If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   Stop Pagination Now: Why websites should not make you click and click and click for the full story   (slate.com) divider line 95
    More: Obvious, Iran Nuclear, web editors  
•       •       •

7521 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Oct 2012 at 12:51 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



95 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-02 09:26:34 AM
10% of new customers lost per click... Their idiotic choice
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-10-02 09:34:21 AM
From: Everybody who submits links from Boston news sources
To: Everybody who complained about how we submitted a six page story from the Boston Globe

The Boston Globe will show you a story in a single page if you arrive from the newspaper site, but when you come in from Fark the same story will appear in multiple page form.

So stop whining and learn to click, or direct your anger at the failing newspaper.
 
2012-10-02 09:51:00 AM
Maybe if they added some conditional logic that says, "Hmmm....Page 2 will only have two and half lines. Let's default to one page, then."
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-10-02 10:08:27 AM
Diogenes

The Boston Herald does the opposite. Some opinion columns so consistently end with widow lines (one line alone on the second page) that it must be intentional.
 
Pud [TotalFark]
2012-10-02 10:10:12 AM
At least they had a single page option on their 6 page article about how paginating is a bad thing.

www.slate.com
 
2012-10-02 10:12:35 AM

Pud: At least they had a single page option on their 6 page article about how paginating is a bad thing.

[www.slate.com image 568x160]


You know how I know you didn't RTFA?
 
2012-10-02 10:13:14 AM
Whatever. Pagination is about creating an interactive experience. It allows the reader to actually participate in reading the page, rather than being a passive stooge just drooling at text scrolling by on the screen. In a nation where obesity is a growing epidemic, we should be doing everything we can to make innately passive activities as active as possible. I mean, why stop at pagination? A lot of articles use multiple pictures across each page of the article...why not turn those pictures into mini slideshows, so that after clicking to get to the new page, you click to see each picture, too?

And that's still just same-old same old. Why not explore *real* innovation. Like, who says the "next" button has to always be in the same place? Why not make finding it an adventure, something the engages the reader critically, creates the opportunity for some good old fashioned problem solving? We need to be developing critical thinking skills. Maybe each page in the article, or each picture, could have a clue as to where on the web page the reader might find the hidden button that will allow for the next page to be accessed. Think of the sense of achievement people will have after having successfully found them all! We're always talking about building self confidence; here's a real chance to do just that.

And why not use the web to help develop motor skills, too? Who says the buttons have to be static? Why not have them moving around the page, flickering and jumping around and maybe turning invisible for a while? So the readers have to play a reflex game to hit it after they find it?

Reading a web site doesn't have to be boring, in other words. It can be fun.
 
2012-10-02 10:15:03 AM
b-b-but unique impre$$ion$ per page!
 
2012-10-02 10:16:58 AM

Pocket Ninja: Reading a web site doesn't have to be boring, in other words. It can be fun.


May you die the slow death of a billion slide shows, funboy.
 
2012-10-02 10:19:47 AM
Bonus: The story has 2 pages.

/lulz
 
2012-10-02 10:30:28 AM
I think they should try to replicate the experience of physically reading a newspaper, and the story should be continued on an entirely different website that's really hard to find.
 
2012-10-02 10:49:25 AM

Sybarite: I think they should try to replicate the experience of physically reading a newspaper, and the story should be continued on an entirely different website that's really hard to find.


[Like]
 
2012-10-02 11:08:56 AM

Sybarite: I think they should try to replicate the experience of physically reading a newspaper, and the story should be continued on an entirely different website that's really hard to find.


Lolz.
 
2012-10-02 11:20:50 AM
No mention of Cracked?
 
Pud [TotalFark]
2012-10-02 11:43:19 AM

Gecko Gingrich: Pud: At least they had a single page option on their 6 page article about how paginating is a bad thing.

[www.slate.com image 568x160]

You know how I know you didn't RTFA?


I was originally going to make a joke about how the second page only had 2 sentences (I'm sure it was intentional). But then I saw that picture in the middle of the article, and decided it was just too easy to pass up
 
2012-10-02 11:52:30 AM

Pocket Ninja: Whatever. Pagination is about creating an interactive experience. It allows the reader to actually participate in reading the page, rather than being a passive stooge just drooling at text scrolling by on the screen. In a nation where obesity is a growing epidemic, we should be doing everything we can to make innately passive activities as active as possible. I mean, why stop at pagination? A lot of articles use multiple pictures across each page of the article...why not turn those pictures into mini slideshows, so that after clicking to get to the new page, you click to see each picture, too?

And that's still just same-old same old. Why not explore *real* innovation. Like, who says the "next" button has to always be in the same place? Why not make finding it an adventure, something the engages the reader critically, creates the opportunity for some good old fashioned problem solving? We need to be developing critical thinking skills. Maybe each page in the article, or each picture, could have a clue as to where on the web page the reader might find the hidden button that will allow for the next page to be accessed. Think of the sense of achievement people will have after having successfully found them all! We're always talking about building self confidence; here's a real chance to do just that.

And why not use the web to help develop motor skills, too? Who says the buttons have to be static? Why not have them moving around the page, flickering and jumping around and maybe turning invisible for a while? So the readers have to play a reflex game to hit it after they find it?

Reading a web site doesn't have to be boring, in other words. It can be fun.


This is what you show up as:


Pocket Ninja [TotalFark]
2012-10-02 10:13:14 AM
(favorite: Poe's Law incarnate)
 
2012-10-02 12:33:02 PM

Pud: I was originally going to make a joke about how the second page only had 2 sentences (I'm sure it was intentional). But then I saw that picture in the middle of the article, and decided it was just too easy to pass up


No you weren't.
 
2012-10-02 12:57:22 PM
I know the reason they do that is to increase our exposure to ads...

Here's a reason NOT to put a story on several pages (or slideshows): I will NOT read your article and I will NOT see any ads. I am not alone here, so websites...say goodbye to your consumers!

Paradoxically, if these websites chase MORE customers away it would actually seem to "increase" their productivity because a greater %age of users would see the ads (possibly increasing the click-thru rate) - not taking into account you've lost users by your web design.

Kind of like the unemployment rate - it looks better (lower) the more people who give up looking for work. If ALL unemployed people quit looking for work we'd have 0% unemployment - great, huh?
 
2012-10-02 12:58:22 PM
I like the way Andrew Sullivan's blog does it. Read the lead paragraphs, click the Read On link, the rest of the article text fills in in-line... no new page load required. Dunno how it works but I hope it catches on.
 
2012-10-02 12:58:25 PM
Heh.  Page 2 made me laugh.
 
2012-10-02 01:01:43 PM

Sybarite: I think they should try to replicate the experience of physically reading a newspaper, and the story should be continued on an entirely different website that's really hard to find.


+1
 
2012-10-02 01:02:59 PM

Diogenes: Pocket Ninja: Reading a web site doesn't have to be boring, in other words. It can be fun.

May you die the slow death of a billion slide shows, funboy.


You should have seen his myspace page.
 
2012-10-02 01:03:27 PM
I clicked only to find out if the story against pagination was paginated and of course it was.
 
2012-10-02 01:04:36 PM

oryx: I clicked only to find out if the story against pagination was paginated and of course it was.



*tap* *tap*
 
Go read page 2.
 
2012-10-02 01:05:23 PM

Temporarily Qualmless: I like the way Andrew Sullivan's blog does it.


Okay, sure. But you're reading Andrew Sullivan.
 
2012-10-02 01:10:16 PM

PC LOAD LETTER:
This is what you show up as:


Pocket Ninja [TotalFark]
2012-10-02 10:13:14 AM
(favorite: Poe's Law incarnate)


Mind if I borrow that? PN needed a good one...
 
2012-10-02 01:10:26 PM

Pocket Ninja: And why not use the web to help develop motor skills, too? Who says the buttons have to be static? Why not have them moving around the page, flickering and jumping around and maybe turning invisible for a while? So the readers have to play a reflex game to hit it after they find it?

Reading a web site doesn't have to be boring, in other words. It can be fun.


I remember banner ads that made me shoot something or whack something and I could enter to win a prize! I still haven't won anything (yet), but hey, I've lost like 2 pounds with all that extra clicking!
 
2012-10-02 01:11:40 PM

Temporarily Qualmless: I like the way Andrew Sullivan's blog does it. Read the lead paragraphs, click the Read On link, the rest of the article text fills in in-line... no new page load required. Dunno how it works but I hope it catches on.


That's the thing. With the advent of AJAX (like, ten years ago IIRC), this whole thing should have been moot. You think a giant block of text ruins your site's layout? Fine, use AJAX to paginate the content without refreshing the whole page. But it's such a deliberate cash-grab, and it seems ridiculous when so many UIs are moving towards more fluid designs that don't interrupt your workflow.

But then, I almost never RTFA so what do I care?

/Hobbyist web designer, using AJAX for years to create fluid interfaces
//Actually did R this FA
 
2012-10-02 01:12:44 PM
Bad website design. It never ends.
 
2012-10-02 01:15:53 PM

JackieRabbit: Bad website design. It never ends.


You'll get over it.
 
2012-10-02 01:20:38 PM

Sybarite: I think they should try to replicate the experience of physically reading a newspaper, and the story should be continued on an entirely different website that's really hard to find.


The website should be unpleasant to touch after a shower, too.
 
2012-10-02 01:21:08 PM
Pocket Ninja

(favorite)


/your color is green
 
2012-10-02 01:22:22 PM

there their theyre: JackieRabbit: Bad website design. It never ends.

You'll get over it.


Yeah, I've come to accept it. But isn't pagination akin to edging?
 
2012-10-02 01:23:01 PM
We also need to see an end to the phrase "...after the jump."
 
2012-10-02 01:23:34 PM
Missed opportunity for the Ironic tag? They have an article on why stories should only be on a single page spread over 2 pages. Plus it's Slate, who are notorious for such paginated stories.
 
2012-10-02 01:24:12 PM
if i see multiple pages, i usually print the stupid thing and take it along to read later.

tldr version- i'm lazy.
 
2012-10-02 01:24:14 PM
Really, I don't care all that much about pagination in a long article. They have to get their money somehow.

Now, slideshows that make you click "More" just to read a one-paragraph caption, that gets me all stabby.
 
2012-10-02 01:27:47 PM
I really don't care that much about pagination, so long as it doesn't interfere with the
 
2012-10-02 01:28:22 PM
flow of things.
 
2012-10-02 01:29:20 PM

oh_please: Really, I don't care all that much about pagination in a long article. They have to get their money somehow.


Agreed. Author of TFA is biatching just for the sake of biatching.

Good content is far more important than pagination.
 
2012-10-02 01:30:03 PM

Gecko Gingrich: Pud: I was originally going to make a joke about how the second page only had 2 sentences (I'm sure it was intentional). But then I saw that picture in the middle of the article, and decided it was just too easy to pass up

No you weren't.


Puds law, when calling "I was just joking about that error", on the internet, there is no way to prove you were just joking.
 
2012-10-02 01:32:14 PM

dabbletech: I really don't care that much about pagination, so long as it doesn't interfere with the


You're good.
 
2012-10-02 01:32:16 PM
I know some sites have single-page articles for logged in viewers. Pagination only occurs to visitors. It's to entice you to register.

Not that I'm implying anything.
 
2012-10-02 01:32:23 PM

Pocket Ninja: Whatever. Pagination is about creating an interactive experience. It allows the reader to actually participate in reading the page, rather than being a passive stooge just drooling at text scrolling by on the screen. In a nation where obesity is a growing epidemic, we should be doing everything we can to make innately passive activities as active as possible. I mean, why stop at pagination? A lot of articles use multiple pictures across each page of the article...why not turn those pictures into mini slideshows, so that after clicking to get to the new page, you click to see each picture, too?

And that's still just same-old same old. Why not explore *real* innovation. Like, who says the "next" button has to always be in the same place? Why not make finding it an adventure, something the engages the reader critically, creates the opportunity for some good old fashioned problem solving? We need to be developing critical thinking skills. Maybe each page in the article, or each picture, could have a clue as to where on the web page the reader might find the hidden button that will allow for the next page to be accessed. Think of the sense of achievement people will have after having successfully found them all! We're always talking about building self confidence; here's a real chance to do just that.

And why not use the web to help develop motor skills, too? Who says the buttons have to be static? Why not have them moving around the page, flickering and jumping around and maybe turning invisible for a while? So the readers have to play a reflex game to hit it after they find it?

Reading a web site doesn't have to be boring, in other words. It can be fun.


swoon
 
2012-10-02 01:34:22 PM
Itchy92
You think a giant block of text ruins your site's layout? Fine, use AJAX to paginate the content without refreshing the whole page.

But please include a version that works without Javascript.
It's really annoying if sites use "noscript" blocks (i.e. they show that someone has thought about it), but instead of content the only thing in that block are 3rd party web bugs and maybe an ad.
Great, make sure the pageview gets counted, but don't care if the user sees only a blank page.

Also, some AJAX slideshows are made so bad, they're slower than replacing the whole page; I've seen one site where a single click on "next" to swap the image and caption did trigger about 25(!) requests behind the scenes.

/ and apropos of nothing, if there's someone in need of a good cockpunch, it's otherwise clueless Javascript people who are responsible for stuff like "a href='javascript:document.location=...."
 
2012-10-02 01:37:36 PM

stpauler



No mention of Cracked?


No kidding, that was the first thing I thought of as well.
 
2012-10-02 01:38:32 PM
Pagination requires more effort on the part of the user, and so therefore is bad design. I've been on the Internet since 1994, and back then there were less pages on the Internet - because less things had become paginated. You didn't need a Google search engine back then: we used Alta Vista, which was robust enough.

But now, with all these new pages, we have to have something like Google, which has servers in every town and is watching us. I was traveling last week, and I verified that I could even get Google in Sierra Blanca, TX, which is a small town with nothing but a border checkpoint and a Chevron. This is ridiculous.

What they should do is change the pagination to magnification. I have patented this process, so don't bother trying to steal my dreams. But all of you who have condoned pagination up until now are about to have a rude awakening when my technology makes this obsolete. Sorry Drew. Sorry Sergey. Soon it will be "Paging Dr. Falken!"
 
2012-10-02 01:41:40 PM
Pocket Ninja:
Who says the buttons have to be static? Why not have them moving around the page, flickering and jumping around and maybe turning invisible for a while? So the readers have to play a reflex game to hit it after they find it?

I've actually seen that done.
An ad layer was put over a flash video player and when you cursor was over the layer's "close" button, the button moved down from the upper right to the lower right corner.
That is, I suppose it was an ad layer; the actual ad must have been blocked, because I didn't see nothing but a "close" button.
 
2012-10-02 01:42:08 PM
I like pagination. I know for a fact I don't ever look at their stupid ads or click on them. Anything to make them keep spending money on shiat that doesn't work I am all for. Chaos FTW.
 
2012-10-02 01:42:23 PM
From the farking article:

"Pages that run too long can irritate readers," Plotz said in an email. "We run stories of 2,000, 4,000, even 6,000 words, and to run that much text down a single page can daunt and depress a reader. So pagination can make pages seem more welcoming, more chewable."

4.bp.blogspot.com

Hogwash, Mr. Plotz. You do it not only for the pageviews, but for the metrics. If the 1100-word article is on a single page, you don't have any way to determine how many of your readers (a) read the whole thing, (b) skimmed the whole thing, or (c) read the first paragraph and clicked away. But if you can make the majority of your readers click on the "2" to read the last paragraph, you know the answers to all three of those questions - what portion of your readers wanted to see the whole article, and of those readers, by comparing the time of the "page-2" pageview and correlating it with the Referrer and the cookie of the "page-1" view, you can make a guess as to how fast they read, and hazard a guess as to who's reading for content and who's just skimming. Which is frankly none of your farking business. (I wonder if, when analytics tools for sites with "printer-friendly" output come across my clicktrail, do they imagine I'm actually some doddering old executive with a hundred pages of dead-tree printed out per day?)

I loathe web "designers" who interrupt me while I'm reading-for-content by insisting on me stopping what I'm doing in order to navigate. The web is not print. The size of the scrollbar is more than sufficient to hint at the length of the article. Fark you, Mr. Plotz, and anyone who writes like you. 

/man, that came out way rantier than I expected.
//sounds better if you read it in the voice of one of the Warner brothers.
///or the Warner sister.
 
Displayed 50 of 95 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report