Google Chrome and the Importance of Good Copywriting
If you’re using Google’s Chrome browser and access a page that isn’t in English (or whatever your default language is) you see a message saying something along the lines of “This page is in German. Would you like to translate it?” and two buttons, “Translate” and “Nope”.
Do Google Chrome want me to translate this page? Or is it offering to translate the page for me?
Wait, do you want me to translate this page? I don’t have time for that silly stuff, and why do you presume I know German? Well, it turns out that Google is offering to translate the page for me, not asking if I would like to translate the page for them.
This is a classic copywriting mistake. Whoever wrote this obviously knows how this feature works and what it does and didn’t put himself into the mind of a user who has never seen this feature before. As a user of Google Chrome, you’re suddenly offered a feature you’ve never heard of and this one line of text is all you have to make sense of things.
The question, “This page is in German. Would you like to translate it?”, can really be interpreted in two different ways:
- We - Google - don’t have a translation for this page, would you - the user - like to translate this page for us?
- We - Google - have a translation for this page, would you - the user - like us to translate this page for you?
As a first-time user, you just have to guess. Most users of course won’t give this any thought. Depending on the user’s current state of mind, she will just subconsciously jump to one of these meanings and then (possibly) be disappointed when the feature does the exact opposite thing.
The fix is easy. A mere three extra words could easily get rid of any ambiguity: “This page is in German. Would you like us to translate it for you?”
Can you think of other ways Google could have worded this message? Or other examples of bad copywriting?
User experience research, delivered twice a month
Join 25,000+ readers and get Baymard’s research articles by RSS feed or e-mail:
Topics include user experience, web design, and e-commerce
Articles are always delivered ad-free and in their full length
1-click unsubscribe at any time
Related Articles
More E-Commerce Research
Free Research Content:
- Popular Articles · a listing of our most popular research-based articles on e-commerce UX
- UX Benchmark · benchmark with case studies of 123 major e-commerce sites ranked by e-commerce UX performance
- Page Designs · navigate 9,200+ manually annotated full-page screenshots categorized by page type
Products & Services:
- Baymard Premium · full access to all 618 research-based design guidelines, UX case studies, page designs, and review tool ($720-$3,000 / year, based on plan)
- UX Audit · get an in-depth analysis of your site’s UX, conducted by a Baymard researcher ($1,900-$9,700 based on scope)
Comments
Premium Research
Get full access to Baymard’s 78,000+ hours of research and empower your UX team and decisions.
Audit Service
Get Baymard to audit your site’s UX performance, compare it to competitors, and identify 40 areas of improvements.
JanJune 10, 2011
My classic example is a strange translation from English to German. Facebook’s “Share” button is translated to “Teilen”. Though “teilen” can also mean “to share”, it’s main meaning is “to divide” which seems strange for novice Facebook users. Why will my message be divided? What they actually meant was “mitteilen” or “to inform”. Strange choice of translation.
James StevensJune 13, 2011
The point here is well taken. There’s no question the text needs to be fixed. But purely for the sake of discussion, I wonder if anyone has been the least bit confused by the Google text. I recognize that the wording permits both meanings, but considering the context and what I assume most users know, it’s hard to imagine anyone thinking Google may be requesting a translation. Even if I were confused by the question, the button labeled Translate tells me it’s going to happen for me as soon as I click it. But maybe I’m assuming too much about the mind of the user. Wouldn’t be the first time.