A list is an interface, too

<![CDATA[Joshua Porter writes that “content aggregators throw this site-centric idea out the window. They allow users to bypass a large portion of the design, whose sole purpose is to get them to target content.” (Thanks to CyberJournalist.net for the link.)
I think this argument confuses the artifact (a design) with the content conveyed by the artifact (the news, entertainment, etc.). Content aggregators, whether human or machine, compile their lists of content, which may be displayed as a list of links or as a collections of articles on a page, based on some form of judgment. As an editor, you begin any daily presentation of news or information with a list.
What Joshua Porter is focused on is the problem of designing a site, which I believe is a question borne of a short-lived dominance within editorial organizations by designers. For decades, newspaper layouts were largely static. The introduction of a new font or some greater change in layout was a big deal. With the rise of desktop publishing and, especially, Web page design, change was easy and it encouraged designers to believe they were in control of the presentation of information. There was much more to experiment with in layout than with language.
Designers were never in control, instead, they were elevated into a greater role in the delivery of information by the ease with which an interface could be changed. But editors and, today, bloggers and algorithms (or faux algorithms?), have a much larger role due to the speed of information delivery. We’ve moved past a point where immediacy is possible with a complete design effort, like graphs and other data representation; that’s a practice that can survive when news and data is produced over hours or days.
At the same time, there is still an important role for deeper presentation and analysis of information that should not be discounted. The emphasis on navigation, which Joshua Porter pursues, misses the greater value superb design introduces to help people understand information. That doesn’t happen when everyone is racing to be the first to give the audience something novel; but timeliness is only the first step toward understanding.
Instead of fretting about how design can keep up with aggregation, the designer should be looking closely how their contribution to the interface improves the usefulness and understanding of information. If Anil Dash can manipulate search rankings by asking people to link to his site using a unique phrase, it points to the value a designer’s unique contribution, the ability to make information compelling through design. Think of USA Today’s weather maps, which were a revolution when they were introduced. Joshua Porter’s posting will get more links than this one, because he has charts.
Design can make a destination, but designing a destination doesn’t necessarily make a timely site, because the choices about what information is displayed determine the site’s value from day to day.]]>