Comments on: Straight to the point: the Miniskirt theory of writing http://www.contentious.com/2008/11/10/straight-to-the-point-the-miniskirt-theory-of-writing/ Amy Gahran's news and musings on how we communicate in the online age. Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:38:23 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Least Bloggable and Tweetable Units (LBU) « Unapologetically Unstructured http://www.contentious.com/2008/11/10/straight-to-the-point-the-miniskirt-theory-of-writing/comment-page-1/#comment-1225131 Least Bloggable and Tweetable Units (LBU) « Unapologetically Unstructured Thu, 18 Dec 2008 22:47:16 +0000 http://www.contentious.com/?p=2046#comment-1225131 [...] following a retweet from timoreilly, I tracked down a post which proposes that the main “so what” must be conveyed in the first 62 words of your online [...] [...] following a retweet from timoreilly, I tracked down a post which proposes that the main “so what” must be conveyed in the first 62 words of your online [...]

]]> By:   How to start a Twitter event hashtag — contentious.com http://www.contentious.com/2008/11/10/straight-to-the-point-the-miniskirt-theory-of-writing/comment-page-1/#comment-1224412   How to start a Twitter event hashtag — contentious.com Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:46:59 +0000 http://www.contentious.com/?p=2046#comment-1224412 [...] Albee, maven of the miniskirt theory of writing, asked me: “I’ve used hashtags a bunch, but never started one. If, by some chance, there [...] [...] Albee, maven of the miniskirt theory of writing, asked me: “I’ve used hashtags a bunch, but never started one. If, by some chance, there [...]

]]> By: Lanny Arvan http://www.contentious.com/2008/11/10/straight-to-the-point-the-miniskirt-theory-of-writing/comment-page-1/#comment-1224230 Lanny Arvan Wed, 12 Nov 2008 12:06:52 +0000 http://www.contentious.com/?p=2046#comment-1224230 Ah! The soul of wit, sure. But why should having an unknown reader make it to the end of my post be my goal as a writer? Ah! The soul of wit, sure. But why should having an unknown reader make it to the end of my post be my goal as a writer?

]]> By: Urs E. Gattiker http://www.contentious.com/2008/11/10/straight-to-the-point-the-miniskirt-theory-of-writing/comment-page-1/#comment-1224228 Urs E. Gattiker Wed, 12 Nov 2008 05:39:20 +0000 http://www.contentious.com/?p=2046#comment-1224228 Your point about the miniskirt as mentioned by Doyle Albee is a good attention grabber. Steven Egan and Elizabeth both have a point, a good introduction is needed whilst some people may in fact decide right then if they wish to go on or not. So if I manage a short intro like here: http://commetrics.com/?p=89 the topic might still require some words to explain. So after you got my attention and I have read the 62 words, many readers will still skim the text instead of reading it word for word. Hence, using bullets and short sentences as well as paragraphs makes it easier on the reader..... trying to scan over the text. Finally, maybe less frequent posts (once a week) and taking all the above into consideration still means you have to make sure you add value for your targeted audience. So if you are a corporate blogger (e.g., Fortune 500) you have to make sure that your target audience (e.g., product users or investors) find your posts relevant and additing value as explained here http://howto.commetrics.com/?page_id=127 Thanks for this nice post. Urs Your point about the miniskirt as mentioned by Doyle Albee is a good attention grabber.

Steven Egan and Elizabeth both have a point, a good introduction is needed whilst some people may in fact decide right then if they wish to go on or not.

So if I manage a short intro like here: http://commetrics.com/?p=89 the topic might still require some words to explain. So after you got my attention and I have read the 62 words, many readers will still skim the text instead of reading it word for word. Hence, using bullets and short sentences as well as paragraphs makes it easier on the reader….. trying to scan over the text.

Finally, maybe less frequent posts (once a week) and taking all the above into consideration still means you have to make sure you add value for your targeted audience. So if you are a corporate blogger (e.g., Fortune 500) you have to make sure that your target audience (e.g., product users or investors) find your posts relevant and additing value as explained here http://howto.commetrics.com/?page_id=127

Thanks for this nice post. Urs

]]> By: Bradley Shoebottom http://www.contentious.com/2008/11/10/straight-to-the-point-the-miniskirt-theory-of-writing/comment-page-1/#comment-1224226 Bradley Shoebottom Wed, 12 Nov 2008 02:25:14 +0000 http://www.contentious.com/?p=2046#comment-1224226 It sounds like what you are writing in the first 62 words is an effective summary or abstract of the subject under discussion. This is the info that is often under a news headline on news sites. Structured authoring for technical writing in the DITA XML environment would call this the Topic summary. The topic summary is what gets included in introductory sections or is used to build high level documents. It sounds like what you are writing in the first 62 words is an effective summary or abstract of the subject under discussion. This is the info that is often under a news headline on news sites. Structured authoring for technical writing in the DITA XML environment would call this the Topic summary. The topic summary is what gets included in introductory sections or is used to build high level documents.

]]> By: Steven Egan http://www.contentious.com/2008/11/10/straight-to-the-point-the-miniskirt-theory-of-writing/comment-page-1/#comment-1224223 Steven Egan Tue, 11 Nov 2008 22:23:01 +0000 http://www.contentious.com/?p=2046#comment-1224223 I believe that the longer content pieces still need a good introduction, which I don't always succeed in writing. A good introduction is exactly what you've covered, short enough to be "snacked" on and robust enough to be beneficial. After you give them that taste, the reader can make an educated decision to read on, or not. I believe that the longer content pieces still need a good introduction, which I don’t always succeed in writing. A good introduction is exactly what you’ve covered, short enough to be “snacked” on and robust enough to be beneficial. After you give them that taste, the reader can make an educated decision to read on, or not.

]]> By: The Miniskirt Theory of Writing for the Web | Recipes for Publicity http://www.contentious.com/2008/11/10/straight-to-the-point-the-miniskirt-theory-of-writing/comment-page-1/#comment-1224219 The Miniskirt Theory of Writing for the Web | Recipes for Publicity Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:18:30 +0000 http://www.contentious.com/?p=2046#comment-1224219 [...] last weekend’s Thin Air Summit, Amy Gahran spoke about her theory that the first 62-words of a post had better tell web surfers what the [...] [...] last weekend’s Thin Air Summit, Amy Gahran spoke about her theory that the first 62-words of a post had better tell web surfers what the [...]

]]> By: Elizabeth Yarnell http://www.contentious.com/2008/11/10/straight-to-the-point-the-miniskirt-theory-of-writing/comment-page-1/#comment-1224218 Elizabeth Yarnell Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:53:15 +0000 http://www.contentious.com/?p=2046#comment-1224218 Amy, I thought you were dead on when you presented the 62-word discipline at the Thin Air Summit. It's not that people will ONLY read the first 62 words of an entry, it's that people will use that first handful of words to assess WHETHER OR NOT to read the rest of the entry. Those better be the right words to hook them or they will move on. And, by the way, the secret of a good miniskirt is that it attract attention to where you want it to attract attention without (ahem) skirting around the point. Elizabeth RecipesForPublicity Amy, I thought you were dead on when you presented the 62-word discipline at the Thin Air Summit. It’s not that people will ONLY read the first 62 words of an entry, it’s that people will use that first handful of words to assess WHETHER OR NOT to read the rest of the entry. Those better be the right words to hook them or they will move on.

And, by the way, the secret of a good miniskirt is that it attract attention to where you want it to attract attention without (ahem) skirting around the point.

Elizabeth
RecipesForPublicity

]]> By: Stephen Downes http://www.contentious.com/2008/11/10/straight-to-the-point-the-miniskirt-theory-of-writing/comment-page-1/#comment-1224217 Stephen Downes Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:48:04 +0000 http://www.contentious.com/?p=2046#comment-1224217 Actually, 62 words is generous compared to the 23 words I was allocated for my lede back in my journalist days. Actually, 62 words is generous compared to the 23 words I was allocated for my lede back in my journalist days.

]]> By: Dave Copeland » Blog Archive » Hope for dead-tree codgers? http://www.contentious.com/2008/11/10/straight-to-the-point-the-miniskirt-theory-of-writing/comment-page-1/#comment-1224215 Dave Copeland » Blog Archive » Hope for dead-tree codgers? Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:03:02 +0000 http://www.contentious.com/?p=2046#comment-1224215 [...] lead (or lede) of the articles we write. The first paragraph of this post was just 28 words — well within the 62-word limit suggested by Amy Gahran — and addressed specifically what I was writing about. Gahran’s theory is rather [...] [...] lead (or lede) of the articles we write. The first paragraph of this post was just 28 words — well within the 62-word limit suggested by Amy Gahran — and addressed specifically what I was writing about. Gahran’s theory is rather [...]

]]>