PDA

View Full Version : Headlines vs Content



phanio
08-23-2009, 08:49 AM
When I first created my website, I thought about putting as much content I could on the home page - I wanted content that reflected my key words. To this point, I have tried to live by that. Thus, when I write articles, I put the headline as well as a small blurb on my home page.

However, I recently came across a blog post that I found interesting related to providing headlines only. (not trying to promote this blog - but here is the post - Scanning Headlines (http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2009/08/scanning-headlines.html)).

It got me thinking about how other sites display information. I look at msn.com and see that is all they really have; headlines - I read the headlines and click on the ones I like.

Two questions - 1) is it better to just have headlines like this blog post suggests? And, 2) if headlines are better - where can one (like me) get that content (without having to pay for it).

Thanks

Business Attorney
08-23-2009, 02:41 PM
I read the blog post and it did not seem to me to be saying that is is better to have just headlines, although it certainly made the point about people's tendency to scan headlines.

As far as becoming an aggregator (which the post seemed to be recommending), I think the answer to that will depend on what your site aspires to be. Being an aggregator may be OK if the main thing is getting someone to your home page, but if you link out to a lot of other sites where the information sits, it seems you will be losing a lot of eyeballs when the users leave your website to read the articles (unless, of course, you frame the content - a violation of the TOS of many sites - or you buy the content and display it on your own pages, ala the Associated Press model).

Harold Mansfield
08-23-2009, 07:23 PM
You also have to take into consideration what advantage sites that you use as a comparison have. While it is good to study large companies who have "made it" or perfected a way of doing business profitably, what works for them, may not (most times won't ) work for you, especially if...in the case of MSN...have household recognition worldwide. and have a different business platform than what you are trying to build.

So you can't really take what MSN does, who's core revenue stream is software sales, and apply it as a successful possibility for a website who's core revenue may be affiliate marketing, or advertising.

You may have the same or similar kind of service, but you are using it in 2 different ways.
There are many things that you can do, and many shortcuts that you can take when, you have your own search engine, the majority of the world is hog tied to your computer operating system, and you already have millions of eyes on your page everyday.

KristineS
08-24-2009, 12:56 PM
Personally, I'm a fan of headlines and small blurbs. For my blogs, that's the way I generally do it. Part of that is because I'm sometimes given to quirky headlines which may not necessarily point to the content of the post. So giving a blurb allows people to get a taste of what's in the post.

Aggregators are a completely different thing, and are really just a gathering point for content that was created in other places. In the case of those types of sites, headlines may be enough, because the point is really just to get your eyes there and get you to click something.

vangogh
08-25-2009, 01:19 PM
I think this idea depends on what kind of site you have and who you are. Headlines only could make sense for a news site, though I prefer to at least have a sentence of description along with the headline. It also helps if you're a well-known site like MSN. On a site like that I already feel confident the article will be good enough. If I landed on a completely unknown site and all I found was a list of headlines I probably wouldn't even scan them. In fact I'd say a list of headlines isn't all that easy to scan.

To answer your questions:

1. The above probably answers already. Again it depends on the site. I'd agree you don't want to have a single page that's a series of articles. People scan first in order to decide what to read. Then they go back and read the content a little more in depth. A list of headlines to me isn't particularly inviting or easy to scan. A few headlines with some associated descriptive text is easy to scan and is much more inviting.

2. If you mean original content, you won't find it. If you mean aggregating content that other sites allow you to republish then there are plenty of scripts available to do that. However that won't necessarily give you a good site. If your site is simply republishing the same content I can get at MSN, I'm going to continue to visit MSN and ignore your site. You're going to have to add something of value beyond a list of links to attract people to your site. That might just be you choosing only the best articles from a variety of sites to display on your site, but you still need to take the time to add something of value.

There aren't any shortcuts. It takes work to build a good site.

vivianrollins
10-08-2009, 02:59 PM
Headlines are what attract visitors to your content. Without it, your content can be great but no one will know about it.

vangogh
10-09-2009, 01:40 AM
True. That's really all your headline is supposed to do. It's there to interest people enough to want to read more. Then it's the job of your first paragraph to draw people in to read the rest.

Zealus
10-11-2009, 10:29 AM
I would first analyze what kind and size of content are you producing and what kind of visitors you have. Depending on that, I would go with either headlines, headlines with blurbs of text or full-text articles.

If your content varies drastically from article to article (i.e. if you have side by side "Dollar is being replaced by Amero by the end of 2010" and "Britney Spears abducted by aliens, gives birth to alien baby") then short blurbs wouldn't hurt. If your content is a consistent flow of similar information, (could be sports news or UFO sightings, as long as they're consistant across the board) then you can do away with headlines.

MSN is using both, not just headlines or just blurbs. It all depends on content and the amount of it.

vangogh
10-12-2009, 12:44 PM
It always depends, doesn't it?

I like the headlines with blurbs approach on the home page. To me a home page's purpose is to make it clear what your site is about and then get people to your deeper content as quickly as possible. I like to present a heading for each major section of the site or something that's targeted for different kind of users the sites get and offer a sentence or two about what the visitor will find in that section.

TulsaWeb
12-27-2009, 12:48 PM
Google uses Headlines, but also has the page descriptions under that headline. I think I'd take a hint from that. If the headline is "Barak Obama" is it pro or con? Can a person tell without a description?

vangogh
12-28-2009, 11:13 AM
Depends on the headline. I think most can be descriptive enough to get you to click. However knowing that headlines are often written to get me to click without really being honest about what I'll find makes me want and even need a description.

Depends on the site too and the purpose of the site. Some may not need more than the headline.