Posted on

Readability Algorithms Should Be Tools, Not Targets

Readability Algorithms Should Be Tools, Not Targets

Readability Algorithms Should Be Tools, Not Targets

Frederick O’Brien

The web is awash with words. They’re everywhere. On websites, in emails, advertisements, tweets, pop-ups, you name it. More people are publishing more copy than at any point in history. That means a lot of information, and a lot of competition.

In recent years a slew of ‘readability’ programs have appeared to help us tidy up the things we write. (Grammarly, Readable, and Yoast are just a handful that come to mind.) Used everywhere from newsrooms to browser plugins, these systems offer automated feedback on how writing can be clearer, neater, and less contrived. Sounds good right? Well, up to a point.

xkcd webcomic about algorithms
As with most things, there’s an xkcd comic for this. (Large preview)

The concept of ‘readability’ is nothing new. For decades researchers have analyzed factors like sentence length, syllable count, and word complexity in order to ‘measure’ language. Indeed, many of today’s programs incorporate decades-old formulas into their scoring systems.

The Flesch-Kincaid system, for example, is a widely used measure. Created by Rudolf Flesch in 1975, it assigns writing a US grade level. The Gunning fog index serves a similar purpose, and there are plenty more where they came from. We sure do love converting things into metrics.

It’s no mystery why formulas like this are (quite rightly) popular. They help keep language simple. They catch silly mistakes, correct poor grammar, and do a serviceable job of ‘proofreading’ in a pinch. Using them isn’t a problem; unquestioning devotion to their scores, however, is.

No A-Coding For Bad Taste

I want to tread carefully here because I have a lot of time for readability algorithms and the qualities they tend to support — clarity, accessibility, and open communication. I use them myself. They should be used, just not unquestioningly. A good algorithm is a useful tool in the writer’s proverbial toolbox, but it’s not a magic wand. Relying on one too heavily can lead to clunkier writing, short-sightedness, and, worst of all, a total uniformity of online voices.

One of the beauties of the internet is how it melts national borders, creating a fluid space for different cultures and voices to interact in. Readability historically targets academic and professional writing. The Flesch-Kincaid test was originally developed for US Navy technical manuals, for example. Most developers can appreciate the value of clear documentation, but it’s worth remembering that in the world of writing not everything should sound like US Navy technical manuals. There are nuances to different topics, languages, and cultures that monosyllabic American English can’t always capture.

Deference to these algorithms can take writers to absurd lengths. Plain English is one thing, but unquestioning obedience is another. I’ve seen a good few sentences butchered into strings of words that tick readability boxes like ‘write in short sentences’ and ‘use monosyllabic words wherever possible’, but border on nonsensical to the human eye. It’s a near-impossible thing to quantify, but it has been a recurring phenomenon in my own work, and having spoken with other copywriters and journalists I know it’s not just my rampant paranoia at work.

Let’s look at the limitations of these tools. When faced with some of the greatest writers of all time — authors, journalists, copywriters, speech writers — what’s the verdict? How do the masters manage?

  • A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens.
    The opening chapter receives a grade of E from Readable.
  • George Orwell’s essay ‘Politics and the English Language’, which bemoans how unclear language hides truth rather than expresses it. He gets a grade of D. Talk about having egg on your face!
  • The beginning of The Old Man and the Sea by Ernest Hemingway does tolerably well in the Hemingway Editor, though you’d have to edit a lot of it down to appease it completely.

A personal favorite that came up here was Ernie Pyle, one of the great war correspondents. His daily columns from the front lines during World War II were published in hundreds of newspapers nationwide. One column, ‘The Death of Captain Waskow’, is widely regarded as a high watermark of war reporting. It receives a grade of B from Readable, which notes the writing is a tad ‘impersonal.’ Have a read and decide for yourself.

War correspondent Ernie Pyle during World War II
Impersonal war correspondent Ernie Pyle. Credit: Indiana University. (Large preview)

Not all copywriting is literary of course, but enjoyable writing doesn’t always have to please readability algorithms. Shoehorning full stops into the middle of perfectly good sentences doesn’t make you Ernest Hemingway. I’m an expert in not being as good as Ernest Hemingway, so you can trust me on that.

Putting Readability Into Context

None of this is supposed to be a ‘gotcha’ for readability algorithms. They provide a quick, easy way to identify long or complex sentences. Sometimes those sentences need editing down and sometimes they’re just fine the way they are. That’s at the author’s discretion, but algorithms speed up the process.

Alternatively, if you’re trying to cut down on fluffy adverbs like ‘very’ you can do a lot worse than turning to the cold, hard feedback of a computer. Readability programs catch plenty of things we might miss, and there are plenty of examples of great writing that would receive suitably great scores when put through the systems listed above. They are useful tools; they’re just not infallible.

Algorithms can only understand topics within the confines of their system. They know what the rules are and how to follow them. Intuition, personal experience, and a healthy desire to break the rules remain human specialties. You can’t program those, not yet anyway. Things aren’t the done thing until they are, after all.

It’s a fine line between thinking your writing has to be clear, and thinking your readers are stupid. You stop seeing the woods for the trees. Every time I hear that the ‘ideal’ article length is X words regardless of the topic or audience, or that certain words should always be used because they improve CTR by 0.06%, I want to gauge my eyes out. Readability algorithms can make sloppy writing competent, but they can’t make good writing great.

Remember, when all is said and done, copy is written for people. From an SEO perspective, Google itself has made it clear in the past that readability should match your target audience. If you’re targeting a mass audience that needs information in layman’s terms, great, do that. If you produce specialized content for experts in a certain field then being more specialized is perfectly appropriate.

As Readable has itself explored, readability can be a kind of public good. Easy to read newspapers spread information better than obtuse ones do. Textbooks written for specific age groups teach better than highly technical ones do. In other words, understand the context you are writing in. Just remember:

“When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.”

— Goodhart’s Law

Find Your Voice

I have no beef with readability algorithms. My problem is with the laziness they can enable, the thoughtlessness. Rushing out a draft and running it through a readability tool is not going to improve your writing. As with any skill worth developing you have to be willing to put the hours in. That means going a step or two beyond blindly appeasing algorithms.

Not everyone has a luxury of a great editor, but when you work with one, make full use of the opportunity. Pay attention to their suggestions, ask yourself why they made them. Ask questions, identify recurring problems in your writing and work to address them.

Analyse how the algorithms themselves work. If you’re going to use readability systems they should be supplemental to a genuine search for your own voice. Know how the things calculate scores, what formulas they’re drawing from. Learn the rules yourself. By doing so you earn the knowledge required to break them.

In his aforementioned essay George Orwell offers up his own approach to rules:

  1. Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
  2. Never use a long word where a short one will do.
  3. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
  4. Never use the passive where you can use the active.
  5. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
  6. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

These are founded on solid principles applicable to the web. Where did those principles come from? Not computers, that’s for sure.

Real editors and honest self-reflection do a lot more for your writing ability long term than obeying algorithms does. It all feeds back into your communication, which is an essential skill whether you’re a copywriter, a developer, or a manager. Empathy for other people’s work improves your own.

There is another essential thing good writers do: they read. No algorithm can paper over the cracks of an unengaged mind. Whatever your interests are I guarantee there are people out there writing about it beautifully. Find them and read their work, and find the bad writing too. That can be just as educational.

If you’re so inclined, you may even decide to get all meta about it and read about writing. If you’re not sure where to start, here are a handful of suggestions to get the ball rolling:

Also keep in mind that readability is not just a question of words. Design is also essential. Layout, visuals, and typography can have just as much impact on readability as the text itself. Think about how copy relates to the content around it or the device it’s being read on. Study advertising and newspapers and branding. On the other side of that sprawling jungle is your voice, and that’s the most valuable thing of all.

To reiterate one last time, readability algorithms are handy tools and I wholeheartedly support using them. However, if you’re serious about making your copy ‘compelling’, ‘informative’, or even (shudder) ‘convert’, then you’re going to have to do a lot more besides. The best writers are those algorithms are trying to imitate, not the other way around.

Whoever you are and whatever your discipline, your writing deserves attention. Whether it’s website copy, technical guides, or marketing material, developing your voice is the best way to communicate the things most important to you. By all means, use the tools at your disposal, but just don’t phone it in.

Smashing Editorial (ra, yk, il)
Posted on

6 Unconventional Tips to Create Content Faster

How much content have you written in the past month?

Are you happy with that amount?

Most marketers answer no to that question. In fact, 44% of marketers say that producing consistent content is one of their biggest challenges:

image05

Believe me, I get it. Creating a high amount of high quality content on a regular basis is hard.

But the traffic, subscribers, and eventual sales you get from it make creating content a necessity for most businesses.

There are a few ways to make it easier to produce whatever level of content you’re trying to:

  • Raise your budget (hire writers)
  • Devote more time to it
  • Write faster

The first two are often out of your control or not possible at this time. The third one, however, is almost always possible.

If you haven’t tried to optimize your writing habits, consider doing it now. It’s possible to double your productivity after some tweaks. Imagine being able to produce an article in half the time it currently takes you?

Hopefully, by the end of this post, you’ll have picked up a few tips that you can apply right away to significantly decrease the amount of time you spend creating content.

I’m going to share with you six tips, many of which are a bit unconventional but can work wonders. 

1. Narrate, then write

Everyone is different, but most people can talk significantly faster than they can type. I’m talking 3-4 times as fast.

On top of that speed difference, consider how often you pause in the middle of writing because you lost your train of thought.

Then you have to take 10 seconds to figure out where you were headed and repeat that process every so often.

With speaking, there are no delays other than the speed of your thought.

What I’m advocating here is to speak general thoughts about your topic. If you can go through it in a general order, that’s even better.

Record the audio on any free recorder app on your phone, or use an online app.

Then, when you’ve said all of your thoughts on your topic, type up your recordings.

They don’t have to make perfect sense yet. Just write them down, and organize them into appropriate sections.

Once you’re done, you can do a thorough edit and fill in any gaps that are left.

I suggest trying this out a few times, and if you like it, keep using it.

An added bonus – writing becomes much “easier”: When you simply write your content, you’re always thinking about the length, overall quality, vocabulary, and so on.

On top of that, you’re thinking about what to write next.

It’s exhausting.

When you narrate beforehand, you can solely focus on ideas and concepts. Then, you can focus on everything else as you’re editing. It makes writing much less intense and more enjoyable.

You can make this faster with tools: If you adopt this process, it should bring down your writing time by a bit and make it more fun.

However, if you’re really looking to minimize your writing time, a few tools can greatly speed up your writing time further.

First, consider hiring a virtual assistant (transcriptionist) to type up your narrations. Once you train them, it will save you a considerable amount of time for a small cost.

Next, you could also use more advanced narration tools to record your thoughts directly in a Word document.

Recently, Google Docs added a new feature for voice typing. Go to “Tools > Voice typing…” to enable it.

image04

Next, click on the microphone icon that pops up. Once you do, it should turn orange to indicate that it’s listening.

image08

From there, you can just speak, and the tool does a pretty amazing job at capturing your words. It’s not perfect, of course, but the technology has come a long way.

Don’t worry about correcting mistakes—you can do that later.

There are a few voice commands you’ll need; here’s a list of them.

2. Limit your time

According to Parkinson’s law,

Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion.

Even if you haven’t heard of it, I bet you’ve noticed it before.

When you have a week to write a post, it usually takes a week. You take extra time doing each part, not hurrying to finish early.

When you need to have a post finished tomorrow, you get right on it in the morning and focus like a laser. You have no choice but to work as hard as you can.

Now that you understand the law, you should apply it to your writing process.

Most marketers like to give plenty of extra time in case they can’t finish a post in time.

What I advise you to do, and what I do myself, is to limit your time to the lowest amount you think is realistic (without rushing the post).

For example, if I think a post can be done in a day, that’s how long I allot for it.

The other side of this is that it’s a good idea to plan in advance and have a few extra posts ready to go.

If you do underestimate the time a post will take, which does happen, you want to have those backups ready to go.

3. Start at the end, and work backwards

Writer’s block affects everyone, even us non-fiction content marketers.

You stare at a blank or mostly blank page, trying to think of something to write.

image02

This is clearly a huge waste of time.

Consider that the average typing speed is about 40 words per minute. You might even be able to beat that.

If you could simply type for an hour straight, at 80% of that speed, you’d crank out 1,920 words per hour.

Be honest, do you even come close to that when you’re actually creating content?

If you do, you probably don’t need this post.

This dead time is the main reason for this drastic difference in theory versus reality.

The main cause of writer’s block: There are many reasons that could cause you to pause while writing, but the most common is trying to think ahead.

You try to consider what you should write next and whether that will make sense when you’ll get to the later parts of your post.

Sometimes, you just stare at a blank screen because there are too many possibilities, which overwhelms you.

You can eliminate this by taking the opposite approach.

Instead of wondering what you should write at the moment, you should ask yourself, “What is the point of this post?”

Once you know that, work backwards, and create a very basic outline that supports your central points.

This takes 5-10 minutes upfront but can save you a ton of time, especially with long posts.

4. Make typing automatic

I told you above that the average typing speed is 40 words per minute.

Honestly, it’s not too difficult to push that to above 60 words per minute. Doing that alone will decrease your writing time by up to 50% (probably more like 20% due to other distractions).

That’s a huge amount.

If you’re already a really good typist, just move on to the next section. But I know that a lot of my readers know multiple languages, and some might not have grown up with computers, which makes it difficult.

Remember, typing is a skill. Like all skills, it can be improved with a bit of practice.

And if you currently have to think about where keys are on the keyboard, taking the time to make typing an unconscious habit will pay off greatly.

Step 1 is to test your typing speed. There are many free tests out there, and Key Hero is one of them. The test will only take a minute or two.

image06

If your typing speed is under 60 words per minute, you’ll benefit a lot from improving it. Alternatively, use the narration tools I mentioned in tip #1.

How do you actually improve your typing speed? To start with, you need to make sure your typing technique is correct.

The proper hand placement consists of your 4 fingers on each hand hovering over the home row (middle) keys and thumbs over the space bar.

image03

Next, get in the habit of not looking at the keyboard. If you do, it’ll be next to impossible to get to a solid typing speed.

Once that feels normal, if you haven’t been doing it already, it’s time to practice. Key Hero has a practice round that should work really well—you just type random letters and words that come up:

image07

Commit to just 20 minutes a day, and in a few weeks, you’ll see big improvements.

Do a little work now to save hundreds of hours in the future.

5. Take breaks (yes, seriously!)

It’s extremely counter-intuitive, but taking breaks usually makes us more productive.

Studies have shown that even short breaks of a few minutes can improve productivity by over 10%.

image01

It makes sense when you think about it. After working for a while, you lose focus, get bored, and can’t concentrate well.

Breaks don’t need to be long, but a few minutes every 30-60 minutes is a good idea. You should know how much time it takes before your concentration starts to wane.

If you’re not sure where to start, I highly recommend the Pomodoro Technique.

It’s very simple:

  • Set a timer for 25 minutes
  • Work until the timer finishes
  • Take a 5 minute break
  • All of that is one Pomodoro
  • Repeat steps 1-3 four times. After the fourth 30-minute period, take a long break (anywhere from 15-50 minutes, up to you)

Here’s an online tomato timer, or you can use a timer on your phone.

This procedure is supposed to keep you focused and fresh while working.

image00

6. Write first, edit after

I kind of touched upon it earlier, but I want to make it clear here.

There are all sorts of distractions while you write. Random thoughts you have, trying to decide whether you’re using the right words, figuring out what to write next, and so on.

Whether it’s obvious or not, you’re multitasking.

Multitasking is horribly inefficient because every time you switch to thinking about the next thing, there’s a “switch cost.”

The switch cost is often just a second or less, but consider that you can have thousands of thoughts an hour, and it adds up to minutes of wasted time on a regular basis.

Research has shown that constantly shifting focus can decrease productivity by up to 40%.

This is the main reason you don’t want to write a sentence and then think about whether you should edit it. It takes way too much time, and then you waste more time switching back to your writing mode.

The first draft of anything is garbage.

That’s a quote by Ernest Hemingway, one of the most famous writers there is.

Even if you’re editing your content line by line, it’s still going to suck compared to what it has the potential to be. You can’t really know whether a sentence fits until you have the whole post written.

As you can see, this type of multitasking doesn’t work, and you should edit your post after you’ve written everything you wanted to say.

So, instead of multitasking, write the first thing that comes into your head.

That’s what most professional writers do.

They don’t revise until they finish the first draft—they just let the thoughts flow from their head onto the page. That’s something that can also be accomplished through narration.

Then, you do a thorough edit and refine your content into gold.

It may seem like doing two things instead of one will take more time, but try it, and you’ll likely find that you will not only have a better final product but also save time.

Conclusion

Content is a necessary part of modern marketing for most businesses.

And yet, it’s always difficult to find the time to produce content on a regular basis.

That’s where learning how to create content faster comes in.

I’ve shown you six different ways to create content faster. Just try one or two for now, and come back for the rest later. Measure your content creation times before and after, and you should see a big difference.