Limit Your Design

Paul Scrivens / 04.22.08 / 2 responses / Design

The Triad is currently in a battle with content overload. We have so much content to offer from our member sites and user-generated content that we wish to show it all to the world, but we know that is unreasonable. Instead we have to pick and choose what gets shown and what to sacrifice because let’s face it, putting everything on a page works for sites like…hell I can’t think of any.

But maybe I’m wrong here. Maybe it is a good thing to load a page up with as much content as possible so that a reader can browse around and hopefully randomly click to another page. However, do we want people to randomly click though or do we want them to know what they want, find it quickly and proceed with a smile on their face?

The problem is that not every user is the same. For example, when I go to Yahoo maybe I want only financial news or to check my Yahoo Mail. In that case I can think of better designs for each case, but unfortunately for me and Yahoo there are so many cases that they have to create a design that caters to everyone and no one. Same goes for the New York Times with the plethora of content and sections they offer. How do you limit a design that is supposed to offer so much?

There is a constant struggle in the design of a site. This struggle involves what you want to show your audience and what you should show them. You want to show them everything that you have to offer, but you should only show them what is needed. About 99% of the time these goals don’t align and that is a pain in the ass.

The Blog Herald

A great example of this I think is The Blog Herald. Now let me say that I think BH has a beautiful aesthetic about it. However, without trying to read anything do a quick scan and scroll of the page and ask yourself what caught your eye? What were you inclined to clickthrough on? Now going back to look at the site let’s see what content is being offered to the reader on the homepage excluding any ads which take up a ton of space on their own.

Recent articles
Full listing of contributors
News (kind of confusing since the news is on BH, but what is the difference between that and what the left side offers?
Bloggy Award reviews
Submitted news
Patrons (could fall under ads I guess
Recent job listings
Recent comments
Friends

Some of these I can understand why they are there. I have Clips listings on this site, but I don’t think they are needed. I just want to promote other sites that I am a part of and it makes since for BH to do the same. However, look at what is being offered to a reader on the homepage and think about what the main focus of what BH offers. In its most basic form BH could be a single column page with the latest articles. Obviously they want to make money so adspace is needed to fit the appropriate ad sizes so this rules out the one column design. Stick in a couple more columns and the need to cross promote other sites and you all of a sudden you find yourself with a design that is cramming a lot onto one page. Thankfully they do it in a pretty clean design so they probably get away with it, but that isn’t always the case.

Now I’m not saying that offering less on their page would make them any more successful, but you can see the struggle that can occur for a designer that understands the importance of simply showing what is needed and nothing more. On Chawlk we want our audience to read the main content, but to also explore the site and that is what the sidebar is for. We have been tinkering with the amount of content that is shown and don’t think we are satsified yet. It is a constant process of trial and error and I am pretty sure we will never be 100% satisfied.

We have done great designs with 9rules in the past that offered a great balance of showing off what we have to offer without overwhelming visitors. The new 9rules (launching April 30) is without a doubt the cleanest version yet and shows off what we feel a user will want to see, while giving enough exposure to our members to satisfy their needs. If you had a chance to see I think you would agree and the funny part is we are still looking at sections to cut back on without taking away from our desired objectives.

This constant struggle between achieving business objectives and making sure your audience gets everything possible out of a site without overwhelming them is one of the things that I love about design so much. it is one of the reasons that we have no problem redesigning so often to the enjoyment and dismay of our audience. Design never seems to be a finished product even when you reach the deadline. There never seems to be a 100%, but a constant struggle to maintain a 90% completeness.

I wouldn’t have it any other way to be honest with you.

2 Responses

SB / 04.27.08

This is a challenge for personal blogs, as well. I have often removed something, only to have readers object: “Where is … ?”

I’m also curious why there is such a preference for as-short-as-possible sidebars. From a design point of view, can’t an argument be made for ‘balance’?

Paul Scrivens / 04.28.08

Well there is a difference between removing something before people get to see it and removing something after people are used to it. If it’s useful to them then no it probably shouldn’t be removed, but if they are just missing it because they are used to seeing it then they can get over it.

Balance because it is needed differs greatly from balance to please your own aesthetics. Do you need a crammed sidebar that no one will pay attention to anyways?