How to write great blog posts

I’ve put together a 2-hour workshop called ‘How to write great blog posts’.

It’s designed to show non-writers how to turn out fantastic articles for their business blogs, consistently.

It’s not just a presentation (in one ear and out the other). Rather it’s sitting down with an experienced web writer and learning hands-on some of the simple (when you know them) techniques for:

• Sparking off original ideas
• Shaping your blog for your audience
• Grabbing, then keeping, the attention of your readers
• Writing posts that work brilliantly on the web
• Bumping up your readership

During the 2 hours you’ll learn by practising on real content for your blog. So you’ll come away with both new techniques for writing and a load of material on paper that you can use straight away.

And we’ll have fun. The first time I did this it was for a team of financial advisers. They said thay they ‘really enjoyed it – albeit one of our team had to have a lie down.’

‘How to write great blog posts’ workshop costs £180 if you’re around Cambridge. For other locations in the UK just cover my travel too. Price does not include VAT.

Get in touch if you could use some help and inspiration for your blog.

If you’d like assistance with any other aspects of writing on your web site, I can do that too. Drop me a line and we’ll soon get your site singing.

Are you stupid enough to use leverage as a verb?

Let me make two things clear. Firstly, language is organic. It grows and changes. Words pass out of usage, or take on new meanings. New words are invented for new objects and concepts. People who want language to remain as it is, frozen at the point that they did their English degrees, are probably afraid of change or have large rods inserted in particular orifices.

Secondly, language is important. It is important because it is our main tool for communication. Not only to understand, love and conspire with each other but even to be able to think in the first place. It is very, very difficult to think something for which you do not have the words. Our abilities to think and to relate are bound to our grasp of language – and the integrity of the language that is available to us.

So it’s worth keeping an eye on our words.

Why can leverage not be a verb?

Leverage is the advantage gained by the use of a lever. Imagine a big rock. You ram a crowbar underneath it, push down on the bar and the rock begins to rise. You now have leverage.

The word comes by adding the suffix -age to the verb lever. When you lever (verb) the rock, you get this:

lever    +    -age    =    leverage

We are used to this in language:

spill    +    -age    =    spillage

dote    +    -age    =    dotage

advance    +    -age    =    advantage

The suffix –age transforms these verbs into nouns. That’s what it is used for. You advance (verb) your army, to give yourself an advantage (noun).

So if you want to use further the advantage that you have gained, how do you do it? Let me tell you how you don’t do it. You don’t advantage your troops. That’s nonsensical. Because a noun transformed into a verb by adding –age can’t suddenly be a verb as well.

It sounds completely wrong.

And yet bloggers, especially those who would like to be Seth Godin, are doing this all the time.

They say that the way to capitalise on your position – is by leveraging it. In other words, to leverage (verb) your leverage (noun).

It is a crude bastardisation of language. It takes a verb, to lever, that has become a noun, leverage, and twists the word into another verb even though it ends with the noun-defining ending –age. The suffix –age is the linguistic equivalent of streaking across the live final of The X Factor wearing nothing but a banner proclaiming ‘I AM A NOUN’. You can’t get more noun-like than a word made into a noun by the suffix –age.

You can’t spillage me across the floor or dotage me into delirium for suggesting that language does not work this way.

Because if leverage was a verb then we could create leveragage by doing it. And that’s just getting silly.

What do people mean by ‘to leverage’?

In most cases, I think people mean one of two things:

1. They just mean ‘to lever’

‘if you leverage the content that you have already created, you will be able to squeeze out a bit more mileage’

If the writer (it would be unfair to identify him as so many people do it) means capitalising upon the work that you have already done, then the correct word is simply lever:

‘if you lever the content that you have already created…’

And if this sounds dumb, it is because it is. Leverage has become a buzzword, yet there are few situations where it is apt. A much better analogy for capitalising upon previous advantage gained would be advancing your troops further, or investing in new ventures having worked hard to create money in the first place, to name but two.

2. They mean ‘using the leverage you already have to your advantage’

This is how Seth Godin often uses it. I wonder how he can be so convinced that spelling is important yet throw away basic grammar without remorse. He even quotes someone else on his blog:

‘The more you say leverage, the less you’ve probably thought about what you’re saying.’

It’s not just that it stomps all over obvious grammatical integrity. Using leverage as a verb is also confusing, because it means levering your leverage. That is not a simple concept to me.

A confession to finish

Let me confess that there is a recorded use of leverage as a verb in the Oxford English Dictionary. In finance, leveraging is using borrowed capital to make investments that will provide greater profit than the interest owed. Maybe that’s where some people derive it from.

I hope that the reasons not to emulate the financial world are evident without having to spell them out, particularly when it comes to language. Do we want to shape the world for the better with our ideas, or shut it out?

The writers who imposed the greatest number of new words upon the English language had the greatest grasp of existing words. When you can write like Shakespeare, by all means make up whatever words you like.

Until then, look after the words you’ve inherited. You might need them for something important one day.

Do you use leverage as a verb? Why? What do you mean by it? What metaphors could we use instead? Do you think this might be a British/US English thing?

You are your web site

I want to give you money.

Imagine it. I want to give you money – by signing up to become a paying member on your web site. So I find your site and look for the quickest, easiest way to get to the sign up page.

But I can’t find it. Sometimes you’re talking about signing up, other times about registering. There are two links: one for becoming a member and the other one for joining. If they are different, I’m not sure which one I need. When I find a page called ‘How to sign up as a member’ it tells me both ‘Click the Apply for Membership tab’ and ‘Click here to proceed’.

Well, which one is it?

I take a risk, click one, and fill in the application form (even though the button says ‘register’, not apply). Then comes the most baffling part of the whole process. Your web site tells me:

You are already a member.

I am not already a member. I have never signed up or given you any money for membership before.

But just to make sure, I go back to your question ‘is your organisation already registered?’ and search for my company’s name. Nothing happens. You tell me neither that I am nor that I am not.

Am I going mad? Perhaps I am already a member? Perhaps your sales rep got me drunk one night and I signed up on the spot and Timothy Taylor erased the memory?

So I try to log in to find out. I get an error page.

Do I still want to give you money?

After the awful experience: a serious point about your brand

The point of this true story (I haven’t the heart to name the company here) is that I nearly posted on Twitter: ‘I am trying to give money to x. They make it very difficult.’ I realised that might seem a little unfair, and posted instead:

Can you spot the  crucial difference? The first equates the web site with the company. They make it difficult to give money. The second gives them the benefit of the doubt. It’s just their web site that is at fault.

But guess which way your average consumer will describe it?

They make it hard to subscribe. They see your web site – as you.

To your customers, you and your web site are one and the same

As a prominent interface between your company and the public, your site represents your company to people so completely that it is you. It is who you are.

If that is true – how do you feel about what is on it? Does it really describe what you are like? Is the experience visitors have on it congruent with what you’d like them to think about you? Do your claims stand up?

Having given up on trying to register on the web site above, I checked out their About Us page. Amid talk of ‘technology-enabled enterprise’ and ‘raising Cambridge’s game’, was the claim that they achieved their commitments using ‘technology’.

Yeah, right. Forgive me for laughing.

If you claim one thing but the experience on your web site suggests another, people don’t think, ‘I’m sure they take a lot more care in the other areas of their business’. They think: liars.

If visitors to your site find broken tools and errors, they don’t assume, ‘never mind, technology gets the better of everyone occasionally.’ They assume: these people are rubbish.

If there is a spelling mistake on your web site, customers don’t say, ‘oh look, an error slipped through the spell check on this page’. They say: this company is stupid.

And maybe they’re right. After all, wouldn’t an honest, competent and smart company take care to have a web site that proved it?

To most consumers, your web site is the same thing as your company.

Is there anything you would like to change?

How to blog consistently (note to self)

Happy new year everyone.

I have one goal for SmyWord this year: to blog more consistently.

Last year was great – launching SmyWord, having a couple of big content cheeses drop by in the comments, receiving positive feedback from customers. But if I could change one thing, I wish that I had upheld my promise to post a new article once a week.

Increasingly businesses I do content work for want blogs on their web sites. A real, honest blog by someone who loves their work is a wondrous thing (especially if they’re not meta-careerists). And one of the fundamental pieces of advice I give them – one of the make-or-break keys to successful blogging – is to blog consistently.

Why? Because people are more likely to subscribe to, stick with, and read blogs that have a predictable delivery of content. Whether it’s an inspirational thought once a day (like Seth Godin), or a double in-depth post by different authors twice a month ( as on A List Apart), consistency shows reliability to potential followers and convinces them that you are worth following. People want to know what they will be getting.

So 2010 has me looking in the mirror and quoting ‘physician, heal thyself’.

Tips for consistent blogging

There is lots of good advice about for how to post consistently, including:

• Learn where your inspiration comes from and go there
• Read other consistent blogs to learn how they do it
• Make a regular plan and stick to it
• Split your ideas up into several posts – don’t give away too much at once
• Save good ideas for later (build up a buffer)
• Write useful material for you audience – not what floats your boat personally
• Reinterpret older material for new contexts
• Throw in a few lighter posts for variety and ease

But I know that my biggest obstacle is not creating ideas, because I’ve got loads of them. I shouldn’t admit this but right now I’ve got 41 articles for SmyWord on my laptop which are at least half-written. If I just finished those off I’d have nearly a year’s supply of posts.

But it’s not the ideas that are the problem – it’s perfectionism. I want my posts to reflect my education at Trinity College, Cambridge. I want my boss to think they’re great. I want to imbue them with the finest literary qualities of which I am capable. I want them to be above the criticism of other bloggers. I want my Mum to like them (fat chance).

Perfectionism is the biggest enemy to my goal

So here’s how I’m going to write in 2010: imperfectly. I’m going to value reasonable writing that gets published over theoretically astounding writing that does not. I’m going to be Enid Blyton not Gustave Flaubert. I will develop a thicker skin if criticised and acknowledge my mistakes. And I’m not going to show any of it to my mother.

Let’s tackle what stops us blogging consistently head on.

*Clicks publish*

Crap camera no excuse for bad indoor photos

Oh the joy of content strategy for smaller web sites! One minute I’m immersed in The Maldives’ most magnificent resorts, the next in a portal for plumbers in Portsmouth.

This work is certainly diverse. For example, I’ve just written a guide for a letting agent to help them to take better photographs of their properties. The catch was that their photographers are not professionals, but inexperienced office staff, using basic digital cameras.

Here are some highlights derived from the guide. If you ever shoot interiors – even if only at Christmas with a tree and your Aunty Mildreth in the foreground – these tips will help you raise your game. So put away the costly kit, grab a pocket-sized point-and-shoot, and get clicking.

1. Be trigger happy

The joy of digital. Take thousands of pictures from every conceivable angle, as you can just pick the best ones later and delete the rest. If this is for a property web site make sure that you cover the basics: people expect to see a shot of every room, otherwise they wonder what you’re hiding. Add to that some of the extra features, like a period fireplace or an atractive front door, and you will be starting to satisfy the consumer’s desire for lots and lots and lots and lots of pictures.

2. Avoid ugly

You know what’s ugly? You’re ugly – when reflected in a mirror or window. Clutter and mess is ugly, as are room corners in the middle of the frame. Mould, cracks, and cheap copies of paintings are ugly. Big sofa arms in your face are ugly and ceilings are ugly if you show too much of them.

Also, fine composition is not just removing ugly things but putting a bit of thought into composing the shot. Choose a creative angle, arrange the furniture how you want it, showed lived-in but not messy. If the room is empty stick a prop in, such as a chair, for a sense of scale.

3. Go wide – or not

Using wide angles to capture more of an interior is only partially effective. When Adam Kimmel directed the prison cell photography in Capote he used a wide angle lens. To make the cell look smaller. Seeing three walls of a tiny room emphasises how cramped it is.

In other words, wide angle doesn’t make a room appear bigger – it simply shows more. And you should only show people more if the more is worth seeing. By all means show just how long the elegant lounge is. But the meagre box room?

4. Turn on the lights

One of the biggest challenges in interior photography is the exposure. The light coming in through the window throws the camera off balance, so that the bit of the room that you want to see ends up in darkness. On a good camera this can be solved technically – but not on our budget point-and-shoot with a rubbish flash.

So here’s the tip: turn on the lights.

Reduce incoming light by drawing the curtains, or shooting at dusk. Boost the light inside by flicking every light switch you can, and even bringing some extra lamps for the dark corners. The result will not only be better exposed, but far more warm and inviting.

5. Flash the plastic

There are some things money can’t buy, like knowing how to use a proper flash on a decent camera. For everything else there’s mastercard. If you do need to use your horrible little built-in headlight (or can’t work out how to switch it off), whip your card out and angle it against the flash so that the light goes upwards towards the ceiling. The scene will still be illuminated, but less harshly, and from above. Ezra Stoller eat your heart out.

6. Get on your knees

Taking every photo at eye level is like spending a cruise looking out of one porthole. Stand on a chair or a table, lie on the floor, crouch in the corner or peer through a gap – it’s amazing the difference an altered angle makes. In particular, get down low. Rooms often look more inviting at the reclining-in-lounger level.

Don’t forget to keep the camera level though. Tilting it will distort the straight lines, and people will think the house has got subsidence. Actually, they’ll just think you can’t take photos.

7. Copy good ideas

Have a look at other sites with photography that stands out. What have they done? See if you can recreate the effect. Imitation, flattery, all that. Just start experimenting and it won’t be long for your interior photos are a cut above the rest.

Time to squish the double space

Have you ever shared a room at night with a mosquito?

Tiny things can ruin what should be a straightforward experience. Don’t deal with the mosquito, and you’re in for a bad night’s sleep at best. Leave a spelling mistake on your web site because it seems insignificant to you – and it’s your customers who will be complaining and not coming back.

Writing great copy involves not only choosing the right words, but also caring how those words appear. Font choice and size, line length, punctuation, paragraph length – all these are part of the readers’ experience of your message.

Many of these decisions are subjective. How much space to leave between sentences, for example: surely it is up to the author to decide what is most fitting?

Yes, and no.

Where a writer decides that the once-popular double space (so-called English spacing) looks best, then fair enough. But my contention is that most of that time the decision is not based on looks – but because someone once told the typist that this is correct.

And nobody wants to get it wrong.

Let me alleviate the pressure on the double space defenders and point out that, on the web, double spacing makes no sense at all.

Double spaces originate from physical type

In ye olde worlde of typewriters the typefaces were monospaced – that is, characters were exactly the same width as each other (even the m and the i). Every letter, symbol, and even the spaces were the same width. This gave a regimented appearance to the text, in which a space between two sentences could get lost among the identical spaces between words.

Enter the double space – just to make sure no one missed the start of a new sentence.

However, on the web, monospaced fonts are rare. We write in what are called proportionally spaced fonts, where each letter takes up an appropriate amount of space. Add to that the short paragraphs that we write in, and the other design elements that make our typing much easier to read, and there really is no need for double spacing at all.

In other words, on the web, there is no double space rule to break. Unless you are a graphic designer working with a monotype font, there is no need to hark back to the days of the typewriter and get all uppity about the gaps.

A single space looks and reads better

Now we know that there is no rule to break, the main consideration is more subjective: what looks and reads the best?

Of course, it is a matter of opinion, and here is mine: I think double spacing looks wrong. When I am editing, I correct it. It creates little holes all over the copy, and disrupts the flow of sentences that are already adequately spaced.

By all means comment below and defend the English spacing. But I want to know how it looks and reads on a web page, not what your typing tutor said in 1971.

By the way, there is a sin far more heinous than double spacing. It’s called inconsistent spacing, where some sentences are divided by a single space, and some by a double space, on the same page.

That’s like having a whole scourge of mosquitoes in the room.

Won’t somebody think of the children?

Web developer wanted for the dream team

I am excited to announce that the team I work for in Cambridge, Endis Solutions, is hiring either a Web Developer or a .NET/SQL Developer. You can download the job descriptions and application details here:

Web Developer

.NET/SQL Developer

Apart from the obvious advantages of sharing an office with me, and the sheer amount of cake that passes through the building, I would just like to point out that we might be the smallest web sites and applications company to contain all of the following: Graphic Designer, Content Strategist, Business Consultant, Project Manager, as well as Developers.

We’re the whole package. Not a couple of designers cobbling the back end together and hoping that the clients come up with the content. Or a bedroom developer trying to solve marketing problems with bug fixes.

But a team interested and skilled in the whole process of helping small businesses get bigger through the web.

Right now, if we could code faster, we’d help even more.

Interested?

Gabriel Smy is a writer working on the web. His passion is making things clear. He is a Content Strategist for a small but perfectly formed web company in Cambridge, UK. As well as SmyWord, he runs the poetry blog Verbatim and writes about his first novel at Tongues of Men. Of course, you should follow him on twitter here.

Topics

• Case Studies
• Content Strategy
• Human Writing
• Meta
• Portfolio
• Style/Grammar
• Writing the Web

Most popular

• How to create metaphors that enhance user experience
• Content strategy: as boring as it sounds?
• Apostrophes: do you know the only rule?
• 4 Stages of Any Change
• Generation Y and the Web: what's the relationship?
• 5 ways to prevent the portfolio problem
• The Author
• Time to squish the double space
• Are you stupid enough to use leverage as a verb?
• Converting coffee table book into compelling web site