Direct Mail Web Design

Client projects and tech blog posts about Direct Mail

Over the last year or so I've been asked to do an increasing amount of Facebook consulting. Most weeks I get a couple of emails asking for help and asking how this sort of consulting works so I thought I'd explain my experience.

First off: Facebook is not all that hard. Putting a great-looking Facebook page up to support your group, cause or school doesn't require any programming. But it can be confusing, partly because Facebook is always in-process. They keep adapting it and tweaking it. If you bought a book on Facebook campaigning a year ago, it would already be out of date.

My first job is to ask a few good questions about what you want to do on Facebook and then set up the beginnings of a site. I spend too much of my time already on Facebook but I also keep up with a lot of Facebook blogs and have recent copies of such wonderful tomes as "Facebook Marketing for Dummies." In most cases my job is to recommend a Facebook strategy based on best practices and then to start up a Facebook Page for you. There are certain flourishes I can give, such as picking a good icon or making a customized tab for first-time visitors. But the real value of Facebook is clients sharing information directly with their audience so my most important work is getting you excited about doing it yourself. I'm really just a cheerleader for you.

I typically spend anywhere from two to eight hours helping a client put together a Facebook page. If it looks like a project on the small end of the scale, I just charge the expected amount upfront. I do keep track of my time: if we go over a little bit, I let it slide; if we still have a bit of a balance then I'm there for ongoing questions. Facebook consulting is not the core of my business but it can be a nice break from a big six-month development project and it's helps with the cashflow. I'm also a naturally curious fellow so I like learning a little bit about the kinds of things.
Categories: Facebook , Practical 2.0
Tags: Best Practices, Consulting, Facebook, Page | Edit
Martin Profile Picture Many Friends will know me from my active involvement in the Quaker world. I've been dubbed the "Quaker Blogfather" for my Quaker Ranter (site) blog and my work in pulling together QuakerQuaker (site), an online magazine and blogging community with over five hundred members and 10,000 visitors a month. I am also a frequent Quaker workshop leader and published writer.

I started building websites in 1995 with an award-winning Nonviolence.org hub site and was a social media pioneer when I redesigned its homepage to a blog format three years later. Before going independent as MartinKelley.com in 2006, I served on the staff of Friends General Conference (site) for eight years, where I worked in the FGC Quaker bookstore and built the Quakerfinder, FGC Gathering and youth ministry sites. I also worked for Friends Journal (site) for two years, putting select articles from their Quaker magazine online every month. Since then I've been privileged to work with Quaker organizations such as Friends World Committee for Consultation (site), Friends Council on Education (site) and Haverford Friends Meeting (site). I've done some exciting media work with the Philadelphia Penn Charter School (site) and built personal sites for well known Friends. I bring our testimony of integrity to every business transaction and when I address topics such as search engine optimization or pricing philosophy, I try to do so from a Friends perspective.

Web Design Specialties:


Categories: quaker | Edit
Collected from LinkedIn:

"The list allowed me to click only three attributes, but for Martin I wanted to check them all. He is a wonderful, personable, creative person who also happens to be unflappable. I highly recommend his for web design." March 30, 2010

Tom Ferrick, Journalist/Publisher, Phlmetropolis.com
Hired Martin as a Graphic/Web Designer in 2009
Top Qualities: Great Results, Personable, Good Value.


"Martin has provided -- and continues to provide excellent service and consultation as a Web site developer. For my site on New York-based architecture and history, Mindfulwalker.com, I asked for some complex developments of and changes to a WordPress theme and the site installation. I received the service that I needed and more, and I'm very happy with the site today. Martin brings a variety of assets to his role: He is extremely knowledgeable and capable in programming and Web tools. He's also a good communicator, is very value-conscious about the service he delivers for the cost, and is understanding of client needs. Beyond this, Martin helped with some excellent tutorials as I took over the site. I plan to hire Martin again as I look forward to enhancements and additional developments for my site and business. Martin is excellent at what he does!" May 10, 2009

Susan DeMark, Journalist, Mindfulwalker.com
Hired Martin as a Graphic/Web Designer in 2007
Top qualities: Great Results, Good Value, High Integrity



"Martin provided great value in designing a website for my law practice. He was accessible and facilitated the process, despite our geographical distance, through email and telephone consultations. He was flexible in working with me to achieve what I was looking for within my budget." May 1, 2009

John Kindley, Lawyer.
Hired Martin as a Graphic/Web Designer in 2008
Top qualities: Personable, Good Value, High Integrity



"Martin is not only highly competent as a Web site developer, he's also one of the most honest and trustworthy people I've ever hired. I highly recommend Martin." April 30, 2009

James Maguire, Author, MaguireOnline.com
Hired Martin as a Graphic/Web Designer in 2006, and hired Martin more than once.
Top qualities: Great Results, Personable, Expert



"Martin has worked for our school to integrate Web 2.0 technologies into our communication materials. Martin is highly-personable and his is an expert in current technological approaches. This is a hard match to find in consultants." April 30, 2009

Michael Moulton, Technology Director, William Penn Charter School.
Hired Martin as a IT Consultant in 2007, and hired Martin more than once.
Top qualities: Personable, Expert, High Integrity.



"Martin has an outstanding grasp of everything there is to know about the internet. He is our "go-to" guy whenever we encounter something new and different, especially involving Web 2.0 and Search Engine optimization. He is also an experienced and skilled designer and has excellent PHP/CSS/HTML programming knowledge. Martin is a pleasure to work with in every respect!" May 1, 2009

Barbara Raphael, Founder/Owner, Raphael Webscapes, LLC.
Worked directly with Martin at Raphael Webscapes.
Categories: references
Tags: Architecture, Budget, Communication, Consultations, Go-To Guy, Graphic, Haddonfield, History, Honest, It Consultant, Journalist, Law Practice, Lawyer, Linkedin, New York City, Raphael Webscapes, School, Search Engine Optimization, Technology Directory, Trustworthy, Web 2.0, Web Designer, Website, Wordpress | Edit

I'd like to talk today about social media and nonprofits. I've had a couple of interesting projects lately helping nonprofits put together Facebook Pages, LinkedIn Groups and Twitter sites. I think this is an exciting way to reach out to audience members.

Today: Email Lists

Over the last few years we've focused on email lists. We all have big email lists--tens of thousands of users, segmented all sorts of different ways. We send out dozens of emails a week and they end up seeming not spam.

Facebook Pages

A new era is coming with social media. A big change is Facebook Pages. These are geared toward advertisers although you don't need to have a Facebook advertising campaign to use them. In March 2009, Facebook redesigned Pages to act much more like typical user profiles: there's a wall, there's an activity stream, and you can associate different applications with them.

Two things about Pages are exciting. One is the activity stream. People who sign up as "fans" of your Page see what you're putting out in their individual stream. They'll log into Facebook and see that messages like "Jen just got engaged!" or "Joe is having a bad hair day" and that your organization is having some great event coming up this weekend. You're seen in the association of happy news from their friends. It's different from a spammish email because it's coming in with the context of their friends, which is very powerful for publicity.

The other nice thing about Facebook Pages is that they're public. A lot of portions of Facebook aren't but making Pages public means you can point to them from your website or other social media campaigns.

I think Facebook fan groups are going to be the new email list. They are the way we'll be able to reach out to people. I'm very excited about this because there's all sorts of easy multimedia possibilities. You can integrate with Youtube, with Twitter, with podcasts, etc., embedded for fans of your Facebook page to see as it's happening. This is much more exciting than some of the emails that we send out. They are also more interactive because fans can post things on your fan walls so you can have conversations on your sites.

Intimate, immediate, engaging

What the smart nonprofits are going to be doing is a lot of posting in a style that's authentic and intimate and less worried about being slick than we've typically been.

What I would love to see nonprofits doing is to get serious about video. I'm not talking about fancy video, hauling in videographers for six months shooting a three minute slick commercial. Get an inexpensitve video recorder and start doing five minute interviews with the people your organization serves. This will differ depending on your organization's focus. One advantage to simple videos is that you can convince even the busiest of your interviewees to take out a few minutes. You make these videos and post them to Youtube, Vimeo or directly to Facebook video. It doesn't matter where they hosted but you'll have to make sure they're embedded on your Facebook fan page.

Building our Facebook Fan Page

How to direct? You can direct in the emails you're sending out or through other sources. Twitter is a great way of directing people to what's happening: you send out a 140-character "tweet" with an interesting tease about the video you've produced and a link to the Facebook fan page.

The whole goal is to get Facebook fans. Once you're in as a fan, you show up in their activity streams. All the fans get to see the events you're organizing, the videos. If you have extra tickets to an upcoming event, post about it because people will see it immediately. It's a wonderful way to reach people quickly in a way that's not as intrusive as email (I suspect a lot of younger users are actually checking their Facebook homepage more often than their emails!).

The New Nonprofit Outreach

I'd love to see a lot more of these intimate, almost home-made videos going up on Facebook fan pages and using fan pages as a way of connecting with people. We can think of these as the new email list.

I would strongly encourage nonprofits to use all of these these media to reinforce their message and to find new ways to reach their audiences in a much more engaging, intimate way.

--------------

Martin Kelley is a web developer and social media consultant specializing in nonprofits. This post is a loose transcription of his video, Nonprofits and Social Media. This essay is also available on the MartinKelley.com Facebook fan page.

Categories: Facebook , Niche Marketing , Practical 2.0
Tags: Activity Stream, Email, Facebook, Linkedin, Nonprofit, Outreach, Pages, Profits, Twitter, Youtube | Edit
I was recently working with a client who has a large Google Adwords campaign, with an annual ad budget in the low six figures. He's been very careful about the keywords he's chosen and we've both poured over the Google Analytics figures to see how the campaign progressed.

It took a third party keyword tracking system to discover that many of the ads were being served up to wrong keywords in the Google searches. I want to keep the client's identity private, so let me use an analogy: say you're a boomerang maker and you've bought a campaign intending ads to show up for those who search "boomerang" in Google. What we discovered is that Google was serving up a large percentage of these ads for searchers of "frisbees" -- close, but not close enough for searchers to care. Few people clicked on the misplaced ad. We're talking serious money wasted on ads served up to the wrong target audience.

How did a carefully constructed ad campaign get on so many poorly-targeted searches? Google allows fuzzy matching under their broad match guidelines:
For example, if you're currently running ads on the broad-matched keyword web hosting, your ads may show for the search queries web hosting company or webhost. The keyword variations that are allowed to trigger your ads will change over time, as the AdWords system continually monitors your keyword quality and performance factors. Your ads will only continue showing on the highest-performing and most relevant keyword variations.
You can disable these broad searches using negative keywords (i.e., "-frisbee") and with specific keywords ("boomerang").

But Google does not make it easy to see just where your ads are going. You have to set up a special Search query performance report. It's really essential that anyone doing a large Google Ad campaign set up one of these searches and have it automatically emailed to them every month. Google clearly wasn't tracking the "performance" of its broad search on this client's ad. I'm particularly disturbed that we didn't see these misdirected keywords listed in the Google Analytics tracking reports. It is dangerous to use the same company to both sell you a service and to report how well it's been doing.

Credit where it's due: it was the excellent long-tail blog content service Hittail that gave us the information that Google was misdirecting its ads. See my previous Hittail coverage.
Categories: Analytics , Beyond SEO
Tags: Adwords, Analytics, Hittail, Performance, Report, Search | Edit
Web 2.0 tools have changed the boundary lines between techies and program staff in many nonprofits over the past few years. At least, they should have, though I know of various organizations that haven't made the conceptual leap to the new roles.

OLD SCHOOL: Webmaster

Let me explain by talking about my own changing work role. Even a few years ago, I was a paid staff webmaster. You could divide my work into two large categories. The first was techie: I managed server accounts, set up required databases, designed sites. I got into the HTML code, the PHP, the Javascript, CSS, etc.

The other was content: when program-oriented staff had new material they wanted on the website they would email it to me or walk it over. I would put in my work queue, where it might sit for weeks if it wasn't an organizational priority. When it came time to add the material I would boot up Dreamweaver, a relatively expensive program that was only accessible from my laptop and I would put the material onto the website. Needless to say, with a process like this some parts of the website never got very much attention.

At some point I start sneaking in a content management system for frequently-changed pages. This seemed very hackish and not good at first but over time I realized it greatly speeded up my turn-around time for basic text content. But the organizations I worked for still relied on the old model, where staff give the webmaster content to put up.

NEW SCHOOL: Web Developer

Nowadays I'm a web developer, a freelancer with an ever changing list of clients. I typically spend about a month putting together a site based on a content management (like this) or automatic feed system (like I did for Philadelphia's William Penn Charter School). I do a certain amount of training and while I might add a little content for testing purposes, I step back at the end of the process to let the client put the material up themselves. I'm available for questions but I'm surprised about how rarely I'm called.

Here's two examples. Steadyfootsteps is a blog by an American physical therapist in Vietnam. When we started, she didn't even have a digital camera! I gave her advice on cameras, started her on a Flickr account, set up a fairly generic Movable Type blog with some custom design elements and answered all the questions she had along the way. She went to town. She's put tons of pictures and embedded Youtube videos right in posts. Here's a non-techie who has contributed a lot to the web's content!

Penn Charter is a school that was already on Flickr and Youtube but wanted to display the content on their website in an attractive way. I pulled together all the magic of feeds and javascripts to have a media page that showcases the newest material.

They're very different sites, but in neither instance does the client contact me to add content. They rely on easy-to-use Web 2.0 services: no specialized HTML knowledge required.

NEW TOOLS, OLD MODEL

I got an email not so long ago from an old boss who manages a monthly magazine. Her site has been radically rebuilt over the years. Dreamweaver is out and content management is in. They use Drupal, which my friend Thomas T. of the Philadelphia Cultural Alliance tells me won the recent popularity contest among nonprofit techies. This is great, a definite step forward, but what confused me is that my old boss was asking me whether I would be interested in returning to my old job (the successor who oversaw the Drupal upgrade is leaving).

They still have a webmaster? They still want to funnel website material through a single person? Every staffperson there is adept at computers. If a physical therapist can figure out Flickr and Movable Type and Youtube, why can't professional print designers and editors?

My hourly rate ranges from two to five times what she'd be likely to pay, so I turned her down. But I did ask why she wanted a webmaster. Now that they're on Drupal it seems to me that they'd be better off switching from the webmaster to the web developer staffing model: hire me as a freelance consultant to do troubleshooting, staff training and the occassional special project but have the regular fulltime staff do the bulk of the content management. I'd think you'd end up with a site that's more lively and updated and that the cost would about the same, despite my higher hourly rates.

I've heard enough stories of places where secretaries have come out of the shadows to embrace content management and have helped transform websites. I'm the son of a former secretary so I know that they're often the smartest employees at any firm (if you walk into an office looking for the expert on advanced Excel features you'll surely find them sitting right there behind the receptionist desk).


FINALLY: WHAT'S UP WITH DRUPAL?

I'm trying to join the bandwagon and use Drupal for a upcoming site that will have about a dozen editors. But there's no built-in WYSIWYG editor, no little formatting icons. Sure, I myself could easily hand-code the HTML and make it look nice. But I don't want to do that. And it's unrealistic to think I'm going to teach a dozen overworked secretaries how to write in HTML. The interface needs to work more or less like Microsoft Word (as it does in Movable Type, CushyCMS, Google Docs, etc.)

Most Drupal sites I see seems from the outside like they're still old school: staff webmaster through whom most content funnels. Is this right? Because if so, this is really just an institutionalization of the content hack I did six years ago. Can anyone point me to lively, active Drupal sites whose content is being directly added by non-techie office staff? If so, how is it set up?
Categories: Drupal , Practical 2.0 , Web Design
Tags: Css, Dreamweaver, Drupal, Flickr, Javascript, Movable Type, Penn Charter, Philadelphia, Php, School, Web 2.0, Web Developer, Youtube | Edit

Last weekend I found myself with the scenario no solo web designer wants to be faced with: a dead laptop. It was eighteen months old and while it was from Hewlett Packard, a reputable company, it's always had problems over overheating. Like a lot of modern laptop makers, HP tried to pack as much processor power as they could into a sleek design that would turn eyes on the store shelf. They actually do offer some free repairs for a list of half a dozen maladies caused by overheating but not for my particular symptoms. When I have a free afternoon, a big pot of coffee and lots of music queued up I'll give them a call and see if I can talk them into fixing it.

Once upon a time having a suddenly dead computer in the middle of a bunch of big projects would have been disaster. But over the last few years I've been putting more and more of my data "in the cloud," that is: with software services that store it for me.

Email in the Cloud

I used to be a die-hard Thunderbird fan. This is Firefox's cousin, a great email client. I would take such great care transfering years of emails every time I switched machines and I spent hours building huge nested list of folders to organize archived messages. About a year ago Thunderbird ate about three months of recent messages, some quite crucial. At that time I started using Google's Gmail as backup. I set Gmail to pick up mail on my POP server and leave it there without deleting it. I set Thunderbird to leave it there for week. The result was that both messages would be picked up by both services.

After becoming familiar with Gmail I started using it more and more. I love that it doesn't have folders: you simple put all emails into a single "Archive" and let Google's search function find them when you need them.You can set up filters, which act as saved searches, and I have these set up for active clients.

Why I'm happy now: I can log into Gmail from any machine anywhere. No recent emails are lost on my old machine.

Project Management in the Cloud

I use the fabulous Remember the Milk (RTM) to keep track of projects and critical to-do items. Like Gmail I can access it from any computer. While messing around setting up backup computers has set me back about ten days, I still know what I need to do and when I need to do it. I can review it and give clients renewed timelines.

An additional advantage to using Remember the Milk and Gmail together is the ability to link to emails. Every email in Gmail gets its own URL and every saved "filter" search gets its own URL. If there's an email I want to act on in two weeks, I set up a Remember the Mail task. Each task has a optional field for URLs so I put the the email's Gmail URL in there and archive the email so I don't have to think about it (part of the Getting Things Done strategy). Two weeks later RTM tells me it's time to act on that email and I follow the link directly there, do whatever action I need to do and mark it complete in RTM.

Project Notes in the Cloud

I long ago started keeping notes for individual projects in the most excellent Backpack service. You can store notes, emails, pictures and just about anything in Backpack and have it available from any computer. You can easily share notes with others, a feature I frequently use to create client cheatsheets for using the sites I've built. Now that I use Gmail and it's URL feature, I put a link to the client's Gmail history right on top of each page. Very cool!

Another life saver is that I splurge for the upgraded account that gives me secure server access and I keep my password lists in Backpack. There's a slight security risk but it's probably smaller than keeping it on a laptop that could be swiped out of my bag. And right now I can log into all of my services from a new machine.

Keeping the Money Flowing from Clouds

The latest Web 2.0 love of my life is Freshbooks, a service that keeps track of your clients, your hours and puts together great invoices you can mail to them. I'm so much more professional because of them (no more hand written invoices in Word!) and when it's billing time I can quickly see how many unbilled hours I've worked on each project and bang!-bang!-band! send the invoices right out. Because the data is online, I was able to bill a client despite the dead computer, providing my exact hours, a detailed list of what I had done, etc.

Others

Calendar: I always go back and forth between loving Google Calendar and the calendar built into Backpack. Because I can never make up my mind I've used ICal feeds to cross-link them so they're both synced to one another. I can now use whichever is most convenient (or whichever I'm more in the mood to use!) to add and review entries.

Photos: Most of the photos I've taken over the past four years are still sitting on my dead laptop waiting for me to find a way to get them off of the harddrive. As tragic as it would be to loose them, 903 of my favorite photos are stored on my Flickr account. And because I emailed most of them to Flickr via Gmail most of those are also stored on Gmail. I will do everything I can to get those lost photos but the worst case scenario is that I will be stuck with "only" those 900.

Your Examples?

I'd love to hear how others are using "the cloud" as real-time backup.

Categories: Practical 2.0 , Windows to Mac
Tags: Calendar, Flickr, Freshbooks, Gmail, Hp, Laptop, Remember The Milk | Edit
One of the neatest observations to gain popularity in the last few years is that of The Long Tail, first coined a few years ago by Wired magazine editor Chris Anderson (here's the original article). He noticed that the internet had opened up access to niches--that searches and national distribution networks had given new markets to obscure and small-market products. The classic example is Netflix, the direct-mail movie rental service, that has a huge catalog of titles, the great majority of which are so obscure that no local video rental store could afford to carry them. But Netflix actually rents them all and if you add all these low-volume rentals together you'll find the total volume exceeds that season's blockbusters.
I learned just how strong the long tail can be a few years ago when I worked on Quakerfinder.org, a meeting/church look-up service. For the first year, the site got moderate traffic from search engines. Google wasn't able to index the actual church listings because users were required to type towns and postal codes in to get results. The only search engine visitors we got came in on very generic phrases like "find quaker meetings."

Suspecting we were losing a large potential audience, I redesigned the site so Google could index each and every meeting (adding a few tricks so each listing traded links with half-a-dozen other listings). Once the change was in effect (help from our programmer), those old generic search phrases were still the most popular. But now we got small numbers of visits on thousands of terms which we hadn't hit before: "Quakers Poughkeepsie" and "Quaker Churches in San Francisco," etc. This was the long tail in effect. Our visits jumped fourfold within a few months (see chart). The long tail made us much more visible. (More on the Googlization effort in that year's analytic report.)

A great new traffic analysis service is called HitTail. Like many other programs it tells you what search phrases have brought traffic to your site. But what's cool is that it gives suggestions--keywords it thinks will bring even more visitors in. Some of the suggestions are funny. For example, it thinks I should post about "traditional sweat lodge songs," "ticklish armpits" and "how to dress with personality" over on Quaker Ranter. But it also thinks I might consider posting on "small church local outreach ideas," "new online magazines" and "christian quakers."

If all one was worried about was sheer traffic volume, then a post on each keyword might be in order. But this would bring a lot of random traffic and dilute any focus the blog might have (I already get a lot of traffic on a particular non-typical post that I wrote partly as an SEO experiment). My guess is you should go through the HitTail suggestions list to find topics that match your site's focus but do so in language that you might not normally use.

I might try some experimental posts on my personal blog soon. I'll definitely report back about them here on the MartinKelley.com design blog. In the meantime, check out HitTail's blog, which has some good links.
Categories: Beyond SEO
Tags: Direct Mail, Moderate Traffic, Netflix, Niches, Original Article, Rents, Search Engines Google | Edit
RSS Syndication feeds are small web files that summarize the latest posts to a particular blog or news site. They're a central repository of basic information: title, author, post date, a summary of the post and sometimes the whole post itself. You can open these files directly (here's the raw file for this blog) but you'll see there's a hierarchy of coding that makes it visually uninteresting.

Syndication feeds are the lingua franca powering all the cool new websites. It doesn't matter what blogging platform you use or what operating system you're on: if your software provides an RSS feed I can mix and match it and use it to pull in content to my site.

Examples 1: Photographs: I email all of my adorable kid pictures to the photo sharing site Flickr, which then provides a syndication feed ("here"). I use a little fancy patch of coding on my website to pull in the information about the latest photos (location, caption, etc) so that I can display them on my homepage. Whenever you go to my Theo age you'll see the latest Flickr photos of him.

Example 2: Bookmarks. I also use the "social bookmarking" system with the odd name of del.icio.us. When I find a page I want to bookmark, I click a Delicious button in my browser, which opens a pop-up window. I write a description, pick a category or two and hit save. Deliciouis then provides an RSS syndication feed which I can use to pull together a list of my latest bookmarks and display it on my website. Wave a few magic wands of complication (pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!) and you have the main trick behind Quakerquaker.org.

I've simplified both examples a bit but you probably get the point. Syndication feeds are the secret behind blog readers like Bloglines and email subscription services like the one's I provide for quakerquaker.org.

New to me is the concepts around the Well-Formed Web. As described by Kevin Donahue "The layman's premise of the Well-Formed Web is that each site will have drill-down feeds - a top level feed, item specific feeds, and so on." What this means is that you don't just have one single RSS feed on a site (your latest ten posts) but RSS feeds on everything. Every category get its own unique feeds (e.g., the last ten posts about web design) and every post gets its own unique feed tracking its comments (e.g., this feed of comments from my "Introducing MartinKelley.com" post). It certainly seems a bit like overkill but computers are doing all the work and the result gives us a multi-dimensionality that we can use to pull all sorts of neat things together.

Categories: Practical 2.0 , RSS Syndication
Tags: Adorable Kid, Blog, Blogging, Caption, Email, Flickr, Hierarchy, Lingua Franca, Mix And Match, News Site, Operating System, Photo Sharing, Raw File, Rss Syndication, Web | Edit
A 2004 Denominational Website Report

When I wrote this in the Fall of 2004, I was working as the webmaster for Friends General Conference, the US/Canadian denominational body for the liberal branch of unprogrammed Quakers. As webmaster, I felt that one of my most important responsibilities was to understand how religious seekers use the internet and how our nonprofit organization could benefit from understanding these patterns.

My 2004 report on the three FGC websites touched on a lot of these issues. I offer it here because I hope it can give other nonprofit and denominational websites some ideas about how to measure their site's use. Too often we put up websites without any follow-up analysis of their use. You just can't make an effective website like this and if your work is ministry you don't want its reach constrained by minor navigational design issues. Please feel free to use the comment page to start a discussion on any of these issues.

State of the Websites

Report for FGC Central Committee, October 2004
By Martin Kelley, webmaster

It's important to start off with a little editorial about why we need reports like this. We put up a website and we know people use it. Why bother spending time collecting data?

The internet is simultaneously vague and precise. We can say definitively that the FGC website received 114,097 "unique visitors" in the past fiscal year. But how many people does that represent? Is that a high number or low number? How did these users react when they came to the site. Did they think to themselves "whoops, not what I want" and leave, or did they go "wow, what's this FGC?, hey this is great." LESSON: We need data to know if the site is being used well.

Everyone who reads this report is by definition an insider. None of us are able to step into the shoes of an unknowledgeable seeker. In my study of usage patterns, I have found that the differences in website use between Quaker insiders and seekers is so great that they might as well be looking at different websites, if not different media altogether (see How Insiders and Seekers Use the Quaker Net. Because of this gap we cannot design the site based on whims or personal preferences. It is incredibly difficult to imagine how newcomers might navigate the site. We can only consider the design of the site after we've examined in usage, both in detail (actual users moving through the site) and in aggregate (pages and links visited over periods of time). See also: How to measure the peace movement. LESSON: We can only effectively design the site if we incorporate sophisticated and detailed data about how the site is being used.


Part 2, Googlization

By far the most significant change in our websites over the past year has been the "googlization" of Quakerbooks and Quakerfinder, both of which now have over four times the visitors they were getting last year.

The Google Problem: Both Quakerbooks and Quakerfinder have had great content from their start. The former lists the entire inventory of FGC's bookstore, along with book descriptions and reader commentary. The latter has our list of meetings--addresses, worship times, and contact information. But on both sites the bulk of the content was locked up in databases. Before users could benefit from the sites, they had to find them. This limited much of the use to people who already know about FGC and our resources. Because internet search engines can't search website databases (a problem known as the hidden or deep web), they could index only a limited number of pages on these sites and they made referrals on only the most generic search phrases (e.g., "quaker bookstore" "quaker meeting directory").

We made various changes to both sites (technical details below) that have made them searchable by Google and the other search engines, which now return our sites for very specific search queries, e.g., "Quakers in conflict Ingle" and "Quakers Poughkeepsie".

A Wider, More Inclusive Audience: What's great is that this has given us not just a bigger audience, but our target audience. Most of these visitors don't know enough about how Friends are organized to even know where to look for information. With Quakerfinder and Quakerbooks, we're now be visible on their terms.

We're giving them the basic information they're seeking and we're doing it when they are actively seeking it. This last point is important. I spend a lot of time watching how people use websites. If you email someone out of the blue with a link to a website, they might follow it but only half-heartedly. They might be doing five other things at the same time and they rarely stay to full use the website's resources. When someone comes to a site via a search engine they're much more likely to look around: this is the visit that they are initiating because they have something specific they're trying to find.

Having a "googlified" Quakerfinder means we're actually reaching people who are ready to try out a Quaker meeting and we're giving them that most basic information that's often hard to find. With a searchable Quakerbooks we're selling books to people who might not even have thought about Quakers as a possible spiritual path. I suspect that both sites are doing more outreach about Quakerism than any of us expect.

Update, 11/29/04: I recently met someone who came to Friends after reading the Quaker entry in Wikipedia. He had gone through the list of religious denominations in the U.S. till he found one that spoke to his condition. In the past month FGC has gotten 57 visitors from Wikipedia.

The Fixes

In the official committee report I tried to steer clear of too many technical details since I wanted people to read it. So I'll expand on them here on the website version.

Unique Domains: I don't think it really helped to give Quakerfinder.org and Quakerbooks.org their own domains, at least initially. In last year's report I noted that most of the traffic to those sites came from the main FGCQuaker.org site and that the separate domains weren't particularly useful. Now the sites do have their own sort of identity, thanks to the "googlization," which was a different process for the two sites.

Quakerbooks.org: Visitors to the Quakerbooks.org site are given session IDs to allow us to follow along with them as they make their selections. Since some users don't allow cookies, this ID sometimes appears in the URL (it appears as something like "?sessionid=1514" appended to the end of the address). Google really hates session IDs because its automated software doesn't know if the different URLs are different pages (to be indexed separately) or merely different sessions looking at the same page. So Googles just ignores anything that looks like this. The easiest fix is to have the software look to see if the visitor is Google and take of the session IDs (Google is okay with this workaround; I also used this method to allow them to index my Nonviolence.org discussion board.)

Quakerfinder: On Quakerfinder.org, the problem was that visitors had to type in a zip code to get to any of the content. Google's not that interactive and only follows links. Until recently, it thought there was only three pages to the site. To fix this we set up an alternative way to navigate the site: from the homepage you can now follow a link to lists of Quaker Meetings by state. The zip code lookup is so much more convenient that we don't suspect many live people will look up by state, but Google will and because of this it now lists 808 pages on the site. Now Google acts as a alternate lookup service, one that doesn't depend on people finding our site beforehand.


Part 3, Comparing the Sites

Visitors

The basic measure used to measure website traffic is that of the "unique visitor," which counts user sessions. Here are this year's comparisons to last year's. Numbers represent the monthly average "unique visitors" to each of our three websites.

     Site	      FY 03/04 total  FY 02/03 total  Increase
FGCQuaker.org 114,097 82,747 38%
Quakerfinder.org 48,084 23,964 100%
Quakerbooks.org 69,924 19,332 262%

The last two sites have truly remarkable jumps. The numbers are a little misleading, however, as the increase in traffic hasn't been gradual but sudden and climbing. Compare the last full month (September 2004) with the same month the previous year and all three sites have higher jumps.

     Site             Sept 04         Sept 03         Increase
FGCQuaker.org 9459 8254 15%
Quakerfinder.org 8782 1997 340%
Quakerbooks.org 7498 1611 366%

While the internet grows in use every year, the increases on Quakerfinder and Quakerbooks represent a quantum leap over that incremental increase. They represent "search engine optimization" of those sites, or what we all refer to the "googlization" of the sites.

Links:

One way of measuring the visibility of a website is to count how many other webpages link to it. Here are

     Site              October 2004    October 2003    Increase
FGCQuaker.org 496 396 25%
Quakerfinder.org 196 46 326%
Quakerbooks.org 151 96 57%

For comparison: Quaker.org is up to 11,900 links, Phila. Yearly Meeting is 248, PendleHill.org is 420, FCNL.org is 10,200, Nonviolence.org is 20,900 and AFSC.org is 21,800. See Miscellaneous & Notes at end to see how numbers were obtained. See How Can We Measure the State of the Peace Movement? for more on this method of measurement.


Part 4, The FGCQuaker.org Site

Visitors

Use of FGCQuaker.org continues to grow at a good clip. We have a 38% increase this fiscal year compared with last's. The site received over 114,000 unique visitors from October 1, 2003 to September 30, 2004.

To the right is the chart showing unique visitors by month for the past three years:

Referrers: Where did visitors come from?

In September 2004, there were 9459 "unique visits" to the FGCQuaker.org site, still our most-visited site. Here's where they came from.

1021 from Quakerfinder.org. One surprise this year is the jump in Quakerfinder-referred visits. This is due of course to the phenomenal visibility of that site. In a recent one-month period, FGCQuaker received 983 visits from Quakerfinder links, two-thirds of which came from the "googlized" Quakerfinder pages. About one in ten visitors are now coming to FGCQuaker through Quakerfinder. Up 288% from last year.

842 from Google. We get a lot of Google traffic because we have a lot of content on our site: dozens of pamphlets, years worth of FGConnections, large parts of the old Fostering Vital Friends Meetings resource binder. Visitors via search engines often don't know FGC exists but they want to know about our programs and work. Because FGC does such great work (and because we publicize it online!), many of our resources answer questions people have. I think this is great outreach.

Here's an example. This Spring I noticed that we were getting visits on fairly generic searches for racism. Here's a list of search inquiries that brought people to the CMR pages on FGC:

"ending racism"
"racially diverse communities"
"quaker racial diversity"
"diversity in friends"
"ethnic diversity"
"responsibilities to racism"
"pastoral care racism"
"activities for ending racism"
"testimonies racial unity"

This is a fascinating list precisely because these are generic searches. People aren't looking for "Quakers ending racism," they're looking for anyone "ending racism" and Google is bringing them to us (we're number 6 on that search term). This is surprising: I would think the much bigger denominations would all have committees ending racism that would come up higher just because of their larger institutional clout. That we are so high suggests that this work is not as common as I we might hope and that Friends might have the opportunity to play a role in larger faith dialogues.

When people use search engines, they get results from all over the FGC website. Searches might pull up some four-year article on FGConnections, or one of the "Friends And..." pamphlets that we've put online. Google up 12% from last year. There were about 83 more visits from regional Google sites.

434 from Quaker.org. Most of these people are coming directly from the Quaker.org homepage to the FGCQuaker.org homepage. I estimate that about 60% of these visitors leave the FGC site without clicking on any links. They're probably just superficially curious about us, but not enough to look around the site. Up 39% from last year.

253 from other search engines: 118 from Yahoo (118), MSN (74), AOL (42), Ask (19).

81 from Beliefnet. Beliefnet has a popular "Belief-o-Matic" quiz that will magically tell you what religious faith you should join. It's rigged in such a way that a lot of people unexpectedly come up as Quaker. The qui zthen directs people to an information page on Friends, which includes some links to FGC. Most of the Beliefnet visitors are coming from that information page directly to the FGC homepage. Up 200% from last year.

69 from UVa's Religious Movements site. This is a pretty good description of Quakerism

60 from Quakerbooks. Our own bookstore website attracts a lot of new people who aren't part of the established Quaker networks and many of them first learn of FGC this way.

53 from Religious Tolerance. A popular website from a Canadian Unitarian that profiles religions..

52 from QuakerInfo.org. This is the Philadelphia Quaker Information Center, a joint project of a number of Quaker organizations, including FGC.

Where did people go?

Top Destinations in September 04:
* To the homepage: 2396;
* Library's "Welcome to Quakerism" pages: 463;
* A&O "Resources for Meetings": 320 (prominently linked from Quakerfinder);
* Gathering pages: 309;
* "Silent Worship Quaker Values" tract on the Library section;
* Gathering's pictures from last year: 149;
* Religious Ed: 149;
* FGConnections articles: 129;
* Ideas for First Day School": 127;
* Advancement & Outreach homepage: 124;
* Young Quakes: 118;
* Publications: 100;
* Development 97.

These are pretty typical numbers. The only significant variation over the year comes in Spring, when traffic to the Gathering pages goes up. In May 2004, 961 people visited the Gathering homepage, and 355 visited the workshop listings.

Forget the Aggregates: How Do People Use the Site?

So far I've looked at tallied-up numbers: how many people visited, how many pages were looked at. The problem with this sort of statistic is that it doesn't give us a feel for how individuals are actually using the site. Looking at usage explodes the preconceptions that many of us "Insider Quakers" might bring to the web.

The first lesson: most people don't come into our site via the FGC homepage. Even more shocking: close to half never even see the homepage! This blew me away when I first realized it. We spend so much time designing the homepage and wondering how we're going to direct seekers from it but a lot of this work is in vain.

Of that 45% or so that enter the site via the FGC homepage, most of them leave the site immediately without following any link whatsoever.

Let's splice this another way: 70% of the people who hit our site (wherever they enter) don't look at any page other than that first one. They don't click on anything but the back button.

What are some of the lessons on this: one is that content is all important. Those majority of visitors who bypass the homepage to parachute directly inside the site are coming for specific information. Many of them don't know anything about FGC and most of them don't care to learn about FGC the organization. They're looking for some specific piece of information on Quakers ("painting of Pennsylvania Abolitionist Society Quakers" and "Quakers prison reform"), or on religious education in general ("religious meeting"), or on how churches are dealing with racism ("racial diversity" and "do blacks worship with only blacks"). These are all search phrases that have brought visitors to FGCQuaker.org. So it's great that we have our pamphlets online and FGConnections and RE materials and A&O brochures. There are hundreds of pages on our site, most of which we probably forget are there, but Google knows them and will display them up when the query is right.

Another lesson is that we shouldn't rely on our homepage to help visitors navigate. We shouldn't even worry much about using how its design will work for both insiders and seekers: most of the seekers never even go there. Most of the people coming to the FGC homepage are looking for FGC the organization.

Committee Page Case Study: One committee, Advancement & Outreach, is considering redesigning their committee page. In preparation I've looked at the usage and I think it makes a good case study. The A&O committee gets the most visible link on the FGC Homepage (top left, it gets this position because the committee list is alphabetical). Despite this prominence, almost no visitors actually follow this link. Only 1.5% of visitors to the FGCQuaker.org site ever get to the A&O homepage and even at that it's the most visited committee page on our site!

Most of the visitors that did get to the A&O page left without clicking on anything. It is safe to say that most of those visitors didn't thoroughly read through the page. The most-followed link is the first one, for the "Inreach/Outreach" review. In the one-month period I examined only 9 people followed this link! This doesn't mean A&O material isn't used: Quakerfinder is very successful and the pamphlet "Resources for Local meetings" is popular. And over 300 people in this month came to some part of the A&O site. Committee pages are useful for the relative trickle of Quaker insiders who visit the page, but we should focus more on the content committees are producing.

The lesson is clear: visitors are primarily looking for 1) good useful content from the "Quaker Library" resources and 2) practical information about the Gathering. Pages about committees and internal FGC workings are not well used. We need to continue the focus on practical resources. We also have to accept that people will not be looking at what we think they should be looking at. Through these visits we will slowly build up FGC's reputation but many people only dimly know what they're looking at.

What I didn't say in the report

In my official FGC report, I only hinted at the differences between institutional websites and focused online new media sites.

One surprising find that didn't make it into the report is that the three most-viewed pages on my own Quaker Ranter site were seen by more people than all but the two most-viewed FGC pages. The most viewed pages on FGCQuaker are the homepage and the Welcome to Quakerism page. Three of the pages on "Quaker Ranter" are seen by more people than any other page on the FGC website. FGC's Religious Education and Advancement and Outreach and Publications pages all are more obscure than my homepage or my "resources on plain dress" directory.

Institutional websites by their very nature have too many conflicting audiences and too timid a voice to act as much more than a reference resource. The Friends General Conference website is probably more friendly to seekers than most other institutional websites out there but even it gets a lot of people hitting the "back" button as soon as they hit the homepage.

Religious seekers are looking for individual voices with something to say and I suspect new media seeker websites will only become more important as time goes on. I suspect this will come as a surprise to institutional insiders as it happens. Sort of relatedly, see my Peace and Twenty-Somethings for some of the generational aspects of this shift. My Books and Media section collects similar sorts of essays.

One more piece in this: the FGC websites didn't get a lot of blog traffic. If all I were was the webmaster of Friends General Conference, I'd assume that all this blog talk in the media was hype. But as the "Quaker Ranter" I know that a popular blog and/or personal site can get a lot of readers. The lesson here is that there's little cross-over. Blogs seem to send little traffic to institutional websites and vice versa (actually institutional websites can't really send people to bloggers for a variety of reasons). I've had a number of people read my blog and declare they'll be coming to the next FGC Gathering so I know personal blogs can help raise organization profiles but that interest doesn't manifest itself as an immediately-followed link. I suspect the community being formed by the blogs is far more important than the raw number of referral links.


Part 5, Quakerbooks.org and Quakerfinder.org

Quakerbooks.org

The first of our two sites to be "googlified" was Quakerbooks.org. I had long hoped to have our book listings show up on the search engines, especially since we carry a lot of hard-to-find ones. I had opened up the discussion board of my peace site to Google and been happy with the results.

Back in early 2003 we installed new software by Steve Beuret to power the bookstore website, one that would allow easy transfer of information between the website and our inventory program. The website could now list whether a book was in stock, and orders would go directly into the system (no more retyping them!). Once the new system was running smoothly, I emailed Steve about optimizing it for Google. There were two parts to this: having the books show up (Steve) and linking them in such a way that Google would index them properly (me). It took awhile to get ito all working but on December 17, 2003 Google came through and indexed the site.

The most visited pages are the introductory ones:

  • Welcome to Quakerism
  • Becoming a Member
  • Basics for Everyone

The search phrases that are bringing in visitors used to be generic ("quaker bookstore") they now are very specific. September's list is typical:

  • crash by jerry spinnelli
  • Andrew Goldsworthy
  • celebration of discipline
  • the misfits by james howe
  • rufus jones

I knew we'd show up high in the Google rankings for obscure books but I've been pleased that we're right up there with Amazon and Barnes and Noble even with mainstream books.

Our online best sellers are pretty

  • Grounded in God: Care And Nurture In Friends Meetings
  • Friends for 350 Years
  • The Quaker Way
  • Philadelphia Faith and Practice
  • Listening Spirituality Volume 1
  • Silence and Witness
  • The Journal of George Fox

The bookstore inventory software is not very good at pulling marketing statistics. While it's very good at telling us what books have sold and what books need to be reordered, it won't tally up things by type of sale (phone vs. web vs. mail-order). The bookstore report should include more information on actual web sales.

Anecdotally it appears as if about half our web orders are new customers. Many of them are from geographic areas which are not traditionally Quaker. A&O has produced a flyer which goes into orders for new customers.

Quakerfinder.org

After we saw how successful the "googlization" of Quakerbooks was, I thought we should try it for Quakerfinder. It took a little seasoning to get everyone on A&O to sign off on the project but I am delighted to say they saw their way clear. The result has been nothing sort of amazing. Use of the site has grown by 340%. But the actual numbers are even more important: by my best estimate, over 6000 a month are using Quakerfinder who would not have even found the resource if we hadn't made it search engine friendly. That's 72,000 people a year--twice FGC's membership, and these are the EXTRA people coming. Altogether at our current rate, this site is being used by over 100,000 unique visitors. Even if only one in ten of them make it to a Meeting, that's a lot of people.

In last year's report I pointed out that most of Quakerfinder's traffic was coming from the FGC site. At that point, it didn't looking like giving the location look-up utility it's own domain name was paying off in any tangible way. Now it's clearly worth it. Just the extra 600 or so visitors Quakerfinder is throwing to FGCQUaker.org site makes it worth it! Horray!

Twenty Times the Google-Linked Visits: I compared two typical months, one before and the other after the "search engine optimization." In May 2004 Quakerfinder received 241 visitors from Google searches (footnote 1). In September, it received 3813 visitors--that's over twenty times the visits. Overall visits almost tripled, from 2292 to 6037, with 60% of those extra visitors directly attributed to the Google bounce. The chart to the left shows daily Google-referred visits since the middle of March.

More Than Just Google: Other search engines were affected too: all together search engine visits went from from 311 in May to 4134 in September. For those interested, the top five search engines for Quakerfinder traffic are:

  • Google.com 83%
  • AOL: 5%
  • Google Canada: 3%
  • Yahoo: 1%
  • Comcast: 0.8%

As you can see, Google far overwhelms everyone else, which is why we often just call this "the googlization" of Quakerfinder!


Part 6, Miscellaneous and Notes

Miscellaneous

Mailing Lists

Late in the fiscal year, we purchased bulk email software. No, we're not going to try to sell Viagra or a new home mortgage. This program will help us get information out to our bookstore customers and committee lists. Our occasional bookstore emails ("Book Musings from Lucy") have been very well received, with only a tiny fraction of recipients asking to be taken off the list.

Web Host Changes

A big project, though not very exciting, is that we're changing our web hosting company. FGCQuaker.org is with the new company (OLM)and Quakerfinder.org and Quakerbooks.org will be moving shortly. The new company organizes our accounts better and we hope that their service is better. (We'd recommend avoiding Data Realm also known as Serve.com.)

Notes

Programs I Use to Collect Stats:

  • For overall numbers, I used a extremely-common program called Webalizer, which gives useful monthly summaries.
  • For details I used a program called AXS Visitor Tracking Program, which lets me watch individual users as they navigate the site. With AXS I can also get details on where visitors to specific pages come from.
  • I have a list of key words which I watch on Google; every few weeks I record where our sites stand on those phrases and watch how navigational changes I make affect our Google rankings.
  • I also use Google to see what other websites are linking to us. I look at what they link to (often not our homepage) and how many sites there are linking.
  • I also follow links using more specific search engines such as Technorati, which indexes blogs ("web blogs" or personal diary-like sites).

Measuring Links:

I use Altavista's search engine to measure how many links a site has. For good reasons, Google doesn't list obscure websites and also counts how a site's links back to itself. Here's a sample Altavista query:

link:www.fgcquaker.org/ -site:www.fgcquaker.org

See How Can We Measure the State of the Peace Movement? for more on this method of measurement.

Unique Visitors:

The most standard measure of website usage, here is a definition: "A real visitor to a web site. Web servers record the IP addresses of each visitor, and this is used to determine the number of real people who have visited a web site. If for example, someone visits twenty pages within a web site, the server will count only one unique visitor (because the page accesses are all associated with the same IP address) but twenty page accesses."

Categories: Analytics
Tags: Denomination, Friends, Liberal Branch, Navigational Design, Nonprofit Organization, Quakers, Religious Seekers | Edit
This essay was originally written in 1995.

IT'S HARD TO IGNORE the sorry shape of the social change community. The signs of a collapsed movement are everywhere. Organizations are closing, cutting back, laying off staff, and dropping the frequency of their magazines.

On top of this, the basic resources we've depended on are getting scarcer. Paper prices and postage prices are going up. Direct mail solicitations are for many economically-unfeasible now. With every abandoned mailing list, with every discontinued peace fair, we're losing the infrastructure that used to nourish the whole movement.

Here in Philadelphia, the last few years have seen food coops close, peace organizations lay off staff, and the bookstores discontinue their political titles. I've been meeting people only a half-generation younger than I who aren't aware of the basic organizing principles that the movement has built up over the years and who don't know the meanings of Greenham Common or the Clamshell Alliance

Like many of you, I'm not giving up. We can't just abandon our work because it's becoming more difficult. We need to struggle to find creative ways of getting our message out there and communicating with others. What we need is a new media.

The Promise of the Web

The Web's revolution is it's incredibly minimal costs. Fifteen dollars a month gets you a homepage. As an editor at New Society Publishers (1991-1996), I've always had to worry whether we'd lose money on a particular editorial project, and it sometimes seemed a rule of thumb that what excited me wouldn't sell. With the Web, we don't have to worry if an idea isn't popular because we're not putting the same level of resources into each publication.

Never before has publishing been so cheap. Just about anyone can do it. You don't need a particularly fast or fancy computer to put Web pages online. And you don't have to worry about distribution: if someone sets their Web browser to your address, they'll get you "product" instantly.

All the forces pushing movement publishing over the edge of financial insolvency disappear when we go online. Switching to the Web is a matter of keeping our words in print. The Web is the latest invention to open up the distribution of words by birthing new medias. The printing press begat modern book publishing just as the photocopier begat zine culture. The Web can likewise spawn a media where words can flourish with less capital than ever before.

Advertising Each Other

The problem with the Web is not accessibility, but rather being heard above the noise. People generally find your website in two ways. The first is that they see your web address in your newsletter, get on their computers and look you up; this of course only gets you your own people. The second way is through links.

Links take you from one website to another. Webpage designers try to get linked from sites of similar interest to theirs, hoping the readers of the other site will follow the link to their webpage. This bouncing from site to site is called surfing, and it's the main way around the web.

Linking is a very primitive art nowadays. The Nonviolence Web has internal links that actively invite readers to explore the whole NV-Web. Everytime someone comes into the NV-Web through a member group, they will be inticed to stay and discover the other groups. By putting social change groups together in one place, we can have a much-more dynamic cross-referencing. Think of it as the equivalent of trading mailing lists in that we can all share those web surfers who find any one of us.

In the web world as in the real one, cooperation helps us all. If you're an activist group doing work on nonviolent social change then contact us and we'll put your words online. For free. If you have your own website already, then let's talk about how we can crosslink you with other groups working on nonviolent social change.

Come explore the Nonviolence Web and let us get you connected. Come join our revolution.

In peace,

Martin Kelley

Categories: MartinKelley.com , Niche Marketing , Web Design
Tags: Bookstores, Direct Mail, Greenham Common, Infrastructure, Mail Solicitations, Peace Organizations, Political Titles, Postage Prices | Edit

Search

As Seen In

EBook

Shortcut cover
Web 2.0 Mash-Ups & Niche Aggregators (O'Reilly Media, 2008, $9.95): Order here.

Social Networks

Other Sites

Archives