Information Obesity

Roland Piquepaille writes "How many phone calls, emails, voicemails, memos or stories do you have to go through every day? Probably more than last year. And probably too much. This article from the Sydney Morning Herald looks at this problem of information overload and how to deal with it. Here is a quick and not well-known fact: Website content management author Gerry McGovern says that something like 70 per cent of most websites goes unread. Despite that, when putting content on the web, "rarely do we ask the question: is anybody interested in reading that?" Good point. Check this column for a summary if you don't have time -- and who has? -- to read the original article."

Comments

Who Can Predict What is Useful to the Public?

[Pooua]

But seriously, what's not of interest to some people may be exactly what one individual is searching for. I know I've found obscure information only available on a page or two in all of Google, and I know people have come to my sites on some pretty strange search terms.

That's exactly the point I came on here to make. It is impossible for the private Webmaster (and probably commercial Webmasters) to know what information might be useful.

I have an eclectic mix of information on my personal Web site. I doubt very many people would be interested in everything I post, but my Web site offers information found nowhere else on the Web that I know is of interest to several people. Several people have expressed interest and appreciation in the copy of Bagster's "History of English Translations and Translators" that I have on my site, and others have said they have enjoyed my story about my Navy experiences. Maybe someone else would be interested in my college class (Advanced Lasers) report on dye lasers? But, what is most relevant to the question of posting only interesting information would probably be my autobiography, which necessarily contains arcane details of limited appeal.

In matters of research, it is impossible to predict what little bit of information might make all the difference to a single reader. As someone who does a fair amount of research, more information generally is better than less, provided that the information is organized for rapid searching. I rarely need an entire document (the longer, the less-likely), but I often need some brief bit of information that often is not included in any article.

It's good to have all that information there.

[IGnatius T Foobar]

Ok, so perhaps 70 percent of all content goes unread. It's still good to have it there. Even if the site's navigation controls are terrible, even if the site is poorly organized, even if it's not updated very frequently...

The information can still be Googled.

The fact that Google and other search engines index by content rather than by title, author, or whatever, means that when someone does go to look up a particular piece of information, if there's something relevant on your site, they'll find it there. If you think about it, this is the ultimate indexing system. Microsoft has been trying to make this work in Windows for nearly a decade (remember the abomination called 'Find Fast' - not to mention their latest attempt, WinFS?) and failing miserably. Google handles it with all manner of grace and speed.

So go ahead, put up that content. Put up as much content as you like. Someday, it's going to be just the thing somebody needs to read, and when they need it, they'll find it on your site.