Website crashes on first viewing

THE new North Cyprus website is an accident waiting to happen and that’s a tragedy for everyone involved in marketing the country in these difficult times.

Your website is your portal on the world. It should be your calling card – spelling out your values and your unique attributes to potential customers. And, lest you think that I am speaking marketing mumbo-jumbo, let me stress: these matters are really important. The livelihood of this important sector is resting on this vital communications tool.

I was asked to take a look at the work, from the comfort of my overcast and cloudy Lincolnshire home. I was not impressed, certainly not from first impressions. Those are the ones that count, when a web-surfer makes a decision to stay or go within eight seconds or less of clicking on a new page. After all, one never gets a second chance to make a good first impression.

Initially, I was put off by the logo, which was difficult to read, and looked far too exotic, to the point of suggesting that I was engaging with an alien culture. I do not think I would normally have stayed on the site after that. So the designers had lost me in the first few seconds.

Having concentrated on the logo, I now get it. But I would never have understood the logic unless I was assessing the work in a professional capacity. As a consumer, I would just have gone elsewhere.

A tourism site has to sell security, e.g.: “English spoken here.” So the logo font is very confusing.

Remind me, what it is you are trying to sell? Worse, I had no idea to which the swiggle, above the title referred, at first sight.

The topic headings across the top of the screen were far too difficult to read, because they were small and capitalised. Why? Compare them with the font sizes or screen proportions of some of the world’s greatest websites, such as the Daily Telegraph. Conversely, the Northern Cyprus website’s impenetrable fonts are a real irritant.

After a time, I eventually got what the design team was trying to do. Fine. But when the design gets in the way of clarity, you’ve got a problem. Why are you making it difficult for potential consumers to read your words? Is it their fault? No, it’s yours.

I liked the moving pictures which dominate the homepage. However, again, the designers were putting style above substance. A fatal error. That’s because the images are in vision far too briefly. My feeble brain can’t take it all in. I think I remember a woman in a swimming pool, with lovely weather. But that’s it.

A stationary shot should be on screen for at least three seconds, and probably more. Anything less and the eye does not get enough time to fully comprehend the image. And, if you have a shot, such as a pan, moving, say, from left to right, it should begin and end with two or three seconds of a stationary view, again, to give the eye something to anchor on.

You need all those excellent images to be seared into the viewer’s mind. That simply is not happening at the moment. The site needs to talk to me, not at me. It’s not engaging.

The grammar of picture sequences should usually be: wideshot, mid-shot, tight-shot. Such an arrangement enables the mind to properly comprehend the scenario in question. If you don’t do this, the brain will simply reject the images as unconvincing, and will move on to something else.

Bear this grammatical lesson in mind next time you watch your favourite movie classic. This is what every aspiring multi-media journalist learns in college.

You can call me an old woman for wanting to see traditional BBC values in the movie edit, but this is basic communications practice. The problem with the design is – it’s being clever for the sake of it. What is it that you are trying to sell here? I want to buy security (in a dangerous world), I want fun, and I want, above all, memories. I think the content providers get that.

The image of the swimming pool model makes me think that this is a holiday destination for me (even though it was difficult to comprehend because of the poor movie editing).The high-quality images of the experience are great. But there are too many of them in too small a section (again, see how the BBC or the Times website uses pictures).

I was going to say that I was disappointed that as former scuba diver there were no underwater scenes. So I returned to the website, peered a little longer, and there was an image. Second one along. Actually, it is a wonderful shot. On closer inspection, that picture provides me with everything I need. It sells to me. But I have to work too hard to get what I want. So I’m going to move on, somewhere else. (The Maldives are looking pleasant at this time of year, and are great for snorkelling).

All of this proves, again, that the poor design is getting in the way of clear communication.

Therefore, from my cursory inspection, I would give the Northern Cyprus website seven out of ten for content – that’s an A-grade – and two out of ten for design. That’s an F. For fail.

As far as I am concerned, to use a sporting analogy, this product does not even get out of the starting gate. I am sorry to trash another professional’s work and feel bad about that. Bear in mind that I wish the people of North Cyprus well. I even considered buying a property there. (Lincolnshire is great for wide open spaces but the weather is not usually much to crow about).

I really, really, want you to succeed. But with all that opportunity in my heart to love this website, it just alienates me. I do not think the average web-surfer would spend much time on this product at all, in its present state. And that is very sad. It doesn’t have to be that way.

My message to the designers is simple: Stop trying too hard. Stop being too clever. Instead, be engaging, down to earth, and trustworthy. Be true to yourself, and your brand.

Tim Arnold is a former BBC reporter and Sky News presenter. He is now managing director of Arnold Broadcast, a media training and corporate PR company.