with limited web experience, it was apparently the perfect blog for me.

My first week at Quirk was spent giving people blank looks when I was told to “add it to your RSS Reader”, and “put it in the meta description”. Sorry, the what?? Apparently the Internet offers more than just Facebook and free smses. I obviously had a lot to learn. I mean, I still say I got it on the email *Insert blush here*.

So, if you are web guru, stop reading, because my little discoveries are going to seem inane. But, in my defence, sometimes it’s good to look back at the basics that astound newbies like me and be grateful that, thank goodness, you already know all this stuff!

Back to day one. Feeling industrious, I googled “writing for the web” to feel prepared for my first day. The first website I found headlined, “How Users Read on the Web”. Perfect, I’m getting somewhere. Until I read the answer – they don’t.

Huh? I panicked for a few moments until I realised the truth of that statement. I hadn’t actually bothered to read on either.

Readers apparently only scan webpages and pick out what seems useful. So this, of course, affects how we write. To make webpages as readable and scannable as possible, some basic rules apply:

Use highlighted key phrases (hypertext links, bolding, colour, font variations)
Use meaningful sub-headings (not "smart" ones)
Put information into easy-to-read bulleted lists (like this one)
Only use one idea per paragraph
Use the inverted pyramid style of writing - starting with the conclusion
Use, at most, half the word count than conventional writing

So basically, all the stuff I spent four years perfecting during my Media and Writing degree at varsity - forget about it. No more I’m-too-clever-literary-device-filled emotive headlines, no props for being able to eek out 7000 creative words about ambulances (don’t ask).

My slightly subdued self accepted my first assignment in anticipation - an article on the wonders of self-cleaning glass (I know, I didn’t know it existed either - and it really is wondrous). These articles are written to provide users with useful information and (hopefully) lead them back to our client’s site. The more sites that contain links to ours, the better our genuine credibility and rankings in search engine results pages - Link Building to be technical.

My first reaction was that most of my varsity essays were probably a little dodgy, with my belief that the first results from search were the best. I had the brilliant revelation that us online copywriters write the copy specifically for the search engines so that they'll appear in the top of the results pages, making them more about sneaky keywords than real relevance.
And with that “realisation” I fell straight into the trap of how NOT to write for the web (pretty good for day one).

Bad search engine optimisation does just that, inserts keywords and emphases solely to attract spiders and rank in results pages, regardless of the page’s actual relevance to the term searched for. Harsh lesson number one – a good online writer can work in relevant keywords and create a readable, user friendly article that focuses on the user, not the spiders. Uh oh. Drawing board.

Even after deleting my multitude of not quite relevant keywords, my very professional article with an intro, middle and conclusion was not a hit. I needed to talk to the people and be friendly. I could even use contractions. My heart skipped a beat. This major technique of writing for the web is to speak to the user, not at them, as is true academic style.

I referred to myself in the first person, I spoke to you, the user, and I used one word sentences. I mean, what better way to refer to self-cleaning glass than simply - clever!

The best advice I can give any web writers? Be yourself. (See another short sentence!) Write like you’d speak and set it out just like you would want to see it online. No mess, no fuss, no academic jargon to impress professors.

Writing for online is one of the most liberating experiences for a writer and I dread ever changing jobs. No newspaper or publisher is going to appreciate my new found use of the dash and exclamation mark.

My Varsity professors would be horrified – I on the other hand think it’s pretty darn cool.

P.s. – I hope you appreciate all the easy-to-scan-bolding!

2008/01/30 | permalink | comments (15) | trackbacks (0)

Comments

RSS to Email

Get our latest blog posts delivered straight to your inbox.

eMarketing News

Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter which is packed with interesting eMarketing news, views and other quirky titbits.

January

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
				1	2	3
4	5	6	7	8	9	10
11	12	13	14	15	16	17
18	19	20	21	22	23	24
25	26	27	28	29	30	31

« Dec

Feb »

Recent Comments

Kat on Engaging as a Company

I agree with you. There are some things that should ideally not be discussed by an employee in the public sphere.
Would a communications policy have stopped the said journo from speaking out? He/she must have known a huge risk was being taken? I suppose it's also an incredibly difficult thing to predict. The lack of control can be alarming.
I'm definitely interested in seeing a more specific list, so if you find it do share.
Thank you for your comments :). Here's hoping there's a good coffee shop close to you..
vincent on Engaging as a Company

I guess the mark of a well crafted brand starts at HR policy for new recruits - ensuring that they fit the brand's/corporate's persona. So in that sense yes you could argue that left to their own devices employees would, regardless of an online communications policy, communicate in a style the sponsor would approve of. Not sure if that's always the case but I'm inclined to agree with this generalization.
I think what is also important is that the individual writing within the bounds of a sponsor's site does so in a restricted locale. You can police your own domain if you're a corporate, you can't necessarily control the individuals mouth outside of it. For instance on twitter, personal blogs and forums. Owing to the nature of niche stardom you could argue that the employee comes to represent the brand, more so than that personifies the brand in organic conversation with consumers and would carry significant weight both within corporate sites and externally. Making some individuals very wary to write for their companies at all.
For instance in our not too distant past a prominent journo got the boot for publishing his gripes with his employers and their professional ability - he was promptly fired...He would no doubt have been policed on a company blog but owing to the fact that he chose to represent the company elsewhere he took his brand and the papers brand with him - dragging both through the mud as traipsed on towards epic-failuredom...
So to come back to a point, there is definitely a sense that the policies as listed above are quite ambiguous. Even you yourself suggest that requisite legalese is absent, and I have to assume that such legalese would include a fairly long list of do's and dont's. I have a list somewhere laying about which dictates in a very bland corporate fashion how to represent the brand in public - if I find it I will share it with you.
Perhaps its worthwhile to enforce points like "don't tell secrets" and my own favourite, "for the love of god don't gripe about the boss who you've publicly named online"...
That's my mental-riff for the day, I'm afraid I veered rather uncharitably off course but such is the nature of thought.
Now if only the company I worked for had some decent coffee!!
Kat on Engaging as a Company

Transparency is a key issue - as is allowing people to carve their own niche.
My thinking is that people engage with a personality - an individual personality - in conversation more than with a collective. It's just easier. A company personality surely reflects the people who work there as well as a crafted (constructed?) image that the stakeholders choose to present. While you want engagement it's not the same as speaking to an individual.
There are definite risks involved - but I would lean towards allowing people to carve a niche.
vincent on Engaging as a Company

Couldn't have said it better. Nice post, it is most certainly something corporates are going to struggle with. How much transparency is too much? Who should be allowed to represent a brand and to what extent should the individual be given the opportunity to carve their own niche rather than extol the virtues of the mother - brand?
Who knows. We shall soon see as this year pans out and we find out how the big media players tackle the rise of the cost effective digital media channel.
Kat on Engaging as a Company

It is a tough issue, and I can understand why you've never published. I would encourage you to do so though - you probably have a feeling for when your writing reflects your voice and when it doesn't - and the rewards are worth it.
Thanks for reading Wendy. :)

More photos of the QuirkStars At Play

Name:
Friends of Quirk
Websites:
www.quirk.biz

Skribit: Social Suggestions

Name:
E-mail:
Url:
Comments:
Markup guide: makes text bold // makes text italic // -- creates a link -- (two dashes, no http://)
Remember personal info?
Notify me of follow-up comments?
SPAMCHECK:
Captcha:

Writing for the Web: Some newbie insights

by Kelly Wheeler

Comments

Subscribe

RSS to Email

eMarketing News

January

Archives

Categories

Recent Posts

Recent Comments