How (Not) to Share Articles

Why I (Don’t) Read the Links You Send Me

My friends are smart and interesting. My coworkers are talented and motivated. These people know me well, and when they discover an article I might like, they’ll often send it my way. I’m grateful that they’re thinking of me, and I’m sure there’s lots of useful information behind the links they share. And yet:

I read almost none of it. I suspect you don’t, either.

We’re so used to shared links going unread that it’s almost a surprise when someone takes time to tap, read, or *gasp* respond. It’s a darn shame, but — even among close friends and coworkers — we’re bad at sending stories in a way that gets them read. Why?

↓

The inbox is a to-do list.

The great majority of these recommendations show up as links in my email inbox. Right away, then, they’re competing with specific, urgent requests for my time (assignments, deliverables, bills). This hurts the chances that I’ll read it.

Please: avoid email in favor of reading-specific apps.

I don’t know why you want me to read it.

Rather than come with a specific thought, like “this might help with your decision” or “let’s try this process”, most links come with “check this” or “cool” or nothing at all. Perhaps, with some effort, I can intuit why you sent me the link. But if you don’t share a few words about why you’re sending it to me, this hurts the chances that I’ll see it.

Please: include a short, personal note with everything you share.

You pasted the passage into the email.

This is an effective way to get me to read a small piece of something. It’s also an effective way to ensure that I don’t visit the article. When you send me a snippet, I assume that that’s all you wanted me to read. If you’re hoping I’ll visit the source material, sending a snippet hurts the chances that I’ll see it.

You didn’t read it either.

When you read a title, assume I’d like the content, and send me the link straightaway, it’s usually obvious that this was your process. Titles are often poor signals of content and quality. You’re effectively saying: “this wasn’t worth my time, but maybe it’s worth yours.” Ouch.

When you share articles you didn’t read, you’ll share bad stuff, and I’ll learn not to trust your recommendations. Lose-lose.

Please: don’t share what you don’t read.

It might take too long.

When you send me a link, I have no idea how long it’ll take me to read, view, or address whatever lies beyond the click. URLs can signal that it’ll be long — newyorker.com implies I should take a vacation day before clicking — but importantly, URLs have no way to signal that they’re linking to short content. I assume there’s a #longread behind the click, so I don’t click.

In user research for Highly, we often see people glance immediately at the scrollbar to gauge article length — time commitment — upon arrival.

Please: tell me how long you expect this to take: 1 min? 10 min? “Weekend read?”

You’ll never know.

No matter how or why you sent me the link, I can generally be sure of one thing: you won’t really ever know if I’ve read it. Absent a feedback loop, you get to imagine me thoughtfully nodding my head as I pore over the text you shared, and I get to ignore the link altogether.

Perhaps: use a channel with read receipts or the like.

You don’t even care.

Be honest with yourself: did you really expect me to read it? If we were in a room together, and you asked me 5 questions, you’d be pretty disappointed if I ignored 4; our digital tools have us conditioned to see this same interaction as “ok” online. Being numb to being ignored is inefficient at best and arguably much worse.

I spoke to the director of a California radio station; part of her job is to share links with her staff who may then pursue them as stories. She guessed that 2 of her 13 teammates actually reads the links she shares; she’s happy with that. I think she should expect better.

Please: care.

↓

Good writing — still the preferred delivery method of good thinking — is more abundant and accessible than ever. Our friends and teammates are inviting us to read the ideas that matter to them.

It’s easy to let these shared links sit idly for a day or week until, with some shame but greater relief, we dispatch them unread into Archive. Our tools make tapping Share easy but actually sharing quite hard.

We’ll get better tools, but until then, let’s be a bit more intentional about how we use the ones we’ve got.

I’m working on Highly: highlight to share the best things you’re reading. For example, I highlighted this article. We pay a lot of attention to how people read and share.

Tweet at me if you’d like to test drive Highly.