Spellr.us targets university web page typos

 

Only one out of 20 takes the bait.

Aussie start-up spellr.us' latest ploy to attract higher education customers is to shame them for typos that appear in their first 1,000 web pages.

A survey of the top 20 universities in the world - which includes Australian National University in Canberra - found 13 of the 20 misspelled the word ‘university' on one or more of their web pages.

Spellr.us general manager Kevin Garber told iTnews by email that ANU "was about the middle of the list of 20 in terms of of [sic] their frequency and severity of typos."

Garber said "spelling errors can convey sloppiness and lack of attention to detail, which can detract from the message".

In the case of Universities, that message is that a high quality education is on offer, he said.

"A university's website is often the first point of contact for prospective students and staff," Garber said.

iTnews conducted its own survey of Australian universities using a free trial of the spellr.us tool, which checks only the top 100 web pages.

ANU again placed middle of the road, recording only four "likely" errors. Other major local Universities recorded higher figures; however, all had fewer than 10 errors in the first 100 pages.

A spokesperson for ANU said the University "has processes in place to ensure our website and individual pages are of the quality we would expect.

"In addition, each area has its own webmaster to update and check on web content," the spokesperson said.

"Despite that, misspellings will sometimes slip through the net. As soon as we identify those we work to correct them."

Garber said calling the spellr.us survey a naming-and-shaming exercise was an oversimplification.

"We wanted to highlight how challenging it is to keep track of content across websites and how organisations underestimate the impact on credibility that errors have," he said.

But he admitted spellr.us hadn't communicated the errors to the universities before publishing the list.

He cited "difficulties" with finding out who was responsible for the sites as a reason not to inform them before publishing the typo figures.

Instead, he called on the universities to contact spellr.us for a list of errors. Only one university - Duke, which is based in North Carolina - had taken them up on the offer at the time of publication.

Garber said Victoria University was among the institutions in Australia to buy spellr.us to date, but he could not reveal other customer names.


Spellr.us targets university web page typos
"Registered to the site for a single "press release" response "alan jones"? I've observed that pseudonym register one shot accounts on a few sites for quick retorts whenever spellrus is criticized."
By LCasey2002
 
 
 
Comments: 4
mschoenfeld
Jul 17, 2009 9:58 AM
While spellr.us may have created some buzz with their ranking, don't believe everything you read (or misspell). We did indeed request a list of the alleged mistakes on the Duke University website and found that the majority -- maybe even the vast majority -- were acronyms, portions of URls taken out of context, and abbreviations that were accurate and, in many case, in common usage on our campus and beyond. Others were scientific terms -- like "buckyballs" -- that have become familiar in print and online journals. Are there typos and errors on the nearly two million pages that fall under duke.edu? Absolutely, and we all strive to keep them out and correct them when discovered. But perhaps a dose of "physician heal thyself" is in order before the naming and shaming begins. After all, we wouldn't want to be sloppy or inattentive, would we?

Mike Schoenfeld
Vice President for Public Affairs
Duke University
kgarber
Jul 17, 2009 11:23 AM
Mike

Thanks for the comments.

Our survey adjusted for false positives including scientific terms.

The spirit of the release was not to "name and shame" - indeed we are the first to name and shame OURSELVES when we make errors.

See example 1 "naming and shaming" Melon Media - our parent company:
http://2xmad.spellr.us/mistakes/1/MELON%20MEDIA/

See example 2 "naming and shaming" spellr.us:
http://blog.spellr.us/2009/07/17/they-always-seem-to-slip-through/

The spirit of the Media Release was not to "name and shame" - we all make mistakes and we all know that. Rather we wanted to highlight how challenging it is to manage and check the content across all websites especially large ones.

In particular - spelling in "Tags" such as title tags, alt tags, as well as spelling in menu items is very difficult to identify without specialist tools.

The spellr.us platform in fact evolved out of the frustration that many of our clients were having in identifying spelling errors on their own sites.

Interestingly a research study released by a Stanford University labs (Stanford-Makovsky Web Credibility Study 2002 Investigating what makes Web sites credible today) found that "...the findings suggested that typographical errors have roughly the same negative impact on a Web site's credibility as a company's legal or financial troubles." See study at
http://captology.stanford.edu/pdf/Stanford-MakovskyWebCredStudy2002-prelim.pdf

We therefore developed this platform to assist the many organisations that would like maximise their online credibility in a cost effective and painless way.

Regards,
Kevin - Founder http://spellr.us
alan jones
Jul 17, 2009 12:22 PM
Kevin can take responsibility for his service and the results it provides but can't really be held accountable for how the media chooses to report it - sensationally or otherwise.

History shows the only way to ensure high levels of accuracy using only humans is to have multiple levels of error-checking (writer, sub-editor, proof-reader and editor.) Sadly, few organisations can sustain the cost of all those specialist skills any more, as in the media and in the education sector.

Software algorithms such as those employed by Spellr.us are a great tool for any organisation that cares about its public perception but can't afford multiple levels of human error-checking.

Spelling software will inevitably have errors in it too from time to time, as will anything designed by mere mortals. There will always be errors and the research suggests those errors do have an effect. So the combination of error-checking software and error-checking people in your organisation is probably the best approach.

You're right: people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. But the solution is to find smart ways to catch the stones before they do any damage, not to 'return fire'.
LCasey2002
Aug 26, 2009 10:10 PM
Registered to the site for a single "press release" response "alan jones"? I've observed that pseudonym register one shot accounts on a few sites for quick retorts whenever spellrus is criticized.
Comments have been disabled for this article.
 
 
 
Top Stories
Vito Forte: A CIO for tough times
Fortescue Metals CIO talks vendor management and innovation.
 
Tech staff spared in ANZ's 1000 job cuts
Cost cutting hits middle management.
 
Telstra shifts BigPond email to Windows Live
All data to be migrated to Microsoft cloud.
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...

Latest VideosSee all videos »

Latest Comments
Polls
Would you be concerned about your business' email data being hosted offshore?

   |   View results
Yes
  83%
 
No
  17%
TOTAL VOTES: 245

Vote