How to Gain Users and Compel them to Act.

Paul Boag

This week on the Boagworld Show, we discuss how best to design for maximum visibility and, following on from that, how to write compelling copy to encourage the users you have gained to act.

This week’s show is sponsored by Balsamiq and Fullstory.


Paul Boag: This week on the Boagworld Show we discuss how to design for maximum visibility and how to write compelling calls-to-action.

This week's show is sponsored by Balsamiq and FullStory.

Hello and welcome to the Boagworld Show the podcast about all aspects of conversion rate optimization, user experience, and digital strategy. My name is Paul I'm-dying-slowly-of-various-illnesses Boag and joining me is always happy and joyous and annoying at the same time Marcus Lillington.

Marcus Lillington: I'm not always happy. I just … I was blessed with seeing the glalf hass full, glass, the ass half full. I don't know what I just said.

Paul Boag: The ass half full. You are an ass, but … Yeah, other than you're occasionally throwing out your back, you're also this healthy person, which is unfair considering the amount you eat and drink and smoke.

Marcus Lillington: Maybe, the two are connected, Paul. Have you thought-

Paul Boag: Yeah, perhaps-

Marcus Lillington: … about that?

Paul Boag: … I should be eating and drinking more. I'll tell my-

Marcus Lillington: No.

Paul Boag: … wife that.

Marcus Lillington: No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. No, and I actually believe this, but I probably don't have any evidence for it at all, if you take a positive viewpoint or-

Paul Boag: Oh, I see, yes.

Marcus Lillington: … or rather-

Paul Boag: Yeah.

Marcus Lillington: … rather, stress makes you ill.

Paul Boag: Yes. Absolutely.

Marcus Lillington: I'm certain of that.

Paul Boag: Yeah-

Marcus Lillington: I think-

Paul Boag: … no, no.

Marcus Lillington: … there probably-

Paul Boag: I think-

Marcus Lillington: … is evidence to suggest-

Paul Boag: I think-

Marcus Lillington: … that.

Paul Boag: Yeah, that sounds like a thing. Let's call it a thing. It's-

Marcus Lillington: Therefore-

Paul Boag: … medical advice from Paul and Marcus-

Marcus Lillington: Oh, yeah. Well, this makes a change-

Paul Boag: … qualified in shit-all.

Marcus Lillington: … from legal advice, isn't it? Yeah, go and stick a knife in your hand.

Paul Boag: That will help.

Marcus Lillington: Surely, if you can not be worried and stressed about things, you're less likely to be physically ill. I'm certain that's a thing.

Paul Boag: Yeah. Yeah, it is a thing.

Marcus Lillington: That's all-

Paul Boag: It is-

Marcus Lillington: … it is-

Paul Boag: … a thing.

Marcus Lillington: … then. That's it.

Paul Boag: There you go.

Marcus Lillington: That's why I-

Paul Boag: I just need-

Marcus Lillington: … get ill so much.

Paul Boag: … to stop worrying about life.

Marcus Lillington: Yeah, don't worry, Paul. It will all be fine.

Paul Boag: We've got Andrew Miller in the room who is being rude to me. He says I look like Uncle Fester. I don't even know who that is, but I know he's being rude.

Marcus Lillington: Yes, you-

Paul Boag: Who's Uncle Fester?

Marcus Lillington: Yes, you do. The Addams Family.

Paul Boag: Oh, no. I used to like Andrew. All right, I'm ignoring that inaudible 00:02:39. That's not happening.

Marcus Lillington: Funny, funny.

Paul Boag: We've got a bit of an erratic recording schedule over the next few weeks, because I'm globetrotting.

Marcus Lillington: Hey, Paul the-

Paul Boag: I'm going-

Marcus Lillington: … globetrotter.

Paul Boag: I'm going off to-

Marcus Lillington: Are you going to be-

Paul Boag: … New York.

Marcus Lillington: … miserable about that as well?

Paul Boag: No.

Marcus Lillington: Good.

Paul Boag: I'll tell you why I'm not going to be miserable about that, because my wife is coming-

Marcus Lillington: Aw.

Paul Boag: … which is awesome.

Marcus Lillington: Yeah.

Paul Boag: It's so much nicer. It's just-

Marcus Lillington: Yeah.

Paul Boag: … unbelievably much nicer. Yeah, she's coming to New York with me next week when we're going to go to the Smashing Conference. I would say, do a plug for the Smashing Conference, but by the time this goes out-

Marcus Lillington: It will be gone.

Paul Boag: It will be gone.

Marcus Lillington: Yeah.

Paul Boag: It's a bit late.

Marcus Lillington: Well, the next one.

Paul Boag: There you go.

Marcus Lillington: Let's help later in the year or next spring or something.

Paul Boag: Then I'm going to … Am I going to Estonia or the Ukraine? I get them confused. That's so embarrassing. Cath?

Marcus Lillington: Over there somewhere.

Paul Boag: Am I going to the Ukraine or Estonia which is it?

Cath: Estonia.

Paul Boag: I'm going to Estonia. I knew that.

Cath: You inaudible 00:03:41.

Paul Boag: I did. I'm a professional.

Marcus Lillington: What's happening in Estonia? Don't you, don't you, like people don't people don't come back from Estonia. It sounds like my-

Paul Boag: Don't tell me that.

Marcus Lillington: … kind of place.

Paul Boag: No, that's not true, because I've spoken to Chris, right?

Marcus Lillington: crosstalk 00:03:53

Paul Boag: Who is a lot more-

Marcus Lillington: … crosstalk 00:03:54

Paul Boag: … trustworthy than you.

Marcus Lillington: Me? Chris-

Paul Boag: Right?

Marcus Lillington: … out there?

Paul Boag: Yeah.

Marcus Lillington: Okay.

Paul Boag: He went to Estonia, the capital of Estonia, and he told me lovely things about it, so I'm very excited.

Marcus Lillington: Okay. Just don't stay out after dark, you'll be fine.

Paul Boag: Yeah, shut up.

Marcus Lillington: I don't, no idea where that came from, no idea.

Paul Boag: You just, it sounded.

Marcus Lillington: I just made it up.

Paul Boag: You just make stuff up, yeah. What else is going on in life? I started fiddling with my home electronics which is fun.

Marcus Lillington: Yeah, I saw this in the notes, and lots of people do this. I am genuinely interested, because I don't know what … I know that you can buy plugs that you can put in the wall that will turn your lights on and off via your Amazon Echo or whatever. But, what else?

Paul Boag: Well-

Marcus Lillington: Why would it be worth it? I guess is crosstalk 00:04:45

Paul Boag: Oh, no, it's not … It's not worth it. No.

Marcus Lillington: Let's just get it so you can talk to the wall.

Paul Boag: It's boys, it's boys with toys. My wife rolls her eyes every time I mention it.

Marcus Lillington: Okay.

Paul Boag: It's, yeah, yeah, yeah, you could get loads of pointless things. I can turn on my television with my voice which is good. I can say to my Google Home to start playing Netflix and things like that.

What else have I got going on? Ah, I can also, I can also, yeah, turn off all my … I'm going to replace the light switches, so that I can turn that on. I can adjust the temperature with my Nest that is arriving soon, my Nest thermostat.

I was going to get it to unlock my front door, but that turned into a major farce. It all sounds so easy in theory and, then, absolutely impossible in practice. But, it's those kind of things that you could waste thousands on and hours and hours of your life.

Marcus Lillington: Actually, it would be a bit shit in the end of it all anyway.

Paul Boag: Yeah, yeah-

Marcus Lillington: Okay.

Paul Boag: … pretty much.

Marcus Lillington: Although, as Michelle-

Paul Boag: But-

Marcus Lillington: … says in the chat room, sometimes she can't move so smart plugs are useful from that point of view.

Paul Boag: Oh, yeah. Yeah, yeah, if you've got a medical condition, yeah, that's all well and good. You could-

Marcus Lillington: Why would you-

Paul Boag: … make up-

Marcus Lillington: … want an-

Paul Boag: … all kinds of-

Marcus Lillington: … internet-

Paul Boag: … things if you've-

Marcus Lillington: … connected fridge? Why?

Paul Boag: Why do I want a connected fridge?

Marcus Lillington: Internet-connected fridge.

Paul Boag: It will tell me when stuff is going off in the fridge and needs replacing.

Marcus Lillington: You can just look for crying out loud.

Paul Boag: You can, but you could just get up and turn off a switch unless you're Michelle that can't. But, you see, but, what, there is nothing cooler, there is nothing that makes you feel more like you've got superpowers than being able to talk to your robot vacuum cleaner and tell it to stop vacuuming the lounge. That is the coolest thing on the planet.

Marcus Lillington: I can actually see a use for an internet-enabled oven that you could say I-

Paul Boag: Turn off and on.

Marcus Lillington: … want this to be cooked in blah, blah, blah, or whatever.

Paul Boag: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Marcus Lillington: crosstalk 00:06:57

Paul Boag: Or a microwave, because microwaves are impossible to program, so it would be much nicer just to be able to say, "I've put this in it, cook it-

Marcus Lillington: Yeah.

Paul Boag: … please."

Marcus Lillington: I'm still not … There are things I love more than to have a, I don't know, James Bond-style home.

Paul Boag: Oh, yeah. It is a total waste of time, but there are some nice … It's quite nice … The thing that got me into it was we ended up with so many mood lights around the house. Do you know what I mean? Not main lights-

Marcus Lillington: Yeah.

Paul Boag: … but, and I got sick of going around every night turning them all off.

Marcus Lillington: Yeah, yeah. I know what you mean, yeah.

Paul Boag: Being able to say, "Turn off all the lights in the lounge," to me is quite cool, but, to a normal person, not so much.

Marcus Lillington: I think it's just … Yes, if it's a major chore, then it's worth it. But, otherwise, you could just I guess wire them all to one plug, one switch on the wall, couldn't you?

Paul Boag: Yeah-

Marcus Lillington: That's probably even more-

Paul Boag: … could do.

Marcus Lillington: … difficult though.

Paul Boag: Yeah. These internet-enabled plugs now are so cheap. But, it's still, it's still a long way to go. You know when a technology feels like okay, they haven't finished making it yet? You know what I mean ? It feels a bit like that.

For example, the front door thing if you, it makes all these promises. Oh, it can detect you walking up to the door, and it unlocks the door, and you just push it, and it opens. Yeah, sure, if you've got the right door, and if you live in America, because none of these things fit European locks. Also, we have greater security on our houses than Americans. Most Americans just have a deadlock, right?

Marcus Lillington: Yeah.

Paul Boag: Which is just one little lock to unlock. Ours has got like three, isn't it, up and down the door. There are all these kinds of complications that … It sounds great on paper, but it's actually crap in practice.

Marcus Lillington: It's true. Can you remember when … Well, when CDs came out that was a great one, and, also, when digital cameras first came out. Both were made out to be considerably better quality than their analog counterparts. How you could possibly even think of even ever putting on a vinyl record or using film or anything like that.

If you go back, and you look at … I've still got quite an old digital SLR, and it just takes crap pictures.

Paul Boag: Yeah.

Marcus Lillington: Yes, absolutely, we mustn't be pulled in by the advertising that goes with these new things.

Paul Boag: But, a lot of it comes down to user experience as well actually, to vaguely pull it back to the subject we're supposed to be talking about. Because-

Marcus Lillington: crosstalk 00:09:43

Paul Boag: … it's like, yeah, I know. But, these things, "Oh, yeah, yeah, you just connect it to your door, and it's fine." Well, no, you've got to get a bloody locksmith out, because your door doesn't work as it's supposed to in the pictures.

Then, "Oh, it just seamlessly connects." Yeah, as long as Bluetooth doesn't get interfered with by something or other. None of it works as flawlessly as they say it does. Baah, but I'm having fun anyway.

Marcus Lillington: Okay. I'll leave you to … Yeah, I was hoping you were going to persuade me that I need these things, but you-

Paul Boag: No.

Marcus Lillington: … haven't.

Paul Boag: No, no, you don't need any of them, absolute waste of … The only one I'm quite interested in, that's smart … I've always had a smart thermostat for years. They are very good, because they do things like, "Oh, you've gone away," so it turns the temperature down. You don't have to … You know those really annoying thermostats where you're programming it. It's like programming an old VCR video recorder. Getting rid of all of that is quite nice, so yeah.

Marcus Lillington: Yeah, yeah.

Paul Boag: They're quite good. I quite like that.

Marcus Lillington: I should crosstalk 00:10:55

Paul Boag: Anyway, none of that has got anything to do with anything we're supposed to be talking about. Should we do a talk about your thought for the day? What-

Marcus Lillington: Let's do that.

Paul Boag: … are you going to talk about today?

Marcus Lillington: Well, I started talking about content audits last week, and I thought I should continue that thought, because I said, "Oh, yeah, and we're doing all these extra things in our content audits, but I'm not going to tell you what they are." I thought I ought to tell you what they actually are.

Paul Boag: Yes, because content audits, if I'm honest with you, I have a pretty low opinion of them.

Marcus Lillington: Yeah, and I know why, because you think that all websites should be … If you're going to redesign a site the content should be rewritten from crosstalk 00:11:34

Paul Boag: No.

Marcus Lillington: … or something like that.

Paul Boag: No, it's not quite like that.

Marcus Lillington: I like putting words into your mouth, Paul.

Paul Boag: Yeah, yeah.

Marcus Lillington: Let's just crosstalk 00:11:38

Paul Boag: No.

Marcus Lillington: Move on.

Paul Boag: It's, no, I'm not going to let you move on. It's more, it's partly that. It's part, not that it should be written from scratch, but you should start from a different premise. You shouldn't start from the premise of, what have we got. We should start from the premise of, what do we need.

But, the main reason, if I'm honest, is it just seems like a shit-ton of work for very little return.

Marcus Lillington: Yeah, yeah, well, it depends how much you do. We're doing-

Paul Boag: Okay, well, you tell what you've got planned.

Marcus Lillington: We're doing one at the moment for an NHS site in the U.K., and we're just doing effectively a pilot to get them going on it. Because, that's something that they'd like to review their, the content that they've got. I said, well, we could just spend a fairly short amount of time probably not even two days, a day and a bit, getting the ball rolling with them, so we started doing that.

We're doing a lot more for the University of Michigan. But, again, they've got 70,000 pages, and we're probably going to do a few hundred. It's not crazy amounts of time on it.

Paul Boag: Okay.

Marcus Lillington: It's looking at reviewing important, pages that would be thought of as important or maybe good exemplars of content that people think they're good exemplars, looking at those, so that kind of thing. That make sense?

Certainly, with both of these sites, a lot of those pages will continue to exist. It is worth reviewing them to say whether they should change, be edited, how much they need to be edited, that kind of thing.

I think there is value, but I do agree. It's like all these things. It's one tool in the box. It's not the whole box.

Paul Boag: Yes. Also, not-

Marcus Lillington: inaudible 00:13:43

Paul Boag: … it's not paying an outside agency to review a huge number of pages which is very expensive, because Headscape obviously charges far more than they should for the quality of work you get back. It doesn't make a lot of sense.

Marcus Lillington: That is so true. We must be almost up to half your rate by now, Paul, I'm sure.

Paul Boag: Yeah. It's return on investment, Marcus.

Marcus Lillington: I couldn't agree more.

Paul Boag: Yeah, yeah, okay. Let's stop at that point then. Yeah, go on anyway, yes-

Marcus Lillington: Sorry, detail. Yeah, we've started a couple of content audits, and where we're taking this "extended" approach to them. We can firstly what is a content audit? It's a process of reviewing existing content to see if, very basically, so there's more to it than this, but, very basically if you want to keep it, edit it, or chuck it out completely.

You're also likely to consider whether you want to merge stuff too. I think that's a very useful aspect of it. One of the reasons why it's good to do, it's good for a client to do a content audit, it's just for them to realize what they've got and to a certain extent that's useful for us, because we can learn from it.

But, I reckon, because I know going back to that you should start from, what do we need? Knowing what you've got can help with that process I think, potentially. I've gone off on a tangent. I shall come back to it.

Traditionally, in a content audit, you would look at stuff, a reviewer would read the content, look at the pictures, watch the video, whatever, and then review things like voice. Does this page fit with the voice that the institution wants it to fit with? Does it use active voice? Is it first or second person? That kind of thing, so very technical-type stuff.

Then tone, tone of voice, so is the appropriateness of tone for the intended, is the tone appropriate for the intended audience and situation? Messaging, does it reinforce one or more of the institution or organization's core messages?

Then you get into things like writing style and layout of content. For example, does it avoid large blocks of dense text? Is there appropriate use of headings and break-outs? That kind of thing.

Is it relevant to target audiences? Is there an effective use of imagery, video or other media? Are there any relevant, clearly signposted calls-to-action and/or related links? That's the kind of thing that you're meant to do, and we will be doing on a content audit.

But, added to that we are also doing some stuff where you can score pages. The idea behind this, it's hoping to bring a bit more value. But, it's also to help the process of, judging these pages is all very well. I don't know, you-

Paul Boag: Yeah, because that's very subjective.

Marcus Lillington: Exactly, and you look at a hundred pages … Even if you take the kind of subjectiveness away from it, it's like, well, what is it that … You might decide that all of them are okay, or that you want to keep all of these pages. You see what I'm trying to say?

Paul Boag: Yeah.

Marcus Lillington: Where their subjective, with a qualitative review, it's harder to make judgements on it. We thought, "Well, let's add some scoring in." Some of this is still based on the reviewers opinions, some of it isn't. They are the following six points.

Which, the first one is, well, I've missed one out. There should be seven. Nope, there isn't, there's eight. I can't-

Paul Boag: But other than that-

Marcus Lillington: I can review-

Paul Boag: … it's spot on.

Marcus Lillington: … text and copy, but I can't count.

Scannability is the first one. This is something would just, would be done by the reviewer. Just how easy it is to scan a page.

Readability, and there are loads of different ways of measuring readability. We've found one that we quite like called, it's one of their tools. It gives you a score that you can, the sheet that we produce then takes whatever that score and puts it into a one to five bracket. Because each one of these, each one of these measurements is a one to five thing, so we can pull them all together at the end.

Reusability, I'm going to just quickly grab my notes on what we mean by reusability. This is something like-

Paul Boag: I like this. This reminds me a little bit of the heuristic reviews that we do from time to time, because by turning it into numerical scores like this, I presume you'll put notes and comments as well, but-

Marcus Lillington: Absolutely.

Paul Boag: Yeah, but, by having a numerical score, it very quickly and very easily allows you to process and understand the results afterwards. Because, you can filter it and say, "Okay, which are all the pages that have got a big usability problem, et cetera."

Marcus Lillington: You got it, yeah.

Paul Boag: Yeah.

Marcus Lillington: Yes, exactly. You can filter … Let's say on reusability, we'd say … Basically, the definition for that is how much does the page need to be changed for use on the new site. If it scores five, there are no changes. If it scores four that would be just minor text changes. Three would be text editing is required and/or replacement or addition of imagery. Two would be a significant rewrite is required. One is the page needs to be deleted.

You can go back in and filter that by all the pages that are worse than three or three or worse. Then, just get that list, and you might decide, "Well, we're just going to chuck the lot," for example. I'm making this up, but that kind of thing, so effectively scoring it.

Nearly there, so, authority, this is a Moz ranking, so Moz page authority. It's how, I'm not sure how it works out. I'll have to come back on that one.

Paul Boag: But, that's nice, because that's an automatically generated number.

Marcus Lillington: It is.

Paul Boag: You've got that as well. Of course, knowing your authority ranking from an SEO point of view is really good, because you want to maintain those URLs. You don't want that kind of content to break.

Marcus Lillington: Exactly.

Paul Boag: Even if my model is correct, oh, you just need to start from a user's need, that's actually a good justification for doing a content audit, because you don't want to break that SEO traffic even if you end up redirecting it to a new page.

Marcus Lillington: Yep. It is a composite measure combining link counts, rankings, trust, and other factors.

I just couldn't find my notes. Three more to go.

External visibility. This is measured by the percentage of sessions in which the page was viewed, and any session where that particular page was viewed, but where it was the landing page.

Paul Boag: Okay.

Marcus Lillington: That gives you, a how well it does on Google and other search engines.

Reach is just simply the number of unique page views. A page that obviously has a lot of traffic will do better on a reach point of view.

Finally, stickiness, which is about bounce rate. crosstalk 00:21:00

Paul Boag: Okay, so there's quite-

Marcus Lillington: … all of those factors in.

Paul Boag: There's quite a lot of factors there that are not subjective. There are data-based figures which I, it's good. It's good.

Marcus Lillington: Yeah.

Paul Boag: Okay.

Marcus Lillington: That was the point of it. That was the point of trying to come up with something which isn't all subjective. It isn't all just in the reviewer.

Because, in theory, this is another problem, if you're going to do a content audit of, say, a thousand pages, you might share that across four people. They're, even though you, obviously, you would try to set up definitions before you do it, people are going to measure things differently.

Having these score-type things where you're pulling in stuff from Google Analytics and analytics and Moz and the readability thing just helps average that out a bit, so hopefully useful stuff.

Paul Boag: No, that is very useful. You almost convinced that a content audit is worth doing.

Marcus Lillington: I think a small content audit is worth doing.

Paul Boag: A small one, yeah, yeah. Although, with those more automated ones, you can roll it out further. Yeah, it's interesting. It's a fascinating subject.

There are tools out there that help with some of this kind of stuff. Siteimprove is one that spring to mind that does some of these kinds of things, around things like accessibility as well and other various factors. Andrew in the chat room uses Siteimprove at his university that he works at. It's a good tool. It's a good tool.

Right. Let's talk about another good tool which is Balsamiq. Actually, I don't want to talk about Balsamiq as a tool, because, by now, you all will already know all that there is to know about Balsamiq. We talk about it pretty much every week. They've been a long-term sponsor. You probably had heard about Balsamiq even before you started listening to this podcast, because most people have to be honest.

But, Balsamiq are doing a lot more these days than just their core tool, their wireframing tool. They're also providing a lot of learning and support stuff for people, so that the wireframes they produce are better quality.

One of the things they've done is they've asked me to create theories of initial impression videos where I get to look at a website for the first time and give my reaction to it. It's all very off the cuff. It's all very spontaneous. I am not that rude just a little bit rude. No, but, I try and make it as constructive as possible. I don't rip people's websites apart, because that's not very useful for anybody.

But, I'll give some, say some things I like about it, some things that I feel that could be done to make it even better. I've done one of these already, and I have to say, I actually loved it. It's brilliant fun. We've got another four planned.

The one that I've done, I don't think it's been released yet. But, we're going to get a load together, and then we're going to release them all over a period of time. I need websites to review basically.

Balsamiq have said, ask people whether they would like their websites reviewed. Happy for it to be, to review absolutely anybody's website. I've done an agency site so far, so I don't think I want to do another one of those. But, if you've got any other, if you've got a very big website, then just ask me to review a bit of it, for example. If there's a particular landing page or a checkout process or something like that, happy to review just a part of a site as well.

No, Peter, you don't need to be afraid. Peter's saying in the chat room that you need to be afraid, very afraid. You don't. I'm very nice. I'm polite, and I'm a nice person. It's only Marcus that I'm ever rude to. He has a special place in my heart which means I can be rude to him.

If you want to take part in that, just go along to and submit your site there, and we'll get you done. You might be thinking that oh, my site will never get picked. Well, I've said this before on the podcast about doing this thing, and we still need websites. Because everybody goes, "Oh, my site won't be picked," and nobody ever submits their site, and it's bloody ridiculous. But, anyway, there you go, that's Balsamiq.

Right, so, really good thought for the day from Marcus today. I found that really interesting. But, I want to continue our conversation a little bit about conversion rate optimization. We're going to look at a couple things this week. We're going to look at designing for maximum visibility, and, then, later on, we're going to look at writing compelling calls-to-action.

Marcus Lillington: Before you get going, Paul-

Paul Boag: Yeah?

Marcus Lillington: … I have to say, your jumper looks very thick, and it's making me feel hot.

Paul Boag: Oh, it's because I'm feeling ill, Marcus.

Marcus Lillington: Paulie Paul.

Paul Boag: Look how pale I look as well, though that is crosstalk 00:26:05

Marcus Lillington: On you.

Paul Boag: Yeah, I'm pale and ill and drawn. Look how drawn I look. It's very sad. Michelle appreciates my jumper. She recognizes good fashion sense when she sees it.

Marcus Lillington: I'm not saying I don't like the jumper. I'm just saying it looks really … It's always so boiling hot in our office.

Paul Boag: Yeah, well, it's a very misleading jumper actually. It actually is quite a cool jumper. Because, I've got a T-shirt on under it as well.

Marcus Lillington: Okay. It's cool in two ways, Paul, obviously.

Paul Boag: Yeah, right. Let's talk about designing for maximum visibility. This is fairly fundamental stuff. If you're a designer, it will be very much a reminder. If you're not a designer, then it's the basic stuff.

But, it's surprising how poor some sites are when it comes to their calls-to-action, how they're often hidden. Yes, all right, if you sit down and you look at them they might look fine. Oh, yes, there's the call-to-action. It's all very obvious.

Yes, they might even do all right in a usability test session where the person you're testing with is giving the thing their full attention. But, as we've talked about in previous shows, people rarely are giving anything their full attention. What might look obvious to you is not going to be obvious to users. Making sure that your calls-to-action are prominent and obvious is conversion rate optimization 101 really.

How do we do that? Well, good starting point is think about the position of your call-to-action. Now, immediately, you're going to think, "Oh, it's got be above the fold." No. That is not correct. People think that oh, if it's, call-to-action has got to be prominent, therefore, it has to be high on the page, not necessarily.

There are two reasons for that. One is high on the page, but in the wrong position high on the page will perform worse than lower on the page in a good position.

For example, if you put your primary call-to-action in the top right, that is dead space. People don't see top right. They look at top right for very specific things like search, shopping basket, things like that, but, generally speaking that is a pretty dead space. If you put a call-to-action there, it's not going to get noticed.

By comparison, if you put the same call-to-action in the central column where people are actually reading content and lower on the page, even below the fold, that will outperform something sitting in the top right, generally speaking. Obviously, there's a lot of other factors involved in it. But, generally speaking, it doesn't need to be high on the page if it's positioned well.

The other aspect when it comes to positioning, it goes back to pick your moment which we talked about in a previous show. It's better that … Let's say, for example, your call-to-action is sign up for a newsletter like it is on my website. That call-to-action on my website happens at the bottom of a page after an article. The reason being is, because until people have seen the quality of my content, they're not going to be ready to complete a call-to-action. If I put it at the top of the page, they're going just go straight past it to the blog post, and then they might forget if they're not reminded at the end.

Position is really important. I find that central tends to work better than left or right or anything else. In the main flow of your content is often a really good place for call-to-action.

But, you also need to consider things that draw attention to or away from that call-to-action. For example, if I designed a page whereby there were lines of text or some kind of graphical element that slopes towards your call-to-action, that's going to draw your attention to it. If they slope away, it's going to draw your attention away from the call-to-action.

Now, the best example of this is imagery. Imagery will have an enormous effect on whether somebody spots a call-to-action or not. The call-to-action's proximity and position related to imagery's really, really important.

I often describe imagery, almost to think of a user's attention as they look at a website almost like a gravitational field. You drop something like an image into that gravitational field, and it has huge gravitational pull. It pulls your attention to it. It's going to pull your attention away from other elements like a call-to-action. Unless that image is in some way directly related to the call-to-action or is drawing the eye then back across to the call-to-action, it's going to kill it dead.

For example, on the basis of what I've said about right-hand side is not as good as the left-hand side, you might think, "Oh, I'll just drop an image into the right-hand side and have the call-to-action to the left of it."

Well, yes, except that gravitational pull of an image is so heavy that your eyes could well skip directly over the call-to-action to the image and never make it back there, unless there is something in the image that pulls the eye back to the call-to-action. That might be a line or a movement in the image or something like that.

The best example, the most powerful type of image is faces. Faces are incredibly powerful. We're biologically programmed to look at faces. If you have, let's just take that example I just gave, you had a call-to-action in the left and image in the right. If that person's, in that image, that face in the right-hand column, if that person is looking back towards the call-to-action, you're rosy. Because, you'll follow their eye movement back to the call-to-action.

Yeah, Marcus is demonstrating this perfectly on the video camera.

Marcus Lillington: I've been doing it for the last five minutes, Paul.

Paul Boag: Oh, I don't pay any attention to what you're doing. But, if Marcus Lillingtonooks off to the right-hand side of the page as he's doing at the moment, your eye gets drawn off the page, and that's it. You lose them.

Even if he's looking directly at the camera, because the call-to-action is to the left, your eye's going to jump over the call-to-action, look at Marcus, and that's like a full-stop. He's looking directly at the camera.

The use of imagery is really, really important. Where people's eye-lines are, or what the direction of movement, any of those things is really important. Use imagery, but use it with care and closely associate your calls-to-action with it.

Another thing that works very well if you want to draw people's attention, talking about gravitational fields again is to remove anything that has a gravitational field from around the call-to-action. Even if the call-to-action itself isn't that bold, it's not that strong a gravitational field, if there's nothing around it sucking attention away, then the call-to-action stands out. In other words, include a lot of negative space around your call-to-action, because then nothing else is going to pull your eye away from it.

Another thing that you could do which is fairly obvious but is worth saying is make your call-to-action big. Although we all joke about make my logo bigger, when it comes to your call-to-action, size is important. Size does make a difference. It doesn't just make a difference, because, obviously, the bigger it is the more attention-grabbing it is. It also makes a difference, because it allows you to do more things with your call-to-action.

Take an e-commerce site. You might have a buy-now button on an e-commerce site. If your buy-now button is relatively small, all you've got space on that button to say is buy now. There's no more space to say anything more. Yes, you'd put text around it and that kind of thing. But, the problem is people read things out of context. They don't always read everything that's around it.

You double the size of that call-to-action button, now you can have something like, "Buy now to become a better gamer," if you're selling, I don't know, gaming mice. You can put more context in the call-to-action which means that it's going to perform better. Size really does matter.

We could also use color, of course, contrasting the color with the things that are around it works really well. But, again, beware of the fact that a large number of people are color blind. You can't rely on color alone, but it certainly can make something pop if it contrasts with the main color palette of your website. But, then, obviously, if you have lots of different colors going on, on your website, it's not going to make any difference.

Now, there's an interesting side note to this color thing which is social media icons. One of the many, many reasons I despise social media icons on websites with such a deep passion is because their color scheme doesn't match the rest of the website. It makes them stand out from everything else that's going on.

Now, that's fine if your primary call-to-action is the social media, follow us on social media. But, in other situations, well, most situations, it's not, is it? That's a secondary thing.

Marcus Lillington: We just use the words Instagram and Twitter, just the words.

Paul Boag: Yeah, yeah. Fine, great-

Marcus Lillington: That's cool-

Paul Boag: … lovely.

Marcus Lillington: … isn't it? Or you could gray them out I suppose. I'm never-

Paul Boag: Yeah, you could-

Marcus Lillington: … sure whether you're allowed to do that, I'll bet you are with Facebook and Twitter.

Paul Boag: You can do whatever the hell you want. It's not like Facebook is going to chase down every person that changes the color of their logo, is it?

Marcus Lillington: No, because they would have to have a company the size of Facebook to do that.

Paul Boag: Yes, but most of them are too busy trying to extract advertising revenue and mining your personal data to be bothered about anything else, aren't they really?

Marcus Lillington: Yes, Paul.

Paul Boag: Color, and the last … To use color but be very careful. You make sure you're only … For example, whenever I create a color palette for a website, I always have what I call a highlight color. That color I only use for calls-to-action.

The other area you need to be a bit careful in but is really powerful is animation. Without a doubt, again, we're programmed to notice movement. Anything that moves grabs our attention.

Obviously, if you use that well on a call-to-action that can grab your attention. But be so, so careful here. Do not have looping animation. Because looping animation becomes, unless it's got a very, very long loop, but looping animation inaudible 00:38:05, because animation is so powerful, a movement is so good at grabbing our attention, too much movement distracts us and makes us unable to concentrate on other things like, for example, the sales copy that's trying to encourage you to complete the call-to-action.

But, I've seen really nice stuff done where, for example, you scroll down on a mobile device this one I really like where it's got, you scroll down the page, and there's the add-to-basket button right next to the product. As you keep scrolling, once the add-to-basket button hits the bottom of the screen, instead of it just scrolling out of site, it tethers to the bottom of the screen. It's there continually. That's a nice, little, subtle animation. Something fades in when you first scroll past it. Those kinds of things are fine.

Yeah, that's all I really wanted to say about visibility. Fairly basic stuff, but I think it's quite important that we cover the basics on the show sometimes too. It's so easy to forget this kind of thing as well.

When you're actually designing, to remember all of this stuff, especially, around things like imagery and how imagery affects other items. Because we, when you're in a design, you can get so caught up in the minutiae and the details that you don't take a step back and look, "Oh, crap, that image is going to have a big consequence on the items that are around it." Yeah, there you go.

Marcus Lillington: I've been trying to get people to, this sounds like … What I was about say it sounds like every client. Once in a while, I try and get people to … Start again, Marcus.

If a site's purpose is, the call-to-action is quite singular, there's one thing, there's one purpose to the site, then often go back to the Google example of, well, go and look at how Google is designed. There's just a single call-to-action in the middle of the screen. There's a few bits and bobs dotted around. I've never managed to persuade anyone to go that simple. But, what you're-

Paul Boag: No.

Marcus Lillington: … saying there does support all of that.

Paul Boag: It does. But, you have to consider the journey that the user is on. What makes Google unique is that they have one, certainly, from their search point of view, they have one very simple task that needs no persuasion. You don't need to persuade people of anything. They go to Google to search on something. As a result, then they can go that minimalistic. They just need a search box.

But, if there's any kind of journey involved, if there's anything before that, then it's necessary to persuade people of that, to provide supporting arguments for that. It's a tricky one.

But, yeah, absolutely, strip out everything. We were talking about this, this morning in the Slack channel, because I'm working on a checkout process at the moment. I've designed this checkout process, and I keep looking at it and going, "There's nothing in it. It looks empty."

Marcus Lillington: But, it's as you were saying, going back to, even in a usability test, somebody who's focused on the task, therefore, they will see stuff, they're more likely to see stuff than if they're just randomly arriving somewhere. It's even more reason to make it really simple and get rid of all the distractions.

Paul Boag: But, it's really hard to resist that urge to go, "I need to add more to it." Almost, not only, I can understand clients wanting to do it, because they're trying to persuade people, aren't they? You add more and more. But, as a designer, there's a part of you that's going, "Well, they're paying me to design this, and I'm not really putting anything in it."

Marcus Lillington: Well, I agree. That is good design.

Paul Boag: Yeah.

Right. Okay.

Marcus Lillington: What's next?

Paul Boag: Let's talk a bit about FullStory. I want to talk about something that I've not really talked about with FullStory.

FullStory's a session recorder. It allows you to watch sessions back. It allows you to understand what users are doing on your site and stuff like that. There are other tools like that out there. We're very much focused on, why do you want a session recorder, and how do they work, and what benefits they provide.

But, we haven't talked so much about why FullStory in particular is good, and why it's my favorite one of the session recorders out there. I think the thing that really makes me lean towards FullStory rather than its competitors is it is so fast and intuitive to use. It really is incredibly simple.

It's got this thing called OmniSearch which helps you find basically anything you want. You can put there find particular customers or people that are rage clicking or you can summon up page analytics or build funnels, all of this kind of stuff just by starting typing.

It's one of those really straightforward experiences where you can just type in whatever you want, and it's just so, you could type in your problem rather than working out what options you've got to select and that kind of thing which I absolutely love.

You can also move fluidly between aggregated data and individual sessions. You can go, for example, and say looking at the aggregated data of all the things that people rage click on. Then, you can go, oh, well, it's showing me examples of people that rage click on this particular thing, and it pulls back all the videos for it.

Then you might watch some of those videos and, then, go, watch one in particular that goes, "Oh, that person is also doing this particular thing." Then, you can say, "Well, give me aggregated data on everybody that's done that particular thing." It's like, I think I described it once like Wikipedia that you just go from one thing, you get drawn deeper and deeper into all these different things.

It's even really easy to set up as well, because you basically put one piece of JavaScript on the website, and it's going to record every user action. There's no maintenance. There's no manual tagging of specific things you want. It's all just there. It's so, so intuitive. It's definitely worth giving go.

You can sign up for a free month of their Pro account. No need to enter a credit card. They even make that easy. Then you can basically use if for a month, give it a go, if you get to the end of the month, and you can't maybe justify continuing with them, you can get a thousand sessions per month for free. If you do want to sign up, then you enter your credit card and away you go.

To sign up go to Include the boag, because, otherwise, I don't get credit, and, obviously, it's nice for them to know whether the money that they're spending actually goes anywhere.

Yes, there we go. Let's talk about writing compelling calls-to-action. We talked about some design stuff, let's talk about some writing stuff.

Okay, first of all, put credibility before hype.

Marcus Lillington: Yes.

Paul Boag: I know. Yeah, but it's so … You say, yes, right? Okay. But, didn't we talk about this before on the show?

Marcus Lillington: Yeah, I suppose it depends, doesn't it, on how much you want to keep your customers.

Paul Boag: Yeah, yeah, yeah. But, no, there's an honesty example. Did I tell the thing about … Yeah, I'm sure we had the conversation about bacteria. I'm … These things, the antibacterial things, and it's that, well, how honest is honest? How much crosstalk 00:46:22

Marcus Lillington: Yeah, yeah.

Paul Boag: … credibility before hype? Do you have to say, "No, you're not allowed to write kills 99% of all germs dead," you should say, "Fails to kill 1% of all germs." It's not a black and white thing.

What I think is about not hyping stuff up would be different to what you think Marcus. But, of course, neither of our opinions matter, all that matters is what users think.

Be very careful. If you're going to write things like headlines and calls-to-action, please, please, pass it by a real user. Because you might not think you are hyping things up, but your users might think something different.

It's a really tricky balance to get right, because you want to put, of course, you want to present your products in a positive light, and you should do. But, it's very easy to stumble into the world of hype and bullshit, basically, and marketing bullshit.

Marcus Lillington: Would your, the title of your new book come under that maybe, about being a dick, or is that-

Paul Boag: Yeah, well I'm-

Marcus Lillington: That's not actually … It's not really hype, is it? It's just whether it's appropriate. It's a different thing.

Paul Boag: Yeah. Well, we're not going to really call it that. We won't, that won't make it to the … It won't make it. I know it won't and, probably, rightly so, to be honest. It's funny for about 30 seconds if you've got an immature sense of humor like you and me. But, it's probably not the right way to go in the end.

But, yeah, and, again, you've got to take your audience into account as well. Fine, if my book was just appealing to 20-something, male web designers that have, obviously, all men have the sense of humor of a nine-year-old boy. But, I want it to appeal to people beyond that demographic probably. Yeah, so put credibility before hype.

That said, I think we can write attention-grabbing headlines. There's nothing wrong with that. There's nothing wrong with writing those kinds of headlines.

Headlines that ask you a question are really good, because we instinctively answer a question. "Would you like to become a better gamer?" going back to the gaming mouse example I gave earlier, right?

Marcus Lillington: No.

Paul Boag: Marcus wouldn't want to become a better gamer, but, again, you wouldn't be falling into the demographic that's buying a gaming mouse, would you? Questions like that. But, it forces you to answer it, and, so, to some level, you're instantly engaging.

Other types of engaging headlines would be the list, "Ten Ways to Become a Better Gamer." Now, lists have got a lot of bad press over the years. People have said, "They're lazy writing," and stuff like that if you go for lists.

But, the actual truth is, they're lazy reading. That's why people like lists. That's why lists are effective is because you can just scan them and get the gist of it. I'm actually a fan of lists. I think lists have got a lot to be said. "10 Reasons to Sign Up to Our Newsletter," great.

Then, the third approach that you can use has completely gone out of my head. Oh, how-tos, of course, "How to Become a Better Gamer," obvious.

Marcus Lillington: Obvious, so obvious-

Paul Boag: Yeah.

Marcus Lillington: … it wasn't obvious.

Paul Boag: So obvious that I had completely forgotten. Yeah, that's … Those will make your headlines more compelling.

Then, also, the wording that we use in them. Although we want to emphasize credibility over hype that doesn't mean we can't use some powerful and engaging words. A lot of words have got real emotion and real power to them. You can talk about, you could talk about signing up for a newsletter but using something like now or today is more compelling. "Sign up today," encourages action.

Marcus Lillington: "You won't believe what comes out in the third newsletter," and things like that?

Paul Boag: No, see, and that, that is hype, yes. It's a hard line to get, but, yeah.

Actually, there's quite a good tool that I use for this sometimes which is a tool produced by CoSchedule. If you google CoSchedule headline optimizer, it will bring you up a tool. Now, like any automated tool, I ignore it on a regular basis. But, it's quite useful to get you thinking about the words and terminology you use, whether they're emotional, whether they're powerful, et cetera. It's also got great lists of those kinds of words that you can refer to, but don't, use your judgment on it.

Marcus Lillington: I use it-

Paul Boag: The other-

Marcus Lillington: … sometimes.

Paul Boag: … thing … Yeah, it's-

Marcus Lillington: Yeah, a little bit.

Paul Boag: … just good. Yeah, it's worth a look.

The other thing you need to be looking at is focusing on benefits and features together, right?

Marcus Lillington: Yup.

Paul Boag: Instead of, "Buy our gaming mouse," "Become a better gamer," is more compelling, because it focuses on the benefit that you're eventually going to get from that, rather than I'm going to get a gaming mouse. Do you see what I mean? You're joining the dots in people's minds as to why they want this particular thing.

Marcus Lillington: I agree with what you're saying there about features as well or function as well.

Paul Boag: Yes.

Marcus Lillington: It's like, yeah, become a better gamer by using our super-duper mouse that's got these extra three buttons on it or whatever. All of that I think is, because people want that information.

Paul Boag: They do want that, and it can go horribly wrong if you don't provide that as well. The best example I ever saw is I went to the Skype homepage near Valentine's. The big banner at the top of the Skype homepage said, "Connect with loved ones this Valentine's." That was it.

Marcus Lillington: Okay.

Paul Boag: Right? If you didn't know what Skype was, it could have been a dating site. It could have been a social network. It could have been anything. That's no good, is it?

I tell you who does it well sometimes. I remember one example where they did it well which was Apple. Apple did this great thing. They had this great line. I think it was either for the iPad or the MacBook. It said something like, I can't remember the exact wording, "With a 16-hour battery life, it will keep going as long as you do."

That's quite nice, because it gave you the feature.

Marcus Lillington: Yup.

Paul Boag: Right? 16-hour battery life, but then the benefit of why that matters. That's what you're trying to do is get that balance between the two. Marketers tend to lean towards benefits and UX designers lean towards features, but you need both. The two work together.

But, that then makes the next recommendation hard which is be concise. But, there has to be a caveat on that. Be concise but favor clarity.

You read something like Steve Krug's book, Don't Make Me Think. He's got a whole chapter dedicated to omitting needless words. It's very easy to read that chapter and go away, "Oh, you've got to have as few words as possible."

Yeah, you actually have to have as few words as possible to succeed in communicating the message that you need to communicate. Conciseness shouldn't come at the cost of clarity. It shouldn't mean that you don't get to say what needs to be said.

Marcus Lillington: Yeah, there's a point, isn't there, when something gets so simplified that it starts to become difficult to understand. Then you've gone too-

Paul Boag: Or-

Marcus Lillington: … far.

Paul Boag: … it doesn't cover all, it doesn't say all the things it needs to say in order to convince people.

But, you see the problem often comes is, let's say I wanted to convince Marcus of something. That actually the Fester look that I'm currently carrying is the next best thing. It's where-

Marcus Lillington: No need-

Paul Boag: … things-

Marcus Lillington: … to persuade me of that.

Paul Boag: Yeah, okay. Well, let's imagine that you didn't think that my-

Marcus Lillington: Sorry, yes.

Paul Boag: … haggard, pale look was the way to go in the future. I would then have to persuade Marcus of that.

Now, I would make my arguments, but what often happens is we then start rewording that in a slightly different way, right?

Marcus Lillington: Right.

Paul Boag: In our desire to convince.

Marcus Lillington: I'm dreadful at that-

Paul Boag: Well, maybe-

Marcus Lillington: … yeah.

Paul Boag: Yeah. Maybe if I said it this way, it would get through. You get that in copy a lot. People will make a point and then make the point again in a different way.

Now, that is verbose copy. It's also verbose copy if you try and be, well, happy talk is what Steve Krug talks about which doesn't really add anything. It's not communicating anything. Be concise, yes, but not at the cost of clarity.

Marcus Lillington: Agreed.

Paul Boag: With your copy, the main thing actually your copy should do most of the time is something called objection handling. That's what good salespeople do. They ask people, "So what's stopping you ordering this used car today?" and then they will systematically knock down each objection you bring up to the point where you haven't got a reason not to buy.

Marcus Lillington: Best salespeople of all do that before the objections even come up.

Paul Boag: Yes, exactly. Spot on. As a result, that's what our copy should be doing. It should be dealing with objections before they come up.

Think about, let's think about something like signing up for a newsletter. Signing up for a newsletter, what are the objections people come up with? I don't want to be spammed. It might not be relevant to me. They're going to make it hard to unsubscribe. They'll sell my data to third-parties that kind of thing.

Well, if you look at the copy on the Boagworld site where I try and persuade people to sign up to my newsletter, I systematically deal with each of them. The copy reads, "Every two weeks," so you know how much … I'm not going to spam you every day. You're going to get it every two weeks.

"You will receive support improving your site by creating a better user experience and more effective digital strategy." That tells you whether or not it's relevant to you. "You can unsubscribe in one click, and I'll never share your email address with anyone." You see what I'm getting at?

Marcus Lillington: Completely.

Paul Boag: That's objection handling.

Then the final thing is think about the structure of your calls-to-action in your headlines as well. You need to think about this with blog posts as well, the titles of blog posts.

People tend to scan headlines, so they'll read the first three words and the last three words of the headline. That should give them the gist of it.

Marcus Lillington: That's interesting. I didn't know that.

Paul Boag: Again … Yeah, yeah, people won't necessarily read the whole thing. They just read bits of it. They bit read the start of it and the end bit of it. If you can take the start of your headline and the end of your headline and stick them together, and it still vaguely makes sense, then you're in a good place as well. There's a few-

Marcus Lillington: I'm going to your-

Paul Boag: … random-

Marcus Lillington: … site now, Paul, and reading out your headlines.

Paul Boag: Oh, I'm not saying all mine do it. It's do as I say, and not as I do. Here we go-

Marcus Lillington: This is a brilliant one. "My Complete Guide … for Your Company," there you go.

Paul Boag: Yeah, yeah.

Marcus Lillington: inaudible 00:59:12 I guess that does kind of work on, certainly on longer ones.

Paul Boag: Yeah, see … What is it? I eat my own dog food, which I never understood-

Marcus Lillington: Ew.

Paul Boag: … that inaudible 00:59:23. That's a very weird phrase.

Marcus Lillington: Yeah.

Paul Boag: That's about it for this time. Just to say-

Marcus Lillington: Cool.

Paul Boag: … that a lot of what we've talked about today, I've written quite a long comprehensive guide, because I seem determined to make you not buy my own master class which the whole of the flipping season was supposed to be about. Yeah, anyway, rant over.

If you go to, then you'll get a complete guide to all of this kind, basically, everything that we talked about today. No need to buy my master class at


Marcus Lillington: Mm-hmm (affirmative)?

Paul Boag: Will you do a joke?

Marcus Lillington: I will. These are all Paul Edwards' ones, because he sent me loads or put loads in the Boagworld slack channel. Again, sorry, a bit U.K.-focused, but I'll explain it afterwards.

A Tale of Two Cities was first serialized in two local newspapers. It was the Bicester Times and the worst of Times, The Worcester Times. Ha, ha, I said it wrong. Damn.

Paul Boag: You messed it up.

Marcus Lillington: I messed it up. The Bicester Times and The Worcester Times.

Paul Boag: Also, Bicester?

Marcus Lillington: Yeah?

Paul Boag: Is that a place?

Marcus Lillington: Yeah, in Oxfordshire.

Paul Boag: Oh.

Marcus Lillington: B-I-C-E-S-T-E-R, Bicester.

Paul Boag: Never heard of it.

Marcus Lillington: The Bicester Times … I've ruined the joke completely. It's a very good joke but not crosstalk 01:00:46

Paul Boag: The Worcester Times, yeah, that works.

Marcus Lillington: So does the Bicester Times.

Paul Boag: Bicester I'd not heard of.

Marcus Lillington: Oh, okay.

Paul Boag: They're places-

Marcus Lillington: They're places-

Paul Boag: … in case you hadn't-

Marcus Lillington: … in the U.K.

Paul Boag: … worked that out.

Marcus Lillington: Yes.

Paul Boag: That really, that was a very U.K.-centric joke. It made Kat in the chat room laugh. She could be just, she could be, it could be the crying-

Marcus Lillington: She's laughing at-

Paul Boag: … emoji.

Marcus Lillington: … my delivery, probably.

Paul Boag: Yeah, I think that's probably what was going on there.

Marcus Lillington: But, yeah-

Paul Boag: Everybody else-

Marcus Lillington: … I'll try harder.

Paul Boag: Everybody else in the chat room, completely silent. Not a-

Marcus Lillington: Tumbleweed.

Paul Boag: Not any … Yeah, Tumbleweed. Thank you very much for listening to this week's show. We'll be back again next week, goodbye.

Thanks to Alta Oosthuizen from Shutterstock for allowing me to use this image.