"So why is so much advertising, including web advertising, so skippable? Partly, I think, because advertisers make the mistake of thinking of the audience as viewers rather than targets. The distinction is real: A viewer is one who views, which implies—but does not necessarily actually deliver—their attention. It is a soft and flabby term that describes a mostly passive audience. On the other hand, a target is one to whom an ad is aimed, and suggests aiming, accuracy, and a more active, vigorous stance by the advertiser."

"Web design is about communication. We need to use technology like servers, browsers, code, and databases to make that communication happen. But in a successful website, the technology is the servant of the communication—not the other way around."

1. It only takes 5 minutes to set up a blog -- why should it take 5 weeks, 5 months, or more to make a website?


2. If a graphic designer comes up with a nice layout, we can just outsource the programming to the lowest bidder.

(and my favorite)

3. A nice looking design will increase the number of people who visit our site.

1. It takes about 5 minutes to build a car out of legos. It takes 30 minutes to upwards of several hours to build a decent model car. It takes years of engineering, designing, and testing to build a subcompact car using 5-50 year old technologies.
   
   The more complex a site is, the more content it has, the more user interaction that is involved, and the more varied the goals a web site might have, the more time it's going to take in creating it. Add in new technologies (if web design paralleled automotive design, we'd still be using tables for layout), and the process becomes that much more complicated. Often it's required that a developer learn technologies on the fly. Not because the developer is a slacker — but because new technologies abound. And that's a great thing, because like the man said, "A man's reach should exceed his grasp."
   
   Can it be done faster? Maybe. And maybe the end result is going to be a nice looking car built of legos.


2. Going off of the Kahn quote above, the back-end of a website is just as critical — if not more — than the front-end. The idea that a content management system can be thrown together, or pulled off of a shelf, is a hard one to shoot down. After all, kids are building websites. There are so many frameworks and CMSs out there that it should be easy.
   
   But back to the car analogy, there are many engines and drive trains on the road. None of them work in every car, and not every car is suited to all of them. And — more imporantly — like Kahn points out, there is a significant amount of consideration that should go into the development of a site, both out front and in the back. Scalability, security, speed, and usefulness are functions of programming as much or more than they are of design. The 6,000lb F-350 is useless with the VW bug engine. Even the turbo.
   


3. This seems to be the longest-lasting misconception I've seen, and the most deeply seeded. While it varies depending on the kind of site — e-commerce is more likely to gain from a clean, easy-to-use design than content or publication sites — it's still a bad idea that a facelift will make people flock to your house. Companies spend huge sums of money on creating new looks and feels, tied in to nifty, cohesive new marketing plans, only to see the same numbers of visitors they had to begin with.
   
   Oh... there'll be an initial spike in traffic. But that fascination wears off when visitors find they're getting the same old content that was there before. Content drives traffic more than anything else. And fresh content drives more traffic. Period.
   

NBC4.com