I have nothing of great importance to say about interactivity and websites. In the Web 2.0 (or 2.5, or whatever we’re up to currently) world of iPhones, iPods, and iEverything else, I think websites certainly have to offer up interactivity in order to grab and keep the attentions of the younger generations. It is therefore important to know your audience, to have a clear learning objective (not to have interactivity just to have it, with no purpose), and not to make the user download additional programs (okay this is a personal thing I don’t like!).

Regarding Jakob Nielson’s article, I completely understand why only 1% of people contribute on the Web—and I am somewhat frightened of them! An example: I used to go to WTOP’s website to catch up on recent news throughout the day. One day I noticed that people could post comments about stories. So I “lurked” to see. All of the posters were extreme in some sense of the word—no moderation there. Quite honestly, some of the posts made me physically nauseous. There were racist remarks galore, threats to other users and public figures, sexist comments…you name it. Now obviously these people (oh, I hope!) don’t represent the majority of web users. But that did not stop me from becoming completely disillusioned at that particular website, and I have not been back since.

So here is the problem—the one percent of contributors that Nielson is talking about control the majority of the web. So should I submit a post, trying to be a moderate “voice of reason”? Wouldn’t that be like Obama speaking at the Republican National Convention (or Palin at the DNC)? Why should I put myself out there? It’s not worth the aggravation.  Now for surveys and things of that nature, if they are simple and quick, I’ll contribute. But as for becoming part of a dialogue online with strangers? No thanks.

Please continue to ignore the irony that I am writing this in a blog post that is online for the world to read.

Advertisement