I posted a link on our Twitter account a few days back about Jim Brady from the Washington Post’s call for commenters on newspaper websites to post using their real names.  In doing away with anonymous commenting, he is hoping to improve the generally low level of discourse you find on many media sites.  Here is his justification:

I think part of the problem is that people aren’t held accountable on the Web.  People say things online they would never say when disagreeing with someone at the dinner table. I think heated debate is fine, but when there are (flame wars), many people won’t take part for fear they will be attacked and bashed over the head with the (Internet-equivalent) of a steel pipe.

I have mixed feelings about this.  On the one hand, I think there is a tradition of respecting anonymity on the Internet that has value, and I am generally opposed to putting up barriers that hinder discussion.  On the other hand, the comment sections on many newspaper website are completely broken and I think Brady’s solution would probably work.

Anyway, the whole issue got me thinking about steps I think media companies should take to improve their comments sections, short of requiring people to post using their real names.  Below are my ideas based on my experience in trying to manage active comments areas for a variety of clients (we don’t have a comment problem on our own site so we haven’t taken a lot of these steps here):

(more…)

At the New Communications Forum conference I attended last week, Twitter was the topic of a great deal of discussion.  During panels and hallway chats, three things became really clear to me:

(1) There are a lot of smart people who have no idea what Twitter is, or who only know about it in the vaguest sense.

(2) Hard core Twitter users assume that everyone knows about it in the same way that everyone knows about YouTube or Facebook.  They don’t.   Twitter hasn’t hit the mainstream yet, although it is knocking on the door.   Check out this Compete graph:

(3) Twitter is really hard to explain to people.  You pretty much have to just break out the laptop and show the thing. 

We’ve been writing a great deal about Twitter here on our blog, and I fear that we have done so in a way that is inaccessible to folks that haven’t checked out the tool yet.  So below is some background info that hopefully helps out newbies and also Twitter vets trying to explain it to folks.

(more…)

I have written a few times about the various options available for the hosting of videos online via third party services. If I have a choice in the matter, I use Blip.tv for all the reasons you’d expect: interface is easy to use, they allow the posting of video in higher quality than most providers, they’ve help when I’ve had questions, it works, etc. It is the best third-party option I have found, as a web developer.

But I think my favorite thing about Blip.tv is their Flash video player. It is awesome for a couple of reasons:

(1) You can remove all Blip.tv branding from the video player and replace with your own site name or URL, meaning you don’t have to turn your website into an advertisement for your video provider if you don’t want to.

(2) You can turn off any options in the player you want to. So if I can turn on/off options like embed code, autoplay, view in full screen, ads for other videos on Blip.tv, etc.

(3) You can customize the colors of the Blip.tv player so that it matches your site’s colors perfectly. This allows for designers to really seamlessly integrate video into the sites they build.

(4) The player is just really good looking.

Basically, the Flash player is super flexible and gives you the ability to do whatever you need to with it to make it fit into your site.

Below are some examples of the Blip.tv player being seamlessly integrated into various sites. Please click on the images to view the player on the actual sites.

WallStrip

This is basicallly what the player looks like by default.

(more…)

Over the weekend, two of the users I follow on Twitter, David All and Techcrunch (Michael Arrington), had separate problems with Comcast and vented about them via their Twitter accounts. Comcast apparently monitors Twitter and proactively reached out to both of them.

Here is the relevant tweet from Techrunch:

And here is the tweet from David:

An article in the Consumerist confirms that other users have received responses after complaining via Twitter. In a follow up article about his problems, Michael Arrington offers advice to folks with a Comcast service problem: “Skip the hold time on their customer service line and go on the attack at Twitter instead. You may find your problem fixed in a hurry.”

Three thoughts on this:

(1) I think it is great that Comcast is listening to people on Twitter and reacting proactively to fix problems. Based on a quick search, there appear to be plenty of problems to that need addressing. More companies should monitor and participate in Twitter in a meaningful way (we are working on doing Twitter tracking through our ImpactWatch service).

(2) As a consumer, I’m bothered by the precedent of the squeaky wheels on Twitter getting preferential treatment over people who go through normal channels.

(3) Not speaking specifically about Comcast, I think the focus some companies place on social media is more about PR/crisis management than a true commitment to customer service and dialogue. Performing triage on complaints that come in through Twitter may keep the customer revolt at bay for a short time, but when that levee eventually breaks, it isn’t going to be pretty.

Yesterday I sat in on an excellent Marketing Profs webinar titled "Advanced Tactics in SEO: Part Art, Part Science."  While the discussion focused on advanced topics, Stephan Spencer of Netconcepts and Rand Fishkin of SEOmoz briefly touched upon basic link building.

One of the tactics that they emphasized was collecting links from organizations that involve the site owners.  The great thing about such links is that since the target organizations are already acquainted with the site, they're much more likely to honor a link request than other site owners. (more…)

It finally happened to me; I was hit with my first spam message via my cell phone.  I was foolish enough to believe that spam stopped with email, but luckily I was prepared for this eventuality and deleted the message without opening it.  This is my first word of advice for anyone who receives one of these dastardly messages.  Merely opening the message may result in charges being sent to your cell phone.

Text message spam has grown to amounts of 1.1 billion last year, according to recent reports.  The cell phone spam problem has been something that has engulfed countries such as China and South Korea for years now (sigh…they are always ahead of us in technology!).  According to the CAN-SPAM Act passed in 2003, this should be illegal, but I have my doubts as to how many of these spammers are going to be caught.  However, after some exhaustive research, I have come up with a five-point plan for combating requests for purchases of fake stocks and penis pumps. (more…)

At the Politics Online conference yesterday, I participated in a panel entitled “Does Good Design Matter” (previous post here). In my opening discussion, I talked briefly about some common mistakes I see people make when building their websites. Here is a quick summary of what I said.

First, I think website design really consists of two things:

1. What the site looks like (the brand)
2. How well the site works (usability)

The instinct of most folks when building a website is to invest a great deal of energy into the overall look and very little into how usable the site is. In my opinion, this gets things backwards. I’m not advocating that people build ugly sites or not pay attentions to looks. Not at all. But, it is important to remember that, on the web, usability has just as much to do with your site’s brand as the overall look does.

Think about it. When you visit a site for the first time you definitely have an immediate reaction that is based entirely on how the site looks. The colors. The fonts. The pictures. Etc. Your brain processes this information quickly and then you go about the business of actually using the site. If the site doesn’t deliver in a usability sense (things are hard to find, forms don’t work, error messages aren’t in place, etc.), all the good will built up by that good first impression will be thrown out the window and the user will be left with a bad impression of your organization.

So my first piece of advice to folks building websites is to invest as much energy in usability as you do in agonizing over colors and font choices.

Second, always remember that content is the driving force behind any website. Design is there to serve the content. A blog that isn’t updated is going to fail no matter how pretty it is. The slickest tool for writing letters to the editor isn’t going to get used if you don’t provide a compelling reason for people to act.

Too many people think design is a panacea that can cover up content problems. “If we make our site really cool with lots of Flash animation and stuff, maybe people won’t notice that we only have two pages of content.” It doesn’t work. People know.

We actually struggled with this ourselves in developing our site, www.bivings.com. We got stuck trying to build something really design heavy and slick a few years back, because we weren’t focused enough on the conent. Below is what I wrote about our own struggles a few years back:

We’ve been contemplating a redesign of the main Bivings site for a couple of years, but the path forward only became clear the last few months. When thinking about a redesign previously we fell victim to our own ambition. We had grand plans and wanted to create something that was perfect. This sort of led to paralysis. We didn’t follow our own advice, which is to focus on usability and design that serves the content.

We finally started making progress when we shifted the focus to our blog. We decided to keep www.bivings.com really simple and not to overwhelm folks with lots of brochure content they don’t want to read anyway. We brought our blog content front and center. Our goal with the new site is to tell the story of our company a little bit every day by writing about the projects we are working on and the things we are passionate about. We think this will be much more effective than producing some sort of slick, heartless brochure site.

So my second piece of advice would be to figure out your content strategy in advance of even contemplating a redesign.

Without compelling content, your website is not going to work that well no matter how slick the design.

My post yesterday about the use of images in email got me thinking about what the best days or times are for doing bulk email sends. There really isn’t one answer, as each list is unique and finding the best times is a matter of trial and error. But I’ll take a shot at providing some general guidelines.

Based on my own experiences and everything I’ve read, for business to business emails (or any list that consists mostly of work addresses) the best days are Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday.

The rationale for this is pretty simple. Most people don’t check their business email accounts on Saturdays or Sundays. On Mondays people tend to be in heavy delete mode, as they try to clear all the email that has accumulated over the weekend. On Fridays, people tend to be less focused, as they look forward to the weekend. Friday is also an extremely popular day of the week to take off, meaning your email could end up not being seen until Monday.

In terms of time for business-focused email, it is best to send email out during normal business hours. If you send your email before or after work hours, there is a good chance folks won’t see the email as they try to clear their email queue first thing in the morning and go into delete mode. Assuming you are trying to reach a US audience, I think between 12:00 and 4:00 EST is the best time, as you’ll catch people at work in all time zones.

For business to consumer emails (or any list made up mostly of personal email accounts), the situation is more fluid. Some studies show that these audiences tend to be more responsive to emails sent after work hours and on Fridays and weekends, as this is when people tend to check personal email accounts.

It makes sense - lots of people with desk jobs might not check their personal email accounts during the day and others don’t even really use email in their jobs. Just as importantly, business to consumer email tends to be about action. You want users to buy something or enter your contest or whatever. Most people are more comfortable performing those type of activities on their personal computers during their off hours.

My sense though is that there is more room for error for business to consumer emails in terms of time/date. In my experience, volume to personal accounts is lower and spam tends to be less of a problem. So I don’t think people get as delete happy as they do with their corporate email accounts.

Ultimately though, every list is different. Email Labs suggests looking at when people register for your list and trying to send during the days/time you get the most sign ups. But the best way to figure out when to send is through trial and error. Try sending out messages on different days at different times and see when you get the best open and click through rates. This will allow you to figure out your own best practices for your list.

We’ve written a bit here about how some of the Presidential campaigns this cycle have embraced stripped down emails that don’t include a lot of images or fancy formatting. In that previous post, the focus was on how this format can make emails seem more personal, and not on the technical reasons to avoid using a lot of images. Josh Levy’s post yesterday about John McCain’s email mistakes inspired me to look at the issue from a more technical perspective.

The most compelling reason to limit the use of images in HTML emails is that tons of people are never going to see them. Some people actively turn off images. Others don’t see them because their email programs turn them off by default (Campaign Monitor has a great chart showing a breakdown). Some people work at companies that block images in emails to save bandwidth/stop porn. And yet more people are accessing email on cell phones that can’t read images. I have yet to see a percentage I trust completely, but it is estimated that somewhere between 25 and 50 percent of email users block at least some images in HTML emails. That is a lot.

Speaking anecdotally, I’m a lot less likely to see images in email than I did a year ago. At work we upgraded recently to Outlook 2007 which has images blocked by default. I never changed the setting and now follow the process of opting in to see images based on whether I trust the sender. I use Gmail for my personal email and follow the same procedure. (You really should check out that chart breaking down default settings for major email clients.)

So what to do. Stop using images altogether? Use them sparingly? Although a bit old, the useful Campaign Monitor blog provides a great guide to email design. Here are their six tips on how to send emails that actually gets to the recipient in a readable format:

1. Never use images for important content like headlines, links and any calls to action.
2. Use alt text for all images for a better experience in Gmail and always add the height and width to the image to ensure that the blank placeholder image doesn’t throw your design out.
3. Add a text-based link to a web version of your design at the top of your email.
4. Ensure your most compelling content is at the top (and preferably to the left).
5. Test your design in a preview pane, full screen and with images turned on and off before you send it.
6. Ask your subscriber to add your From address to their address book at every opportunity.

Anyone that has sent bulk emails out knows that it is a really stressful thing. Even if you do your job perfectly (no typos, valid web links, good HTML, etc.), your email is going to be garbled for at least a small percentage of people who have weird settings or are using funky email clients (Hello Lotus Notes). And those small percentage of people will inevitably complain to your boss’ best friend from high school and you’ll hear about it.

Given the high probability for mistakes, email is really a format where you need to keep things simple. If you have to use images, design the email so that it will degrade gracefully if images are turned off. The emails we design that use images typically look like an online version of letter head, with a single header image. If you keep it simple, you’ll get yelled out less for supposed mistakes and your click through rates will increase since more people will be able to actually see the content of your message.

Note: I just saw this post from Michael Whitney at Tech President that looks at the use of email by Presidential candidates and expands on Campaign Monitor’s tips. Great minds. Give it a read, as it goes into things in a bit more depth than my post.

<Cross post from our ImpactWatch blog> 

Most people want to boil the success or failure of a website down to two easy-to-digest statistics. How many people came to my site? How many pages did those folks look at? Take those two numbers. Draw a line over time. If they go up, we’re doing good. If they go down, we’re not.

As the web has gotten bigger, these broad eyeball-based metrics have become less and less useful. Sure, eyeballs are still extremely relevant for websites that are selling online advertising. But for most websites, the total number of visitors really isn’t that important except in giving you very broad strokes. More important is whether your website is reaching its target audience.

Let me give you a couple of examples from our own blog, The Bivings Report.

(1) A while back this article of ours made it on to the homepage of the social news site, Digg. For those of you not familiar, this means we got thousands of visitors coming to our site all at once (this phenomenon is actually called the Slashdot Effect). To this day that is still the day we got the most visitors to our blog.

But to what end? As you’ll see, being on Digg didn’t lead to some great discussion in the comments on our site. In looking at usage patterns before and after being on Digg, we didn’t see a long term bump in users or RSS subscribers. Basically, being on Digg was (1) a nice ego boost for us and (2) a fun way to run an ad hoc stress test on our servers. Beyond that, it really didn’t accomplish much.

(2) Similarly, we wrote an off-point blog post a while back on HD-DVD vs Bluray. Based on our site stats, I’d a lot of people are researching which to buy as hundreds of people are visiting our blog each day after finding our article on Google. Like with Digg, this traffic is doing us very little good. We’re not a consumer electronics blog and the people coming from Google on that particular search aren’t being converted from visitors into readers.

If you boil our bottom line for this blog down to a line chart showing visitors over time, these two events make us look great. Our trend line is going up. Hurray. But in both these cases, the people we attracted aren’t really interested in what we write about on our blog and aren’t members of our target audience.

The overall traffic numbers don’t really tell us whether our blog has been truly effective or not. To know that, you’ve got to look a lot deeper than visitors and page views.

As most of you know, The Bivings Group was a part of the team that built Fred Thompson’s Presidential campaign website. Our main client contact on the project, Michael Turk, has a good post up rounding up the good, the bad and the ugly aspects of the online program we all put together. It is worth a read.

In the piece, Turk points out that one of the most successful aspects of the program was the campaign blog, the Fred File. He writes:

As an example of the strength of Thompson’s online effort, look at the Thompson campaign blog and you’ll see something remarkable for GOP candidates - comments. And not just a few comments, but hundreds and even thousands of comments.

Rudy’s blog doesn’t allow comments. Romney’s gets a few per post. Ron Paul just recently launched a blog (despite the fact that blog software is largely free). He currently gets between a handful and a few dozen comments.

I don’t think this indicates a lack of supporter enthusiasm as much as it indicates that the campaigns have created a blog with nothing to say on sites that are so scrubbed of interesting content they’re almost sterile. Most of the posts are rehashed press releases, rehashed campaign e-mails, or occasionally a video so overscripted it becomes almost completely unwatchable.

I think Turk is right on here. With any successful blog, 90% of the battle is producing readable content and engaging with readers. Many, many campaigns want a blog in theory but don’t have the stomach to do the heavy lifting that will make it actually work.  The Thompson campaign, lead by staffers Sean Hackbarth and Austin Walne, deserve the lion’s share of the credit for the success of the Fred File. But I also think there were some small, more technical decisions that were made that helped give the blog a greater chance to succeed. (more…)

My favorite SEO blogger, Rand Fishkin of SEOmoz in Seattle, has an excellent post titled “Choosing the Right CMS Platform for Your Website (from an SEO perspective).” It is about various aspects of SEO to consider when choosing a content management system (CMS) to build a site. 

Instead of doing a comparison and contrast between different systems like Drupal and Wordpress; Rand provides 12 issues to consider. These issues revolve around the ability of a site owner to control various design elements that search engines consider when assessing a site.  These issues range from page title tags to CSS.

It is worth reading.  Other than SEO, what are important issues you consider when selecting a CMS?

Just about every professionally done website you visit includes a copyright date at the bottom of the page. Every January you see websites that forget to update the year in their copyright statement. Many actually fall years behind before catching it and updating the dates. Above is an example of this phenomenon from the website of the Democratic National Committee.

We’ve made this mistake ourselves plenty of times. It is just something that is really easy to forget to do. That is why the best solution is to automate in the process instead of manually updating it every January. Here are two simple ways to accomplish this that our design/production department uses:

(1) If you are working in PHP (like sites in Wordpress and Drupal), use the simple PHP code below to render the copyright date in your footer. The date will automatically change at 12:01 am on January 1 every year.

<?php echo date(’Y'); ?>

(2) If your site is in plain HTML or another language, you can use the following JavaScript to generate the date.

Put this code in the site header:

var date=time.getDate();
var year=time.getYear();
if (year < 2000)
year = year + 1900;

Then place this code where you want to generate the date:

<script language=”JavaScript” type=”text/javascript”>document.write(year);</script>

Two easy ways to save yourself some time/headaches.