Fake FAQs

Marketers have borrowed the FAQ format from instructional websites in the hopes of giving complex, confusing, and discouraging information about their products the appearance of user friendliness.

Why do websites have FAQs? Why don’t they just answer their visitors’ burning questions right on the web pages themselves? Isn’t that the heart of sales and customer services?

Jeff Sexton makes the case against FAQs this week on the blog at the marketing site GrokDotCom.com.

However, I think he’s going up against a straw man. In my experience, while a few companies may be naively burying compelling marketing content on the FAQ page, most are using the FAQ page to hide problems. They use it as a dumping ground for required warnings and other “small print” disclaimers, as well as a place to put the ugly details about cumbersome naming or numbering conventions that can’t be rationally or quickly explained on marketing pages.

In short, marketers have borrowed the FAQ format from instructional websites in the hopes of giving complex, confusing, and discouraging information about their products the appearance of user friendliness.

Here’s an example from HP’s refurbished-products sales site. This FAQ answers the burning questions “How can I tell what the desktop form factors are?” and “How do I decipher part numbers for refurbished products?” (Warning: The answers to these questions may lead people who do user-facing design to bang their heads on the their own desktops — regardless of form factor.)

When the saint comes marching in

Englishman offended by the municipal authorities’ decision to “dumb down” his street’s name (from “St. John’s Close” to “St. Johns Close”) he returned his local street signs to the proper singular possessive — using paint and a paint brush.

I’ve studied with two of the best news editors who ever lived (the late Tim Cohane and Irv Horowitz) and worked under some pretty damn good ones.

So my hat is off to Stefan Gatward, of Tunbridge Wells, England. According to this UPI report, Mr. Gatward was so offended by the municipal authorities’ decision to “dumb down” his street’s name (from “St. John’s Close” to “St. Johns Close”) that he returned his local street signs to the proper singular possessive using paint and a paint brush.

%d bloggers like this: