Features I liked and why: I really like the "Quoted" feature of the Web site. It sits on the left-hand side of the homepage and offers a snippet from a then-linked-to article. Very snazzy and a good way to draw in potential readers. Reminiscent of Time's verbatom section.
What's not working with the site: Updated content is in its own section below the main content cycler of the magazine (see image), which is confusing in regards to if the content is actually up-to-date or not (it is). The disconnect, while perhaps mitigated by the bold, black line segregating the two content types, is still frustrating and possibly limits the amount of time a reader spends on the site.
What's not there that I'd like to see: I would like to see an RSS feed, or something besides their Twitter update, so people know content is constantly updating, whether they can tell or not.
How the competitors' sites compare: W, V and Vanity Fair have more obviously fresher content than Interview, but the subscription pop-ups still persist, which are increasingly annoying.
W's content is recent, but, again, is under the content sneak-peaks for the magazine. I noticed that the magazine subscription advertisement on the right features a new handbag as an incentive for subscribing, although the image of Rhianna is the same.
V's site is very modern and easy to navigate, even though the basic header layout is the same as all the others. Overall, not much to update. Staff blogs have content not pertaining to me or featured in the print magazine, so I'm not sure what kind of supplement this provides.
Vanity Fair has started offering content from its next issue, which none of the other Web sites are currently offering, as well as a menagerie of other content. The site is simple at face value, but becomes confusing as the user navigates, as mentioned last post.
Overall, the competition is only doing what their competitors are doing: not taking chances.
No comments:
Post a Comment