Do you have adblock enabled?
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   ( divider line
    More: Obvious, Iran Nuclear, web editors  
•       •       •

7546 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Oct 2012 at 12:51 PM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2012-10-02 10:30:28 AM  
4 votes:
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 10:12:35 AM  
4 votes:

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

[ image 568x160]

You know how I know you didn't RTFA?
2012-10-02 10:13:14 AM  
3 votes:
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 05:22:15 PM  
2 votes:
Because you didn't ask, here's what I do:

Any site linked on Fark that consistently pisses me off gets it's logo blocked. It keeps me from clicking through to articles on pages where they have dumb cookie/java requirements, pagination, more than 3-4 script servers... I mean, if all I want to do is read your article and look at a farking picture or short video I'm NOT going to allow a dozen+ random servers. Fark that! I don't leave thinking, "Damn, I wish managing scripts was easier. Maybe I should just give in..." It leaves me thinking, "Damn, whoever designed this broke-ass website is retarded."

It's really improved my experience here. And it completely deprives those dumbass sites of my traffic. One person worth of traffic may not be a lot on its own, but that's all I've got. Voting with my wallet as it were.

And if your site has a slideshow you're getting exactly one click out of me. Once I see that slideshow I'm gone. Fark you.
2012-10-02 03:05:43 PM  
2 votes:

xanadian: Bonus: The story has 2 pages.


Slate is one of the worst offenders. Typically after you click to a page, it just loads a full-screen version of the story and throws you back to the top of the page, which is worse than useless.
2012-10-02 12:57:22 PM  
2 votes:
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 09:51:00 AM  
2 votes:
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."
2012-10-02 02:36:34 PM  
1 vote:
this is mother farking 2012 and I've had it with these mother farking paginations.
Pagination is what happens when you let people who are too stupid to be on the internet be on the internet.
/Adjusts onion.
Back in 1980, when there were like 5 of us on the internet on any given saturday night, someone mentioned how everyone would have access to the net in 20 years. I said, well, I hope they have a special place in hell for who enver opens those Gates.
Little did I know how close I was.
Anyway, here you are, and you saw how hard it was to kill Geocities.
You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube, now, can you?
You have to let the kids eat at the big table, don't you?
What the hell, might as well let peopl with AOL accounts speak up, they're certainly the more brilliant amungst us.
Fark it.
If you see and article is paginated, just close the window.
They understand being ignored.
And if they don't, hell, they're probably print media masquarading as something they are not, and they are dying anyway.
Now excuse me. I have to go shoo some kids off my LAN.
2012-10-02 02:22:40 PM  
1 vote:
I don't mind reasonable pagination. The problem is there is a lot of unreasonable pagination out there. They need to be more flexible. If, for instance, you set your pagination line at 1000 words per page and your article runs to 1100 words, and you put 100 words on the second page, you deserve to be shot.

(More Below the Line)

As a general ratio I'd suggest something like this (assuming that your page word 'limit' is 1000 words)

- Up to 1250 words, keep everything on one page
- Between 1251-1750 words, divide your words roughly evenly between two pages
- 1751 words up, divide words evenly, with a goal of keeping pages in that 751-1250 word per page range.

I don't worry about slide shows, because I'm going to hell because I'm an atheist (or so I'm told) and I figure I'll be on the level right above people who make slide shows. I'll get to defecate on them for all eternity, and while I know this will in no way even the scales, it still gives me some small measure of satisfaction.
2012-10-02 01:42:23 PM  
1 vote:
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.comView Full Size

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.
2012-10-02 01:23:01 PM  
1 vote:
We also need to see an end to the phrase "...after the jump."
2012-10-02 11:20:50 AM  
1 vote:
No mention of Cracked?
2012-10-02 10:16:58 AM  
1 vote:

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 09:26:34 AM  
1 vote:
10% of new customers lost per click... Their idiotic choice
Displayed 14 of 14 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.