This is the published edition of our weekly UX writer and UX writing newsletter, The Dash. Sign up to The Dash to have these updates sent straight to your inbox!
Are we grateful for our mistakes? Maybe we should be. Today we start off with a great review of the biggest mistakes we make as content designers, and why they’re actually useful for our careers. Meanwhile, check out a deep-dive into some key Twitter word choices, and an interview with LinkedIn’s content design manager. More resources than you can poke a stick at.
- Make more mistakes! Cayla Dorsey is a content designer at Microsoft, and she made a bunch of mistakes in her first year. In her recent article she describes these learning experiences, but also why she hopes you make the same mistakes too.
- Which design skills do we need? So many of us freak out because we can’t design entire apps from scratch in Figma. Let’s calm down a bit. In this article from TJ Lee, a content designer at Slack, you’ll get a great summary of the most important skills you need. Hint: it isn’t software.
- Behind the scenes of Twitter’s prompt copy. Always love a good case study. Anita Butler and Alberto Parrella do a deep-dive into some prompts that encourage users to reconsider potentially harmful language. It’s a fantastic case study, but also a good reminder of how to incorporate content design needs into overall business goals.
- It’s research time! Why do we need UX researchers? Great question! And Jane Davis breaks it down for us. Side note: if you’re not yet friends with your UX researchers, you definitely should be.
- UX writing and technical documentation. Our good friend Dave Connis – author of the UX Writing for Technical Writers course – speaks to Document360 about what you should consider when making user-friendly documentation.
- You have a new connection request. This interview with Keri Maijala, content design manager at LinkedIn, is great for all sorts of reasons. This sticks out: when looking for new content designers, Maijala looks for curiosity. “We want to understand what their thought processes look like”. Too right.