I looked at a tech site

At the Lean Startup Circle meeting last week in downtown Santa Barbara I talked with a guy who works at Evidation. We didn’t talk about the company, but I looked at the site to find out what they do.

“Radically changing medicine” is the only thing on their landing page, except for generic menubar items.

 I looked at every page of Evidation.com. By carefully studying what they present, I am unable to figure out what they are offering/claiming.

Maybe I’m misunderstanding Evidation’s  motives for publishing a website. As a marketing guy, I assume their purpose is to expand the scope of their operation, to increase the number of people who are aware of the powers of their novel discovery engine. But they don’t provide any details except for abstract generalizations.

I’m a student of readability. If text is not readable, people won’t read it except under duress. I gauge readability using an app to measure the Flesch-Kincaid Readability Index, which gives a number between 1 (totally unreadable) and 100 (kindergarten books) and a school grade level.

     Evidation presents extremely low readability numbers for every textblock on the site, and it all boils down to empty abstract opinion and no concrete details. The headline on their “Product” page is, “New ways to measure health in everyday life.”

Then there are 63 words of text, Grade 23, Ease negative 15, that do not present a single way to measure health.

The “Research” page headline is, “Pioneering work on the behaviorome.” The introductory sentence gets a Flesch/Kincaid Reading Ease score of 9. Dreadfully low. The next sentence asks you to browse the linked articles on the page “to learn more about how the definition of medicine is changing.”

The first article is “Developing Measures of Cognitive Impairment in the Real World from Consumer-Grade Multimodal Sensor Streams.”

The 176 words of the introductory paragraph get a Reading Ease score of 0.5.

Scroll down eight pages and you finally get an example of the output of their “platform:”

Even zoomed in to the max, I couldn’t read the categories in the left-hand column. Readability is also about the visual aspects of the graphics and text.

 There are 54 other abstruse scientific articles you can link to on the Research page, but none of the ones I looked at had any mention of what Evidation did for them.

Another part of the Evidation site is ­­their “News” page with links to three magazine articles. One was in TIME magazine: “12 Innovations That Will Change Health Care and Medicine in the 2020s.” This takes you to a 2,200-word article, of which 168 words are devoted to a project Evidation was involved with. It’s up to the visitor to bull through all the other text to find out what Evidation’s involvement is.

There’s nothing on their site to make it easy to find out what they’re doing. Maybe that’s intentional. Maybe they are swamped by inquiries and are making it difficult to understand to keep the looky-loos out.

 If they want their site to generate inquiries, they should use a copywriter.

Want people to read about your new innovation?

I look at the sites of technology companies and see ponderous blab that doesn’t get to the point. It wastes people’s time.

Sites full of text that’s a waste of space, text that does not reward a visitor’s time. There’s no regard for the visitor’s time. You’re expected to hunker down and study hard because we’re the best and you must earn your way into being allowed to learn about us. We disdain those who don’t already know all about us. Don’t expect us to help you learn about us!

Their text reminds me of Styrofoam: it takes up space without carrying any weight, and the pieces squeak irritatingly when they rub together. Their text is clouds of abstractions connected by passive “equals-sign” verbs. One blob of words enhances, or enables, or, (a current fave), leverages another blob of words. Hacking through the underbrush with an electro-machete, you eventually get to the core level of what they’re trying to say, and it is: nothing.

“I had to read all this to find out that you’re proud you are so proud of yourself?”

I don’t understand why companies think readability of the text on their site is immaterial. I guess they believe a paragraph of text has a certain meaning that will somehow become imprinted in the visitor’s brain, whether they actually read it word-for-word or not, because the company’s intent is so urgent. A flashbulb burst of information. The only important part is to include the proper keywords so the search bots can find it, see. Once the visitor looks at the paragraph, the info goes in whether he reads it or not.


A picture is worth a thousand words, they tell me, but then they show me a picture with no caption, and I’m supposed to interpolate everything about the photo. Of course those who are already in the know do not need a caption to understand the picture. Heck, everybody knows we’re simply trying to  immanentize the eschaton.

If you want people to read what you’re presenting, give them concrete objects in the text, actual visualizable nouns interacting through active verbs. Show the visitors something happening.

Show them the advantage people will gain. Don’t tell them about your long years in the lab. Don’t tell them you’re the leader. Don’t explain how proud you are to be the leader. Don’t tell them “We’ve done it!”

Tell them what you did in plain simple language, and explain what your innovation will mean to them.

If it’s easy to read, people will read it.

Even super-intelligent people prefer text that is easy to read. It’s not a matter of “dumbing it down.” It’s a matter of simplifying the information into a coherent sequence.

In today’s short-attention-span universe, people won’t bother with text that is hard to read. Colin can make your text plain, simple, clear, and factual. And then people will read it.

How a technical copywriter can help a tech startup

At a recent Startup Circle meeting I talked with an entrepreneur whose day job is at a tech startup in the infrared spectroscopy sector.

I looked at the startup’s website, and here’s my Technical Copywriter’s Analysis of what they could do to improve their marketing  presentation.

I found flaws in these areas:

• Focused on features, not benefits.

• Vague, abstract testimonials.

• Applications that are not defined.

• Unnecessarily dense text.

Their site is devoted to their technical achievement of attaining simultaneous IR + Raman spectroscopy. The site presents their product as a scientific advancement to the community. The text was produced by technical writers familiar with all the details of the new instrument. It is detailed and precise. You are expected to understand how the ramifications of this innovation are so disruptive.

“A new paradigm in vibrational spectroscopy,” they tell us. Their instrument is “changing the field of IR spectroscopy.” They believe they have made a substantial technological breakthrough, an important innovation.

But they don’t tell us what they are disrupting. Their photo captions are dry facts about the output of their device: “Optical image with selected 70 x 70 μm area for analysis.”

They tell you what their machine does, but they don’t tell you what the goal of the user is. What can you do with this that you can’t do with existing instruments?

Their testimonials are no help. A research fellow at the Singapore Synchrotron Light Source says, “It is truly extraordinary.” A scientist at the SOLEIL synchrotron in France says, “It is a disruptive technology.” A college professor says, “This is truly an exciting technology.”

These are abstract opinions that tell you nothing about what the researchers learned, or what areas of research the new instrument is useful in.

They are so absorbed in the technical details that they don’t get around to telling you what it is for. The site is all features and no benefits. There is no further discussion of what their “new paradigm” means. How is it changing the field of IR spectroscopy? You are required to infer that for yourself.

This kind of machine has never been offered to the market before, but they describe only its outputs without explaining any advantages over the competition. There’s not a whisper of cost/value comparisons.

On the landing page, one section says “Wide applications capabilities that enable unique breakthrough applications in the fields of failure analysis, pharmaceuticals, life science and more.”

But not a single application is mentioned.

Searching the “Applications” section, we find the words “failure analysis” mentioned again under Pharmaceuticals, but no explication of the unit’s value except that it is “uniquely placed to meet and exceed needs.” It does not mention a single analytical need that it meets.

Perhaps their site is purely for abstract claims for technical accomplishment, aimed only at other microscope makers, a vanity site to claim priority and superiority, not intended to increase sales.

I’m thinking in marketing terms, not scientific-publication terms.

In the ad world we have a saying: No matter how good your drill bit is, nobody wants a drill bit. What they want is holes.

Their text is at a faux high level. It is unnecessarily hard to read. I use the Flesch-Kincaid Readability Index to gauge text. The company’s original PR release starts with an opening paragraph that scores Grade 33, Reading Ease negative 22. This expects the reader to have completed 12 years of post-PhD studies. (See my explanation of the  Readability Index  here.)

Companies think that this kind of hifalutin text makes them look super-intelligent. It’s hard to read because it is clumsily constructed, not because the concepts are difficult.

Marketing a technical breakthrough.

If it’s new, people won’t be familiar with it. You can’t make the other guy look up from his own lab bench by saying “Truly remarkable!” You’ve got to give them some red-meat details.

 I have a lot of experience in helping companies explain things when they actually have something new.


A typical copywriting mistake in a tech startup site.

 I’ve looked at a lot of startup sites and one common flaw is that they can’t bring themselves to tell you what they are starting up.

The intensity of  their passion is so huge and overwhelming that it doesn’t occur to them that visitors might not already be aware of it.

I looked at the site of one of the entrepreneurs I met at a recent Lean Startup Circle meeting.  It has pictures of a drop of water and light bulbs dangling from wires. “Water & Energy Monitoring,” its says in dark type against a dark blue background. Under the company name is a subhead: Saving Water, Saving Energy, Saving Money.

This is the first text block on the site:

Here’s a little quiz: what was envisioned? What are these guys selling?

After reading this, the visitor still has no idea what the startup is offering. And in this case, you can search the site and never find out what they were doing in the garage for all those years. It’s an app and a gadget, but in order to find that out, you have to look at three repetitive videos totaling 13 minutes, and you have to be paying very close attention.

But the site gives you no information that would give you an incentive to devote that much time to it.

It’s common for startups to want to first impress you with the long laborious period of development that led to the disruptive innovation.  They also want to  virtue-signal about their motives.

When trying to write about themselves, they stiffen up and  write pedantically. In my site analyses, I use the Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease index, which scores their introductory text block at Grade 18, Ease 15, which is terrible–about as easy to read as the footnotes in a post-graduate statistical analysis textbook. Not what you want for your marketing campaign.

And if visitors do trudge through this paragraph, they’re rewarded by learning nothing whatsoever about whatever it is that you’re offering.

If you’re offering something new, start with your best benefit–not with a generic abstract preamble.

The technology of text

Greece was just another grubby little kingdom until King Cadmus imported the Phoenician alphabet. In an accident of fate, Phoenician used five more letters than the Greeks needed for their language. Cadmus made the huge technological advance of using those extra letters as vowels.

Writing had been a secret reserved for kings and priests and tax collectors, a code of letters without vowels–an unending stream of acronyms. DSRPTV SLTNS was easy enough to read if you were already one of the cool kids, but by inserting vowels, suddenly everybody could read “disruptive solutions.”

Inserting vowels instantly made the alphabet a killer app that converted  text into speech, and vice versa. Text became easy to read. Text suddenly became a flowing transcription of human speech that anybody could decode simply by speaking it aloud.

Instead of its former role as a means of secret communications within a cabal, writing became a massive new channel of sharing.

“Apes could start using a primitive language today if their motivation to keep secrets gave way to a motivation to share knowledge.”
–Edmund Blair Bolles, BABEL’S DAWN.

When information became easy to share, the accumulation of knowledge turned asymptotic. Within a few generations Greece became the foundation of Western thought and literature. Socrates worried that making literacy easily available to all would result in the destruction of human powers of memory. He was right. Why bother to memorize the ILIAD when you can just look up any passage in a hard-copy print version. Write-once, read-many.

Over the centuries, further improvements made text easier and easier to read. Instead of one long line of letters, spaces were inserted to show where individual words started and stopped. Punctuation was another late invention. The pace of improvement increased after moveable type made mass printing available.

And now, corporate culture is abandoning the technology of text. They are reverting text to the role of protective camouflage, a deflective shield to prevent sharing of information. Text is old and outdated, it can’t compete against YouTube and music.

Companies display text to comply with regulations, without regard for the fact that text is a technology that requires an operator: a person who actively extracts the thought and meaning behind the words.

Typography bears much resemblance to cinema, just as the reading of print puts the reader in the role of movie projector.
–Marshall McLuhan

Amid the worldwide media glut, companies no longer care if people read their text: their goal is merely to plunk the text into your view-space. With the right magic SEO dust inserted into the text, the robots will deliver your text directly to your most highly qualified leads. But will they read it?

Companies fret that their story is not getting out, but at the same time they publish text that leaves readers feeling they are wading through tar. And if that isn’t enough to prevent the sharing of their information, they present it in ways that visually block the message.

Here’s some kind of internet-of-things headline. The search bots can read it easily. How about you?

This text that you visually cannot read  has a Reading Ease score of negative 12 and a Grade Level of 22, according to the Flesch-Kincaid Readability Index. If you battle your way through this illegible text, you learn–nothing. The sentence is an assemblage of vague abstractions. It can only leave readers impatient and irritated at having wasted their time.

The first goal of effective text should be to reward the reader’s time. We have the technology! Why won’t companies use it?

Who is Colin Campbell?

I’m colin@colin.org, a domain I have maintained for 24 years. (I asked for colin.com back in 1995 but they gave me colin.org.)

I mention this only to let you know that I’ve been around for a while. I was already an experienced copywriter, creative director, and graphic designer when the Personal Computer era began.

 Bought my first personal computer with the check I got from the UCSB Computer Engineering Department for writing a recruitment brochure for them. A few years later I became entranced with the graphics capabilities of the second generation of Macintosh computers and bought a Mac SE and a LaserWriter. The vector of my life changed as I learned Pagemaker and Word and Illustrator and Photoshop. I moved to Silicon Valley and did a lot of digital graphic production gigs  through Mac Temps in the Quark/Photoshop/Illustrator segment.

I became immersed in the upsurge of Silicon Valley. I published one of the first online e-zines (https://www.swagazine.com/issues.html) and hung out with other e-ziners, and with hackers who coalesced into The Cult of the Dead Cow.

I bought my domain in 1995 and learned HTML to make my own websites, and then learned CSS. I became an early adopter on the web and virtually everything I’ve done since then has been on the web. I became Webmaster for a Silicon Valley electronic tool company, as a contractor, and wrote tons of content for Walmart.com, besides freelance work for many other clients.

Now I’m semi-retired in Santa Barbara. I wander around on the web and  see lots of technical and industrial sites that could benefit from some professional copywriting.

Reality In Tech Advertising

Reeves believed the purpose of advertising is to sell. He insisted that an advertisement or commercial should show off the value or unique selling proposition, (or USP) of a product, not the cleverness or humor of a copywriter.
His ads were focused around what he called the Unique Selling Proposition, the one reason the product needed to be bought or was better than its competitors.
Reeves pointed out that to work, advertising had to be honest. He insisted the product being sold actually be superior, and argued that no amount of advertising could move inferior goods.

My theory of copywriting is to present information that’s true.

My theory is nothing new. I’m following the lead of Rosser Reeves, who published REALITY IN ADVERTISING sixty years ago. He pioneered the idea of the Unique Sales Proposition (USP).

The best way to sell a product is to present the truth about it. For a lot of major products, the truth is they’re just about the same as the next guy, so they make ads about something else. This can be effective but expensive. Geico spends two billion dollars a year to keep their animated gecko spokescritter in your face.

I’ve been looking at the sites of smaller technical and industrial companies who don’t have two bill in their marketing budget. They often want to keep their information to themselves. They have an attitude of security and secrecy and NDA agreements. Then, when it is time to advertise, when it’s time to spread the word, that attitude impedes them.

It always amazes me when I see strong young companies that mask their virtues on their Web sites by using the same set of buzzwords everybody else is using to self-inflate themselves. Instead of strong, active, concrete information, they use passive abstractions. By removing one or two industry-specific words from their text, it becomes indistinguishable from the text used in a myriad of different industries.

I have an imaginary worst-practices client, Akronim Corporation. Here’s their elevator pitch:

Akronim solutions have been widely deployed on a variety of demanding applications by multiple users across commercial and industrial markets. Our core brands include the Akronim 1, Akronim 2 and Akronim 3 product families.

By examining Akronim’s site and reading their text, you cannot discover what it is that they actually do–only that they’re the best, in fact they’re the world leader! Instead of offering information, they offer their own opinions of themselves.

Luckily, Akronim is imaginary. But many real companies emulate them. They  prefer to sound big and mysterious. Their web designers will insert whatever text they are given into an industry standard template, and the site becomes indistinguishable.

What can a copywriter do for you.

My usual methodology is to study you and your technology and learn what your strengths are. I examine what your competitors are doing. I develop a clear logical description of what your company does. This usually takes several drafts, as corrected by your engineering staff. I condense your information into the shortest, most effective presentation of the facts, written so that anybody can understand it.

Santa Barbara Magazine was a startup when I became Associate Editor

They also expected me to copywrite ads. Free.
We were already ill-paid, but we all pitched in where needed. We’d do anything to help the startup get going. If an advertiser bought a full-page ad but needed text, no problem! And many of the articles I wrote for the magazine were already de facto PR pieces for advertisers.

Some of the advertisers were willing to pay extra for me and the art director to create brochures for them on the side. I wrote them like magazine articles about the company. That made them stand out in the ocean of competitors’ stuff written in standard ad twaddle.

I studied the best textbooks about copywriting and applied their precepts. My theory is that copywriting is writing, and the same standards apply. You create clear, vibrant text by using active verbs and concrete nouns, not the passive abstractions of business jargon. My goal was to present persuasive facts in an interesting way.

Eventually I was writing a lot more brochures than magazine articles. I became known among the local Santa Barbara art directors because they won awards with the ads and brochures that were based on my copywriting.

I worked with art director John Alexander and wrote a catalog and magazine ads for a mail-order stereo retailer in San Luis Obispo. The campaign turned around their sales and won a Gold Mailbox award from the Direct Marketing Association.
Santa Barbara Magazine also won Maggie awards for Best Regional/City Magazine two years in a row.

While visiting family in Detroit I heard about an opening at BBDO, the fourth largest ad agency in the world. I presented my portfolio and was hired immediately. They were impressed by a brochure I had written and creative-directed for a California manufacturer of a new limited-production automobile.

I wrote hundreds of standard print ads and radio and TV commercials for Dodge, but BBDO was not interested in the kind of personal and interesting ads I wanted to do.

I left after a couple years and went back to California and produced my first major hit of a campaign: a brochure and a series of ads for guitar pickups made by Seymour Duncan.

Seymour was well known in the rock-star community for his custom pickups, but his mom & pop business operation couldn’t survive on sales to rock stars. He needed to reach the mass market.

I studied the competition and saw that they were all using rock-star endorsements, with no information about the guitar pickups themselves. Nobody was explaining why you should put a new pickup in your guitar.

Working with art director Mark Oliver, I proposed that we do a brochure focusing on the pickups themselves, with commentary from Seymour explaining why each one was different from the others.

I interviewed Seymour extensively and wrote the brochure in first person, as though Seymour himself were telling the story.

The brochure was introduced at the National Association of Music Manufacturer’s convention, and was an instant hit, catapulting Seymour Duncan into industry leadership. And it’s now in the permanent collection of the American Institute for the Graphic Arts.

Should tech startup sites be easy to read?

I’ve been attending meetings of the Lean Startup Circle since I arrived in Santa Barbara a few months ago, meeting entrepreneurs and looking at their sites. Being “easy to read” is not in the Top 10 of their wish lists.

I’ve worked for sixty tech outfits, so I’ve seen the marketing trends in a lot of different silos. And a thing that I continue to see is companies that shrug about it if their site is hard to read. They equate their complexity with the superiority of their product.

I’m more of a “Keep It Simple, Stupid,” kind of a guy–especially when you’re trying to introduce an innovation. If you have something new, you have to talk about it clearly. If it’s new, it won’t be anything people are accustomed to looking at, right?

If a startup has something truly new, then by definition you won’t be able to google for it.

“Alexa, give me an example of something that has never been thought of before.”

Alexa will not have an answer for you.

I’ve been startled to find out that hardly any of the Startup Circle attendees have ever heard the term “copywriter.” “What, you’re a lawyer?” said one start-up entrepreneur. He thought I was talking about “copyright.”

Maybe I’m a little resentful. Back in the old days when I started, copywriters were the apex of the ad agency food chain. Copywriters were the mainstay of their business.

I’ve been looking around the Santa Barbara scene and contacting web shops, because that’s what almost all former ad agencies have evolved into.

I’ve inspected the OUR TEAM pages of 61 web design shops in Santa Barbara, and hardly any of them have a copywriter. Out of 227 listed employees, only four have the title “copywriter.” There are ten dogs on-staff.

The web shop staffs are filled with graphics people and coders and web developers and video producers, and copywriters are virtually nonexistent. Web shops don’t have a guy like me on staff.

If your product or service is new or different, you need a copywriter to assemble the information into a clear explanation that’s easy to understand. First of all, make it easy for people to see what your offer is.