Comments on: Linking – within the story or after?

By: Links « O Lago | The Lake

Links « O Lago | The Lake — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 12:43:53 +0000

[...] writing 3 artigos que discutem como se devem usar os links nos texto noticiosos. Paul Bradshaw já tinha lançado a discussão há alguns dias, mas Robert Niles, editor da Online Journalism Review também tem as suas ideias. [...]

By: shawn smith

shawn smith — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 18:48:46 +0000

Links must be inside the post/story. One of worst things a story online can do is reference something and not link to it. For example, yesterday I watched an ESPN video that talked about an NBA player’s YouTube contest – and did ESPN link to the YouTube contest? NO!!!! What a pain. I had to go and search for the information myself! News orgs are meant to be informers, and guiding is part of the informing process.

There are also different ways to present information within links. For example, links to related stories can often be put in a fact box within the story, I have no problem with that. MSNBC and other sites have been doing that for years and it really helps me navigate to related stories.

Links within a story to related content are important. But if I see one more link to “click here”…

By: Pete Ashton

Pete Ashton — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:24:34 +0000

This notion of links being a ‘distraction’ is intriguing. It implies that the links are being forced onto the article and not an organic part of it. I guess this is a nice illustration of the difference between writing for print and for the internet. I know most of my writing would lose a lot if bound in a book (which is why I’m not interested in a book deal).

Looks like training on linking is needed Paul!

By: Richard Kendall

Richard Kendall — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 13:09:57 +0000

I’m not sure there is a completely fail-safe right or wrong way?

Links within the story make logical sense, as adding them at the end may mean the read has forgotten their purpose or relativity.

Although linking at the end lets the reader read the story without distraction.

But if there are no links, then the stories become dead ends on the website, and that page becomes an exit page rather – BUT the external links take users away anyway?

On our site I add related internal links and useful documents in clearly spaced blocks either at a pertinent point near the top or the end of a story. But specific relevant links go within the flow.

By: Mike Whiting

Mike Whiting — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:39:09 +0000

I could not agree more with the content of your piece http://www.journalism.co.uk/6/articles/531022.php .
I’ve been banging on about this for years as a managing editor within the regional press and more recently in my role of head of digital development.

You can see the tensions between the media owners, who see the new landscapes and want to move quickly, and their management teams who are pushing the boundaries as they strive to deliver a profit. Then there are the dinosaurs for who the ability to stall, procrastinate, “research” and “develop” is the new currency with which they buy time to merely get left behind.

By: kus

kus — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 23:25:38 +0000

Context rulz, so link within the story!

Might be interesting: We analyzed, how many user actually click on those links. The result: about roughly 5-10% click on them (of course, this might not be represantative)

By: Pete Ashton

Pete Ashton — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 23:02:34 +0000

Oh, one final thing. Just because you put in a link doesn’t mean the reader will follow it. You’re giving them the option to find out more. Whether they do or not depends entirely on the individual.

So I’d say pile on the links. If you have 15 and someone only follows one, one that you might not have put in, and they learn something new then it’s worth it.

By: Pete Ashton

Pete Ashton — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 22:59:12 +0000

@Bas: “I prefer to link below stories. Because I would like people to read the entire story first.”

The thing is, many people have tabbed browsers now. As I’m reading an article I’ll right-click on the links so they open in new tabs. I continue reading the article right through and then check out the linked pages. So inline linkage shouldn’t affect your desire here.

If the links which related to subjects at the top of the article didn’t appear until the end I doubt I’d click on them because my mind would be elsewhere.

By: Ed Walker

Ed Walker — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 22:44:50 +0000

I prefer the links below the story, or to the right, or wherever. I like my story without lots of links highlighted as I read through it – I find it slows me down. I read, digest and if I want more information I’ll want my links in a nice list below or to the side.

By: Pete Ashton

Pete Ashton — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 22:21:55 +0000

Linking should add value to the piece. Here’s three examples off the top of my head:

“In a recent report on the fishing industry it was announced that they catch fish a lot” – “recent report” should link to the report in question.

“The minister, Jo Bloggs, was reported to be rather annoyed” – link the name to a profile somewhere (I’d use Wikipedia myself)

The list at the bottom should be used as a “further reading” list. An example would be when reviewing a book. Link to Amazon, the authors site, the publisher’s site, etc. Think of this as a “next page” link.

The format of better Wikipedia articles is probably a good model to follow, not just because it’s how the web was intended to work but because most people are comfortable with that level of linkage.