How to Write Copy People Will Actually Read

You’ve found your way to this article, but you probably won’t read it start to finish.

You’ve read the stats. According to Copyblogger, 80% of people will read a headline, but only 20% read the body. 38% of people who click on a site will leave before engaging with the content at all. People will share copy, effectively vouching for its quality, when they’ve only read 25% of it.

Does this mean no one reads anymore? Has the Internet killed literacy? Not quite, but it has given birth to a generation of scanners. [Tweeters!] That is, people who scan articles and landing pages to get the “gist” or find a section they’re especially interested in.

Why Does Scanning Matter?

People don’t read the way they used to. Why? There are a few different reasons…

1. Attention spans are shorter than ever. In 2000, the average attention span for a human was 12 seconds. Today? A recent study found that our attention span is a mere 8 seconds. To compare, a goldfish has a 9 second attention span.
2. We’re busier than ever. The amount of time Americans spend at work, on average, is actually declining, but the convergence of work life and personal life leaves us with an “always on” mentality. As a result, we feel “busier than ever”. Far too busy to read an entire landing page or email or article.
3. Content overload is real. 41% of people surveyed claim to feel overwhelmed by the many choices online. Instead, they turn to friends for content and product recommendations.

So, how do people read now?

 “In today’s world people are suffering from content overload. People rarely read, they scan/skim through content and dive in areas they find interesting.”

If you want people to actually read, every line of copy should pass a cost-benefit test…

• Cost – How much time will this take? How difficult will it be to read?
• Benefit – What’s in it for me? What will I learn or gain from reading this?

Do the Old Copy Rules Still Apply?

So, do any of the old school copy rules still apply? Of course. This is an evolution of how copy is consumed, not how it is crafted.

Two core rules still apply: (1) you must secure interest and (2) you must do so as quickly as possible.

The bottomline is that people read copy they’re interested in. If your copy is compelling and intriguing, your visitors are going to read it.

Of course, securing that interest as quickly as possible is key. People make snap decisions, so if you don’t have them hooked in the first 8 seconds, you’ve likely already lost them.

However, they likely aren’t interested in all of your copy. Instead, they will scan your copy and read only the sections they’re interested in.

For example, let’s say you found Evergage because you’re interested in targeting certain visitors for personalization.

From: Shanelle Mullin

The Oxford Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Science

The Simonyi Professorship Chair for the Public Understanding of Science was founded in 1995, by a donation from Dr Charles Simonyi. It is currently held by Professor Marcus du Sautoy, and based at Oxford University’s Mathematical Institute and Department for Continuing Education.

Aims

The aim of the Simonyi Professorship is to contribute to the understanding of science by the public. The chair is intended to be filled by a scientist of distinction in their field of expertise, and the Simonyi Professor may hold the post while also pursuing their scientific work. Just as important as scientific accolade is that he or she has a talent and interest in communicating science to a wide audience.

Primary goals

The task of communicating science to the layman is not a simple one. In particular it is imperative for the post holder to avoid oversimplifying ideas, and presenting exaggerated claims. The limits of current scientific knowledge should always be made clear to the public. Once done so, however, there is also a role for presenting speculative ideas, which can convey to non-scientists some of the excitement of doing true science.

From Charles Simonyi's Manifesto

“The chair is for ‘Public Understanding of Science’, that the holder will be expected to make important contributions to the public understanding of some scientific field rather than study the public’s perception of the same. By ‘public’ we mean the largest possible audience, provided, however, that people who have the power and ability to propagate or oppose the ideas (especially scholars in other sciences and in humanities, engineers, journalists, politicians, professionals, and artists) are not lost in the process. Here it is useful to distinguish between the roles of scholars and popularisers. The university chair is intended for accomplished scholars who have made original contributions to their field, and who are able to grasp the subject, when necessary, at the highest levels of abstraction. A populariser, on the other hand, focuses mainly on the size of the audience and frequently gets separated from the world of scholarship. Popularisers often write on immediate concerns or even fads. In some cases they seduce less educated audiences by offering a patronizingly oversimplified or exaggerated view of the state of the art or the scientific process itself. This is best seen in hindsight, as we remember the ‘giant brains’ computer books of yesteryear but I suspect many current science books will in time be recognized as having fallen into this category. While the role of populariser may still be valuable, nevertheless it is not one supported by this chair. The public’s expectation of scholars is high, and it is only fitting that we have a high expectation of the public.:

Introduction to the Marketing & Publishing Resources

by Dennis Meredith 

 

Writers working with commercial publishers well know that they provide little marketing support for their authors' books. Publishers usually launch a book into the marketplace with minimal marketing planning and give the book only months to stand or fall before essentially abandoning it to the backlist.
However, the web gives authors many powerful tools and outlets for marketing their work themselves, and almost all are free. This resource aims to offer a concise guide to such marketing, as well as extensive reference Web sites and books.
Also, writers have the ability to self-publish their own books and articles, using the extensive network of consultants and other professionals, as well as technologies such as print-on-demand. This resource also includes guides to self-publishing, along with useful references.
Besides this resource, NASW Book Editor Lynne Lamberg has produced Write That Book, an excellent collection of books and online resources for book publishing (available only to NASW members).
Although I've done considerable research to gather information for this resource, I'm admittedly new to book publishing and marketing, although I'm actively involved. My wife and I have founded a small publishing company, Glyphus L.L.C., and have self-published the booklet Working with Public Information Officers, as well as my novels The Rainbow Virus, Wormholes, Solomon's Freedom, and The Cerulean's Secret. And, my book Explaining Research has been published by Oxford University Press. Here's a series of blog posts on my experience in self-publishing and the lessons I've learned. I hope these lessons and this collection of articles are helpful in your decision about self-publishing and in making it a rewarding experience.
I also hope my fellow NASW members will give me feedback — both insights into marketing and publishing from their own experiences and ideas for additional topics to be covered. Below is a list of articles in the Marketing & Publishing Resource. Best of luck with your publishing!

National Association of Science Writers   www.nasw.org

Article list:

• Definitions: POD, subsidy publishing, self-publishing and more
• Publishing e-books and e-articles
• Marketing on Amazon
• Promotion using Google Book Search
• Marketing your book
• Deciding to become a self-publisher
• Building a compelling writer/author Web site
• How to print on demand and make money
• Using a subsidy publisher
• Publishing organizations, discussion and support groups
• Working with book packagers and consultants
• Picking an offset printer
• Blogging to promote your book
• Basics of book design
• Using a publicity/marketing company
• Nuts and bolts of book distribution 

Who or whom

The confusion between “who” and “whom” is one of the most common problems writers face.

“Who” is used as the subject of a verb or complement of a linking verb. It’s a nominative pronoun.

“Whom” is used as the object of the verb or the object of a preposition. It’s an objective pronoun.

The Top 5 Mistakes I Find as an Editor

A lot of writers won't hire an editor. This isn't a pitch to get your business (although, of course, I am always open to that). So since you probably won't hire me or any of my editor cohorts, I'm going to share with you a list of the five biggest mistakes I see in manuscripts, so you can watch for them, and fix them, yourself.

Mistake #1: Writers don't place a comma between independent clauses separated with a conjunction. Independent clauses are clauses that can stand on their own as sentences, e.g., "He took the 405 freeway to work, and he exited at the Getty Museum." Because both "He took the 405 freeway to work" and "he exited at the Getty Museum" are independent clauses—meaning they can stand alone as sentences, you must, must, place a comma before the conjunction, "and." This is probably the biggest, most common mistake I find in manuscripts and books. Don't make it. It's a very easy punctuation rule to remember.

Mistake #2: Writers place commas between independent clauses and dependent clauses. This is probably the second most common mistake I see. A dependent clause is one that cannot stand on its own as a sentence. Let's take the above example, and change it just a little: "He took the 405 freeway to work and exited at the Getty Museum." I took the second "he" out. That makes the clause after "and" a dependent clause, because "exited at the Getty Museum" cannot stand alone as a sentence. It is dependent upon the first clause to be understood; thus, no comma should precede the "and."

Of course, there are other places you need—and don't need—commas, but this isn't meant to be a comprehensive study of the comma. If in doubt, look up comma placement in The Chicago Manual of Style or other style manual.

Mistake #3: Writers don't know their homonyms. In just the last few weeks alone, I've seen characters who were unphased, waiving to people, and peaking out windows. The writer's spellchecker should have alerted her to the fact that "unphased" isn't even a word. She meant "unfazed." To waive means to relinquish, to set aside. The word this author wanted was "waving." And a peak is the highest point of something; one peeks, not peaks, out a window.

Please, unless you are 100 percent sure you are using the right homonym, look it up. The wrong choice could have your characters doing some pretty strange things!

Mistake #4: Writers rely on their spellcheckers. This is a big no-no. If ewe think you're spellchecker will fined awl yore miss steaks, your wrong. That sentence went through my spellchecker just fine, and there are no less than eight errors in it ("ewe" should be "you"; "you're" should be "your"; "fined" should be "find"; "awl" should be "all"; "yore" should be "your"; "miss" and "steaks" should be "mistakes": and finally, "your" should be "you're"). Homonym spelling errors are the most common type of spelling error I find. Do not rely on your spellchecker. It will let you down every time.

Mistake #5: Writers who make errors in syntax. For example, look at this sentence: "I saw a deer driving to work today." Uh, no—you didn't, unless there are some very talented deer in your neighborhood! The correct sentence structure is, "I saw a deer while driving to work today," or, "While driving to work today, I saw a deer." Please, don't put the deer in the driver's seat!

Here's another example: "If your toddler won't drink milk, warm it in the microwave for a few moments." Warm what in the microwave? You've got a choice of antecedents here. Heaven help the toddler if you make the wrong choice! The correct structure would read, "If your toddler won't drink milk, warm the milk in the microwave for a few moments."

Of course, if you and I were having a conversation, we'd probably understand each other if we made these syntax errors. But you can't count on that when people are reading your words. Make sure you have them in the correct order so your meaning cannot be misconstrued.

I cannot list every error I run across while editing manuscripts. To do so would fill a book. But if you watch for these top five mistakes in your writing, your manuscript will be a lot more polished, and you can be more confident about submitting it to your publisher.

Five Steps to Completing Your First Draft

Follow these stages of preparation and production to assemble a first draft of written (or spoken) content.

1. Identify Your Purpose
What is the reason for writing the content? Are you objectively presenting information? If so, is it for educational purposes, or for entertainment — or both? Are you writing to help someone make a decision, or encouraging someone to take action? Identifying your goal for the content will help you shape the piece.

2. Identify Your Readership
Who are your intended readers (and your unintended ones)? What is their level of literacy, and what is their degree of prior knowledge of the topic?

Imagining who your readers are will help you decide what voice and tone to adopt, how formal or informal your language will be — though that factor also depends on your approach (see below) — and how much detail or background information you provide.

3. Identify Your Approach

Should your content be authoritative, or is it the work of someone informally communicating with peers? Are you offering friendly advice, or is your tone cautionary? Are you selling something, or are you skeptical? Should the content be serious, or is some levity appropriate? Determining your strategy, in combination with identifying your readership, will help you decide how the piece will feel to the reader.

4. Identify Your Ideas
Brainstorm before and during the drafting process, and again when you revise. If appropriate, talk or write to intended readers about what they hope to learn from the content. Imagine that you are an expert on the topic, and pretend that you are being interviewed about it. Write down the questions and your answers to help you structure the content. Alternatively, present a mock speech or lecture on the topic and transcribe your talk.

Draft an executive summary or an abstract of the content, or think about how you would describe it to someone in a few sentences. Or draw a diagram or a map of the content.

Using one or more of these strategies will help you populate your content with the information your readers want or need.

5. Identify Your Structure
Craft a title that clearly summarizes the topic in a few words. Explain the main idea in the first paragraph. Organize the content by one of several schemes: chronology or sequence, relative importance, or differing viewpoints. Use section headings or transitional language to signal new subtopics. Integrate sidebars, graphics, and/or links as appropriate.

Incorporating these building blocks will help you produce a coherent, well-organized piece.

 From: Daily Writing Tips