Writer, Speaker, Consultant
Home :: Blog
I have a blog over on Blogger at http://blog.adrianroselli.com/. I post regularly about trends and news in web development, usability, accessibility, social media, best practices, and anything else falls into the very broad category of "web related." Below is just the latest post from my blog, with links to more entries on the side. You can save yourself some hassle and just subscribe to the RSS feed and let it come to you.
Earlier this week M.G. Siegler posted Hacking the Tweet Stream at Medium, where he describes the trend of posting images of text to do an end-run around Twitter's character limits. His post quickly changes from descriptive to prescriptive, advocating for this behavior to bypass what he sees as a limitation of Twitter.
Christian Heilmann quickly responded to note what a bad idea this is (my words) in his post Great publishing works with the medium, not against it.
Christian covered a few reasons why you shouldn't rely on images, which I am including here from his Medium post:
- Maybe they are blind and can not see text in an image
- Maybe they are on a tiny device and whilst the font here is readable the text in a small JPG with artifacts is less so.
- Maybe they are on an unreliable connection and the image hasn’t loaded yet
- Maybe they have a mis-configured ad-blocker that is overzealous with its blocking
Let me add some more:
This isn't an accessibility issue, it's a usability issue and an engagement risk. When you factor connection quality, data plan caps, image quality, contrast, potential image blocking, and search failures, this seems like a terrible method to get your important message in front of people.
There are some easy ways to get around this that are native to the medium. I originally offered three of these in October, so I'll include them here with more.
I think this is too easy to dismiss unless there are examples and context. I think it's important to also show that even people who work in UX struggle with it, as I too have done before.
It seems more and more news outlets are trying this out. In so doing, they are leaving some readers in the dust. More importantly, the reporters who do this are leaving their employers in the dust by not linking back to the news site.
I even asked politely for a non-image version, maybe a link to a release or news story. No response.
Full Sony Pictures statement... pic.twitter.com/zxM0hMQxHG— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) December 17, 2014
I asked the same here, and again no response.
POTUS statement on school attack in Pakistan pic.twitter.com/trbg2biLXU— Jim Acosta (@Acosta) December 16, 2014
Same situation, different news outlet, still requested a plain text link. At least this tweet has an abstract, though no link to the source.
BREAKING: FBI says North Korean government is responsible for the hacking of Sony Pictures pic.twitter.com/JbEmlCr8nK— NBC Nightly News (@NBCNightlyNews) December 19, 2014
While these examples are far from the only three who engage in picture-only-tweets, they each came up in my timeline recently and none included anything helpful for users who cannot see the image (whether by vision impairments or technology issues). These are in reverse-chronological order.
Jared Spool, from his personal account, tweeted a screen shot that had already made the rounds, and didn't take any opportunity to add any value. Of course I got snarky, but when this image first appeared at least I asked for the source URL and got it. It's not that hard.
The Interview. pic.twitter.com/SPTnww0HzB— Jared Spool (@jmspool) December 20, 2014
This tweet from Zeldman is an image of browser stats from a site (probably one of his). That's it, just an image. No descriptive text, no context (though the included text might make it seem NSFW). As I demonstrated in a follow-up tweet, you can fit all the information into a tweet as plain text.
I’ll show you mine... pic.twitter.com/lcePQjWj32— Jeffrey Zeldman (@zeldman) December 11, 2014
Luke Wroblewski ran a series of tweets which were nothing but images, though he included a barely-legible URL at the bottom of each image (itself a gray bit.ly URL that is so small and light it's terribly difficult to tell a 1 from an l). Why would he do this when the tweets had more than enough characters for the URL as well? Even the image confused some users. I opted to retweet some of them with the links restored and context added.
There is no fold. [part 1] pic.twitter.com/OlcR1tWy7l— Luke Wroblewski (@lukew) December 8, 2014
I am of the opinion that if your image-only tweets had text or links to sources, readers wouldn't need to make a Storify of them, manually creating the URLs on your behalf (and noting that now the embedded-in-image links are clickable).
Given the influence these names have on web developers and the industry in general (497,000 followers combined), and given Spool's position in the UX community, the recent push from Zeldman for accessibility on the web, and Wroblewski's constant push for better UX on mobile, their own behavior simply validates laziness when they could, rather should, be examples of useful, inclusive behavior.
See it on the blog with any comments.