[wizely]

Rob, on Jun 1 2008, 00:28, said:

Yes, I believe it could. Take Threadless for example. There is a severe lack of copy, there is usually absolutely no copy relating to their products apart from the title – yet they are the most popular t-shirt website online.

It really depends on your market and what you're selling.

Should they delete their blogs? Come to think of it... why have you got a blog?

They have blogs, forums, idea submissions, a big 'info' section with press releases, latest news etc. that all need explaining and primarily use copy. Could this be why they are more successful?
Would they be doing so well with the same design, but without the social interaction side - i.e. only the basic copy? Is that design making them successful?
Copy is the most important aspect here - in explaining how and why to use each element and in allowing people to get involved.
How successful would they be if they didn't put the price, the sizes etc. - just had a 'contact us' for details? That's the kind of thing that turns visitors into customers.
What if their copy was really bad and descibed the T-shirts as "easy to wear out" or "made from China" or "Get cheap, home-made T-shirts"?
I haven't a clue about threadless but is it as famous or as successful and have the turnover of Amazon?
Big business certainly understands the importance of copy.

Copy is what does the selling - it tips 'want to buy' over into 'buy'.

Top salesmen don't use design to sell - they use verbal skills and words - spoken copy. Selling is about words. Look around a caryard - you can see the bloomin' thing right there but that salesman will offer you all sorts of deals and explain why it's right for you, how it'll benefit you and why you have to buy it today!
Why? Isn't the car capable of selling itself? Isn't the caryard's nicely designed signage and the salesman's suit enough?
You're in a caryard so you're obviously interested in a car - the salesman will now use words to make you buy a car now, today and from here - before you wander off to the competition or decide not to buy.

Anyone ever studied art (I haven't)? Would you honestly know a valuable piece of art if someone hadn't used words to tell you? I see art everywhere (I love photography, travel and people) but is that viable, commercial art? What makes your unmade bed prize-winning, feature in a gallery and make you rich/famous? Why is it different to my unmade bed when I was at uni? What makes it art (nothing if you ask me - but that's just me!)? Is it the actual 'design' of the piece? Or is it all the words that go with it that turn it into somehing meaningful - basically all the 'fluffy propaganda' that you need in art these days? Art is a multi-million pound industry and it's words that do the selling.

Just to pick on Rawkes because we all love the design... Why isn't Rob's site just a single portfolio page showing-off his design skills which he has in abundance? Why is there so much copy and why have many people commented that my humble assistance made a difference? Surely it's design that sells and any old copy would be OK? Come to think of it... why is my inbox always brimming with designers asking for advice!!!

Imagine Rawkes, with the same design, but as nothing but lots of really amazing screenshots of Robs work and then a button saying 'Buy' that asked you to put in your credit card details. Buy what? Is it a manned mission to mars? For how much? Why should I? Do I need whatever it is? Don't be rude and pushy! Who is this Rawkes? Do I trust him? I don't want pictures of rockets, I don't need a professional web designer - I can do it myself in a WYSIWYG editor...

No, the services page tells the user why they need to use Rawkes and what Rawkes does and why it matters to the potential customer. Ideally there'd be pricing information and a definite/time-restricted 'call to action' too.

Now look at the blog page and the 'about' page. These pages are all about the copy (with design playing a secondary role to show-off Rob's talent and display the copy nicely). The home page also relies heavily on copy to direct the visitor and explain who and what Rawkes is.

Now turn off the CSS or look in Lynx or whatever - sure it loses it's impact and design is important, but it can't be as important as the copy which still does it's job (although less effectively). There's a point - I've never seen a FireFox plug-in to turn the copy off - why is that?

Copy is critical for a site as it:

• persuades a visitor that you have the answer to their needs
  
• sometimes it even has to persuade the visitor that they even have a need
  
• explains a company's/service's/product's USPs to differentiate it from the competition.
  
• explains what you actually do and how
  
• directs a visitor around a site
  
• works hard to overcome a reluctance to buy
  
• translates a design's esoteric meaning into something understandable
  
• gets that message across clearly and targetted to the right people
  
• engages and retains people far more effectively than design
  
• evokes an actual response by providing insructions or asking for comments/feedback etc. (UGC - mostly copy)
  
• lots, lots more...

Copy is the critical element in a site. Design might make you go 'wow' for a few seconds (or minutes if it's a design-orietated site), improve usability and support a brand/image, but it's copy that engages visitors and leads them to a response. It's copy that makes a visitor spend real time on your site, interact and come back - that's why blogs and UGC are everywhere now, and they're all about the copy.

Copy is also vital in contexts where you can't use individualised design or there is no design at all. Contexts such as SERP pages, directory listings, blog entries, articles, whitepapers, RSS feeds, emails (e.g. for marketing) and other apps where 'design' is severely limited, meta data, urls etc... and in every other aspect where you have no control over design. e.g. in 3rd party sites (with the exception of 'gallery' sites), in text-only browsers etc.

When you type a search phrase (copy) in Google and then browse through the results - how much is design influencing you clicking through? How much is design influencing what links and in what order they are displayed? Copy plays a fundamental role here.

As far as I see the web is heading toward one giant 'mash-up' where you create your own 'personal portals' that you add your own content from all over the web. When the end-user has seemingly ever-increasing control over how they see web content - 'web design' is going to play an ever increasingly subservient role to content (and therefore copy) and functionality.

Basically it's the old 'content is king' (*shudders at the cliche*) and the largest and most important type of content on the web is copy - language is how we communicate ideas and on the web that means, 99% of the time, written copy.

Oh, and hands-up the designer that can convey all these points without using copy - and yet I can manage it without design!
To refute these points you couldn't just post up a great piece of design without using copy - that's the power of words and I think that's what's being underestimated here.

[elzbeth26]

wizely, on May 30 2008, 15:05, said:

Web design (hereafter referred to as 'design') hereby stands accused of being less important than copy.
I would ask the jury to consider only the facts of the case and not be swayed by emotion. My client (a Mr. Wizely of no fixed abode) has expressed concerns about the impartiality of a WDF jury but feels his case is strong.

The court does not consider semantic markup to be a part of design or of copy, but merely a technical device for delivering content to a site.

The case for the prosecution is:

• A website can function, without hindrance or impediment, as content-only.
  
• Design without copy is a picture.
  
• Design, in a good many cases, wilfully and with aforethought reduces accessibility - clearly in breach of the principles of the DDA.
  
• Copy is cross-browser compatible.
  
• Semantic markup is derived from copy with no regard to design - in fact design, in many cases, is wilfully non-semantic.
  
• It is copy that sells, not design.
  
• The most effective copy is simply presented in a single column.
  
• In many cases design attempts to hinder the readability of black text on a white background - in extreme cases this has led to the heinous crime of illegibility.
  
• It is copy, directly and indirectly, that is responsible for effective SEO.
  
• Well written copy is quite capable of creating mood, tone, theme, personality and atmosphere without the need for anything further.
  
• It is only a misdemeanour if a visitor does not understand the concept a design is getting across - but it is a cardinal sin in copywriting.

Now, before there's any abusive outpourings - this is only a bit of light-hearted fun!

OK, we all know I'm a copy freak so this little 'test case' shouldn't be too much of a surprise! But, without just disagreeing with me flat-out... am I wrong?

I'm not saying I'm right - but if you can put forward very concise and razor sharp points to refute these outrageous allegations and then defend them... well you've just become a better blogger!

For this exercise I wouldn't recommend you pull in citations and links etc. or write a great long essay on why I'm so very wrong. Just use effective words and descriptions. Try to just write about one point (or more if intertwined in a single argument), make it succinct and fight for the honour of web design!

Bring it on!!!!

OK - well I totally agree. Copy is, of course, incredibly important but why are you copywriters so chippy? The 'design' is merely there to support the copy and ensure that users derive the maximum benefit from it. But without good web design organising and presenting the content in an attractive and accessible way, all the effort and fine wordsmithing that has gone into crafting the piece is wasted.

Now, you can take out your red pen and correct my prosaic drivel - who's chippy now, eh?

PS Who was it who said a picture is worth a thousand words?

[wizely]

elzbeth26, on Jun 16 2008, 21:37, said:

OK - well I totally agree. Copy is, of course, incredibly important but why are you copywriters so chippy? The 'design' is merely there to support the copy and ensure that users derive the maximum benefit from it. But without good web design organising and presenting the content in an attractive and accessible way, all the effort and fine wordsmithing that has gone into crafting the piece is wasted.

Now, you can take out your red pen and correct my prosaic drivel - who's chippy now, eh?

PS Who was it who said a picture is worth a thousand words?

You've got me on 'chippy' - I've no idea what that means, unless you're suggesting us copywriters serve fish and chips!!!
The purpose of this thread was to set-up an article on blog-writing (see this post) and I think it worked well.
As for the argument I put forward - it was that copy is more important than design. Almost every reply has come back to say why design is important. I never said it wasn't important, just less so. For example... "The 'design' is merely there to support the copy and ensure that users derive the maximum benefit from it". Exactly - important, just less so.

I don't do red pens - that's so last century! I found the ink was really difficult to wipe off the monitor!

Oh, I think Napoleon was the one who most closely said "a picture is worth a thousand words" although in French obviously!

[Thomas Thomassen]

I have always said that web-design is all about the content and web-design != graphic-design. Which leave me, as self-proclaimed judge, jury and executioner, to find the accused guilty!