Citation-worthy:
"If the audience is expected to go to a page and pick up a piece of information or do something, the page is user-centric. If the audience is expected to linger and learn, the page is quality-centric. If the reader is expected to linger in the face of persuasion, the page is persuasion-centric" (Hailey, 2014, p. 21).
"All writing is infused with rhetoric to some degree. Uninformed writers are unaware of its presence and do not know how to use it, but the best writers work hard to make sure their rhetoric is under control and well groomed--even if they do not necessarily know they are dealing with it" (Hailey, 2014, p. 39).
"When people see web design as assembly or construction, they tend to see the text as an added component, often as an afterthought (this tendency even applies to writers)" (Hailey, 2014, p. 41).
"To effectively move into the future of communication, we must expand our definitions of text and genre and rhetoric so that we have no difficulty seeing that interactive media is communication, not construction" (Hailey, 2014, pp. 44-45).
"If anything can be a metaphor, anything can be a text" (Hailey, 2014, p. 53).
"As communication becomes increasingly complicated, it becomes more important than ever for professional writers to understand what is going on with the texts (Hailey, 2014, p. 82).
"It is better to describe a genre than name it. If you can define it in terms of its exigencies, urgencies, purpose, audiences, appropriate rhetorical stance, and physical structure, you have a tool you can use to evaluate it in detail" (Hailey, 2014, p. 115).
"What makes ... content ... good is the copywriters [know] what it was supposed to do and for whom" (Hailey, 2014, p. 221).
"Just as important to the production of an excellent site is the quality of the writing" (Hailey, 2014, p. 235).
"It would be easy to fall into the trap of paying less attention to quality as the communication venues become more complicated, but the more complicated venues provide us with an opportunity to truly shine. Those few writers who rise to the technical, conceptual, and rhetorical challenge of producing and maintaining excellent texts in the face of these increasingly complicated venues will be uniquely positioned. I believe they will have rare and valued skills" (Hailey, 2014, pp. 276-277).
Summary/Review:
Academia makes great efforts to mine
research, producing new theories and studies that push current understanding,
the passing of wisdom that comes from decades of research and the perspective
of time is a much more rare and valuable gem than the standard publication. Dr.
David Hailey began researching digital media in 1991, then began researching
and teaching professional/technical writing at Utah State University in 1994.
He co-created and built their online degree studies to the thriving Technical
and Professional Communication Masters and PhD programs they are today. In the
twilight of his career, he channeled these years of experience in the public
and private sector to author ReaderCentric
Writing for Digital Media: Theory and Practice. This book takes a
light-hearted, grandfatherly approach to questioning our perspectives on
digital communication as he reflects on flaws in our past theoretical and
practical approaches to writing and analyzing electronic texts.
Hailey
began with a simple question: “Why is it so hard to write on the Internet?”
After addressing many various facets of this challenge he addressed obvious,
but previously unstated, realizations that there is not one type of website,
nor one type of audience, nor a limited number of genres online. Traditionally,
genres in fictional writing are rule-bound, culturally-driven forms that allow
us to categorize materials for our interpretation and use. Nonfiction genres
are more complex. Because of the nuanced levels and layers of communication, it
is not easy to pin down specific genres.
To assist in the
definition of genre, the North American Genre school “advanced a theory that
genres are recurrent actions in response to communicative situations and that
those objects people call genres are really artifacts of the actions” (Hailey,
2014, p. 65). Though this theory could help identify what is and is not
important, it faced limitations in how to evaluate the text itself, not just
the important or unimportant parts of the text. Furthermore, as Anderson later
pointed out, this definition did not view actions as genres (1987).
Miller (1994)
broke from the traditional view of genre as a recurring social action to a view
that one that could reoccur. She viewed a genre as a
“situation with a social need or exigency where a communication is required;
reproducible… in different situations, that can be identified and described and
can be used as constraints or resources” (Hailey, 2014, p. 67). Anne Freedman
(1994) changed the focus of the genre scope and definition by pointing out that
the interaction of genres with the audience; an interaction could occur just
once—and though repeatable, may never occur again—therefore a genre of one can
exist. Hailey hypothesized that a theorized event could also be a genre, so
genres of zero could exist.
Hailey adapted
Miller’s (1994) description of a genre for electronic texts to a spectrum
encompassing both genre and mediums. For example, is email a medium, or a
genre? This understanding led Hailey to propose an activity-based genre for
digital text analysis:
In the traditional
structure-based paradigm, altogether different genres can be described by the
same structure, and a single genre can be described in terms of a variety of
interaction between elements such as need, purpose, authorial intent, audience,
etc. (p. 71).
This may muddy the waters about the
differences of genre and medium, but it allows communication to be judged
independently, on how well it fulfills the intent of its creation. Therefore, a
genre—or sub-genre—can be a sample of one. This crucial issue enables analysis
of individualized texts according to their elucidated purposes.
In
order to define good writing and media in digital space, Hailey recommended
determining the following questions:
(1) Why do we need
this? (2) How important is it? (3) What is this supposed to do and to whom? (4)
What is the best approach to presenting the information (Rhetoric and
Structure)? (5) What is the structure of the interaction? (6) How well does the
text do what is intended? (p. 68).
He demonstrated that once an
author, writer, consultant, scholar, or other professional communicator can
answer those questions, they know the genre of their text and can incorporate
the appropriate writing and media to meet the needs of the creators and the
users.
Hailey
called this heuristic EUPARS—an acronym for the exigency, urgency, purpose,
audience, rhetoric, and structure of the text. The practical, often humorous
applications saturating his book showed various means to—and not to—communicate
electronically. The method could be adjusted to look at other documents or the
various aspects of a document. This altered perspective recognized that any
aspect of a webpage can be a “text,” and allow practitioners to address or
provide feedback on each aspect within the design and layout of a digital
medium. When consultants or scholars provide feedback on a single webpage with
this theory, they give different feedback for the text according to their
purpose, not just their usability or ease of access.
Hailey moved
beyond providing categorical analysis and usability studies for the innumerable
digital genres by identifying three general types of writing in digital
environments. The choice of each writing style arises from the EUPARS analysis.
When analysts understand why the text is needed, what they want it to do, and
what the audience desires, they can work to produce effective content.
The first writing
style, Persuasion-centric writing, is designed to sell an expensive product or
a complicated idea. Writers must maintain the reader’s attention long enough to
persuade them to invest in the desired outcome through quality-centric, and
user-centric writing. Hailey identified narratives, customer reviews or
experiences, humor, films, and interactive media as tools to accomplish this
task, in addition to traditional writing.
Hailey encouraged
those writing for the second category, quality-centric writing, to write so their audience lingers and learns
from the text. The quality of the writing will keep the readers invested. Often
poor webpage designers focused so much on efficiently presenting the
information, that they ignored the need for superior writing. By focusing on
the structural layout of the page, they let it dominate the discussion (and
often the allotted budget), cutting and pasting the content from previous
materials or other areas of a website. Such quick repurposing and
regurgitations send the audience away, in spite of beautiful design.
User-centric
writing allows readers to quickly find information, answers, and learn relevant,
related information. Hailey used the example, “A good help file makes a good
model [of user-centric writing]. … Logical progression that is consistent from
topic to topic” (p. 220). Such efficient material satisfies the user’s
intellectual and emotional needs while building confidence. Like the other two
types of writing, “What makes … content generally good is the copywriters knew
what it was supposed to do and for whom” (p. 221).
In
practice, technical communicators accomplish their broad and changing
responsibilities through collaboration and teamwork. A well-balanced team compensates for
individual weaknesses, oversights, and preferences. With individuals who possess different
specialties, skills, and interests the different aspects of a task easily flow
as different people do what they are best at, and assist others with
feedback.
To accomplish excellent digital
writing, Hailey promoted the reinstatement of the writer as a vital member of
an agile team from the very beginning of a project.
Applying
Hailey’s theory to this review may help demonstrate the importance of his
theory. What is the exigency of this book review? Professional communicators
and their educators need to understand and apply effective theories to fulfill
their professional responsibilities and remain relevant. What is the urgency of
this book review? A timely and effective review can help the target audience
recognize if they should read Hailey’s book. What is the purpose of this text?
To contextualize and review the book; to persuade the audience members to read
or not read the text. Who is the audience? Readers of TCQ, including
professional technical communicators, educators, students, researchers, and
administrators. What is the rhetorical stance? This article should contain
persuasion-centric writing. What is the structure? It is a paper, formatted
using the APA style guide and TCQ’s publication recommendations. As readers of
this review, you now have the tools to determine if the text reached the
audience with persuasive writing and accomplished its purpose.
This book redefines
good web design, digital content creation, and will lead those who apply Hailey’s
rubric it to dramatically improve their media. I highly recommend this book for
those involved in writing digital media.
References
Anderson, P. V. (1987). Technical
writing: A reader-centered approach. Orlando, FL:
Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich, Inc.
Hailey, D. (2014). ReaderCentric writing for digital media:
Theory and practice. Amityville,
NY: Baywood
Publishing Company.
Miller, C. (1994) Genre as social
action. In A. Freedman & P. Medway (eds), Genre and
the new rhetoric (pp. 23-42). New York,
NY: Taylor and Francis Group.
