As a content creator and editor, I’ve always relied on Word to communicate ideas to the designers and developers on my team. To “paint a picture” of web content, I’d format, label, and highlight. Word was my go-to tool.

Recently, though, I gave it all up in favor of managing content in WordPress. And I'm loving it.

The Oodles of Source Content Challenge

A client came to us with great information hidden in the depths of a poor site experience. Among other things, they needed the content re-organized so users could find and use it.

Some months earlier, I'd remarked “Wouldn't it be great if we could put all of the client’s existing content into some sort of CMS and start moving it around?” The answer was yes. Let's do it on this project.

This was a classic “be careful what you wish for” moment for me. Without Word, I wouldn’t have a concrete deliverable that I controlled. Instead, we’d all have a living, breathing code base to share.

But, after confirming that we could rollback, compare changes, and even spit out a trusty Word doc if necessary, we decided to dive in.

Mapping It Out

While I went about researching, reading the old site and gaining all the knowledge I could about the client's business problem, development imported all the “source content” into an in-house instance of WordPress.

When debate ran high about the new site map, I used menus within WordPress to quickly create prototypes and test our organizational theories. In no time, it seemed, we had a new site map approved.

Then the Fun Really Began

I created the new site structure in WordPress — a slew of properly named, lovely blank pages. Then I went through more than 200 pages of source content, scanning for bits and pieces to populate those pages.

There was no need for a content audit spreadsheet. Each source content page retained its original URL, so we could document where it came from. Plus, I noted new page destination(s) or whether content was being retired and why, right in the CMS.

Meanwhile, wireframing sped along, informed by an in-depth knowledge of the type, length, and spirit of the source content as well as our strategy for refining it to support new site goals.

As the wireframes were being approved, I was already polishing pages that supported the templates. Once visual concepting began, I was able to point designers to plenty of content available for use in their comps.

No version control worries. No fighting over docs on the server. I just gave them a link and let the collaboration begin.

Oh But There’s More … More Productivity, That Is

Unlike in Word, I wasn’t creating to-do lists for dev to handle later — I noted keywords, added meta descriptions and refined page titles and URLS. I styled headlines and subheads and tables. I uploaded .PDF assets and added inline links. I made anchor, internal and external links, always making sure they were tagged with a good link title.

When I had pages ready, I added them to a queue for QA, who made changes on the fly. I could compare versions to see what had changed, then pass it along to the client.

We gave our client access to the content on WordPress, advising them when to make changes, when to comment, and when to call us. And they reviewed at lightning speed. As I watched their comments roll in real-time, I got better at making choices they would approve in the next round.

Bye Bye Word

I thought I would miss Word. After all, a CMS is an ever-changing code base, not a document I can lock up. But, the empowerment and efficiency it affords across disciplines is so worth letting go.

One complaint: I can compare changes between versions in WordPress, but sadly, am forced to accept or reject all of them as a package. In Word, I could jump from change to change accepting, rejecting or modifying as needed. The latter is better for a control freak, for sure.

Still, I’m not going back. We've already modified WordPress to suit our needs, and I know we can go further. Next time we have a project with tons of existing content, we will.

I live in my Google calendar. It’s where I shape my family’s destiny — one of few places where my schemes, my husband’s commitments and my kids’ activities all gather to be recognized, dismissed or otherwise accounted for. Today, my Google calendar looks different ... cleaner. I like it. Google asked me if I wanted to learn more about the new look. This phrase caught my eye:

Elasticity: The new design will soon allow you to seamlessly transition from your desktop computer to your mobile phone to your tablet, while keeping a consistent visual experience. We aim to bring you this flexibility without sacrificing style or usefulness.

When someone asks me what Springbox does, I like to say “we make interactive stuff that feels effortless, meaningful and fun” — and that means on any device. The concept of elasticity fits right in with what I think interactive should do for humans. After all, we don’t care what device we’re on — we just have stuff we have to get done. Thanks, Google!

The new look:

Soon, instead of becoming a fan of your brand on Facebook, I’ll simply get to like it. Goodbye to the heavy lifting that fanning entails — now I’ll make more connections with companies and organizations than ever before, because it will feel like a “lighter action.” The change creates consistency and simplification. Or so says Facebook.

Possibly. I guess it does reduce the number of verbs. But I liked the conceptual clarity of the way we were: We friended individuals. We fanned organizations. We liked things that happened.

Liking on Facebook has always been an action of-the-moment. It is an elegantly simple (and brilliant) way of participating in something ephemeral, akin to verbal conversation. Liking feels powerful because it is highly visible and selectively applied. I like things that divert me, or grab my attention — otherwise, I ignore. It’s an expression of who I am, but it’s no big commitment. My likes may be noted and appreciated, but they are soon carried away by the flow of time. And the never-ending stream of posts.

Friending or fanning is slightly more substantial. If I appreciate you — as an individual or as a brand — I consciously invoke a relationship with you. Becoming your friend or fan means I don’t mind hearing from you, and gives me a chance to get to the good stuff: liking or commenting on things you say. It doesn’t mean I like everything you say — just the things I deem relevant or worthy. We may be in a relationship, but we have our boundaries.

Going forward, one verb will have two very different valences. You have to be someone’s friend in order to like what they share. Liking something shared by a brand, on the other hand, consecrates your relationship with them? That doesn’t sound simpler to me. It sounds tricky.

For what it’s worth, I think copy folks will be sad about this, too. “Fan Us on Facebook” is a nice, strong-sounding call to action, with a lovely alliterative quality. “Like Us on Facebook” sounds insecure. Referring to “our fans” in copy is nice and concise.* Using the phrase “people who like us on Facebook,” as Facebook suggests, is an awkward mouthful by comparison.

Ah, well. I’m sure I’ll like it after a while.

*PS: Facebook practically owns the word fan, but they don’t seem to care! Note that in the example above, I did not feel the need to write “our Facebook fans” — the Facebook part is assumed. I myself will argue that when you need to describe “people who like your brand on Facebook” in one word, “fans” is still an excellent choice.

Checking in with my peeps on Facebook the other day, a familiar face caught my eye. It was my brother-in-law, grinning out at me from the right column...but no, he hadn’t posted new pics of the nieces. It was Facebook (on it’s own volition?!) suggesting that I "reconnect" with him.

My first thought was that he'd unfriended me! Now, I’m a big girl. I’ve been unfriended before...mostly without my ever noticing. And that’s the way I prefer it. If you don’t want to be exposed to my pithy updates, that’s fine. I certainly don’t need to have rejection pointed out to me!

Then I’m thinking...is Facebook prompting any of my ex Facebuds to go ahead and make a play to win me back?! Ewww. The whole thing stirred up latent fears I'd rather not contemplate. Namely that I simply do not know what Facebook is doing — or might do — with the things it knows. And I’m pretty certain that this is not how Facebook wants me to feel about Facebook.

My fears were unfounded, of course. A quick search revealed my brother-in-law sitting right where I left him, squarely in my friend category. Whew. Still, Facebook feels that I should take action to deepen my connection with him. This is thought provoking, if irritating.

Does Facebook detect a specific lack of activity between us that triggers the suggestion? Why my brother-in-law, and not all the other friends with whom I maintain a lazy acquaintanceship rather than an active friendship on the ‘book? And why is Facebook becoming such a busybody all of the sudden?

Today, Facebook is asking me to write on my brother-in-law’s wall, as if it detects that he’s feeling down and could use a virtual pick-me-up. From his sister-in-law. Right.

Next thing you know, it'll be nagging me to reconnect with my husband. I guess I'm just thankful that my actual mother isn't on Facebook...yet.