Doctor Who is a Woman and A Frog Talks and That is All Fine

Here follows a very personal Doctor Who season recap. Be warned. I might as well be chatting to my therapist.

Feeling warned? Okay, cool.

I Am Not a Doctor Who Expert

I watched a lot of Doctor Who as a child, and I’ve watched a little less as an adult.

Yes, I tuned in enthusiastically for ‘New Who’ back in 2005, when I was just 18. And I’ve dipped in every time a new Doctor is cast.

Last year, partly in anticipation of the showrunner switch (a regeneration of its own, from Steven Moffat to Chris Chibnell) and out of a The Thick of It-shaped fondness for Peter Capalidi, I watched all of his Doctor’s seasons back to back.

But I’ve never been that turned on by ‘new Who’. I am not the first to suggest this, of course, but its casting of the Doctor as a sort of super hero god never felt right, and while I have no problem with a love interest (do you really think Ive never fantasized about the Doctor?), it  seemed to be on his terms.

Like this string of women (never a man, as far as I saw) were trying to hook up with a celebrity who was a bit too good for them.

Capaldi, both in his treatment of the character and the way he was written, rowed a lot of that back. And so I was excited, tremendously excited in fact, to see how Chibnell – creator of the excellent Broadchurch – would handle the Doctor mythology. I was especially excited when he cast Jodie Whittaker, both because she had been so incredible in Broadchurch and because she is a woman.

(Yep, I’m not going to pretend that I wouldn’t have been excited by any woman).

And Cor, isn’t it Excellent?

From the off, Chibnall’s Doctor Who felt totally different from the seasons before it.

There has been much criticism that series 11’s ensemble cast — the Doctor travels with three companions, none of whom seem sexually interested in her, nor worship her, though she and Yaz seem to flirt in a casual way — draws attention away from the brilliance of the Doctor but this is exactly what I liked.

The Doctor is barely the focus. A wonderful character, certainly. The leader of the group, for sure. But not a super hero.

From Caper to Caper

When I have watched New Who, I’ve found that the season-long story arcs really tire me out. With the exception of David Tennant’s second series, and its gradual teasing into the narrative of the Doctor’s arch nemesis The Master, they each felt labored to the point of overshadowing individual stories.

While the latest series has an arc of a sort (certainly, it has a call back; a conceit that suggests a continuity that is not really there), it is primarily made up of standalone adventures and it is also largely very lighthearted.

This allowed the series to pause for breath far more astutely than in previous years, without the need for prologues or codas. Some of the best Doctor Who episodes since its return have been strong, standalone stories, each of which could have been written without connections to larger story arcs.

(Think ‘Heaven Sent‘, a sort of puzzle adventure; the universally praised creeper, ‘Blink‘; or the dark and moody Second World War two-parter, ‘The Empty Child‘ and ‘The Doctor Dances’).

Under Chibnall, there has been a clear focus on these strong, contained narratives. From ‘Kerblam!’, the superb critique of modern conveniences like Amazon, to the slightly comedic ‘Witchfinders’ with Alan Cummings’ excellent portrayal of King James I, the series has remained light, somewhat wry, and highly effective.

“Caper” is the only word for a lot of these self-contained stories this season. A decidedly old-style word, now, for a supposedly super modern (why must a woman be, by definition, ”too modern”?) iteration of a beloved character, show, and formula.

It is Also Absurd

For my money, the best episode by far ended with the Doctor talking to a whole anti-universe that manifested itself as a frog with the voice of a pensioner from Sheffield.

Many people were outraged by this, since it appeared to lack gravitas and poked fun at the seriousness of protecting the universe during intergalactic time travel.

To my mind, it was perfect: Chibnell, it seems, has decided to take Doctor Who in as many new directions as he possibly could — perhaps aware that, after casting a woman as the Doctor, certain people were going to hate whatever he made, so why the hell not change everything?

And so he moved to an ensemble cast, he made heavy-handed allusions to the stupidity of Brexit, he turned the show back into something that works for kids, and made certain political points about civil rights via stories about the partition of India and Rosa Parks.

And, he put a universe inside a frog. Because let’s all remember that some SF/Fantasy is very serious indeed, and is all the better for it, and some is whimsical (cf. The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy) and is all the better for that as well.

Doctor Who has been running, on and off, since 1963. It’s had plenty of time to try plenty of things (which it has) and it will have plenty of time to try plenty more.

I, for one, am grateful for all that this latest series brought: from its occasional absurdity, to its occasional gravity, to its occasional political commentary.

I feel like the kid who fell in love with Tom Baker’s Doctor, all over again. And that is a very nice feeling indeed.


The Kodak Horror Story and Other Observations

This being a review, of sorts, of ‘Kodak’ by Andrew Norman Wilson, given its world premiere at this year’s New York Film Festival.

SPOILERS ABOUNDif you care about that sort of thing.



Purge Labs

May 2018 – August 2018.


What is a copywriter, these days?

What is a copywriter? Good question. Here’s Wikipedia, with my own bolding for emphasis:

Copywriting is the act of writing text for the purpose of advertising or other forms of marketing.

Copywriters help create billboards, brochures, catalogs, jingle lyrics, magazine and newspaper advertisements, sales letters and other direct mail, scripts for television or radio commercials, taglines, white papers, social media posts, and other marketing communications.

They are generally known as website content writers or copywriters if their work appears mostly on the Internet.

Curious. The term copywriter seems to apply to all commercial writing for print media and to only some commercial writing for the web.

Instead, people prefer the term ‘content writer’, which reflects a similar change in perception that (as I’ve written) spawned the term content strategist.

So then, what is a copywriter?

Ordinarily, I tell people I’m a copywriter. I do this because, while I write regularly for websites, social media, video, and the like, writing is my true skill.

In other words: if I had to lose all my professional body parts and retain one that kept me alive (so to speak: bear with me), it would be writing.

Thus, I am a copywriter. Whatever anybody else says. Because I am not skilled in content writing: in other words, any ‘content’ I produce is text. However, I work regularly with others, as a copywriter, to produce videos, infographics, apps, and more.

It would be inaccurate of me, I think, to call myself a content writer precisely because I don’t ‘write’ images or videos or anything else.

But I do know how to script a video. Or provide the words for an infographic or app. Because I write. I am a copywriter.

Content Design. Content Creation. Content Strategy

I suspect that the distinction to be made between a ‘pure’ copywriter or a ‘pure’ designer’, and their ‘content’ equivalents, is the reason for the increased popularity of terms like ‘content design’ or ‘content creator’.

Both terms (despite the use of the word design) are discipline-neutral and draw the specialism away from what (due to circumstance, I think) has traditionally been seen as a text-based role.

That is, anybody who trained as a writer (of any kind) and got into commercial writing 10 years ago or before has likely held the title of ‘copywriter’.

Those people, because websites have historically been text-heavy, became specialists in website copy. And they became ‘content writers’.

Now — and this is likely to become increasingly true — content creation could begin with various specialisms. It’s not impossible that video-only sites pop up, and plenty of video-heavy sites already exist.

Sure, those videos would need scripting: but if the video component of a site becomes more important than the text part, the core competencies of the role will more than likely change.

That’s why, to go back to the top of this discussion, I call myself a copywriter and I also call myself a content strategist.

Because realistically, I do know how to determine relevant content, and content types, for the right audiences — and that’s the strategist in me — but if you ask me to produce it, I’m falling back to text.

And that’s what makes me a copywriter. Oh, and a journalist. And a fiction writer. But that’s a discussion for another day.

Enjoy that waffle? Email me!



February 2015 – October 2017.



November 2017 – May 2018.


What is content strategy?

To me, ‘content strategy’ is a new phrase for some older concepts, repackaged to meet the expectations of a new time.

Which isn’t to say that it’s wearing the emperor’s new clothes – but I’m not sure that calling myself a content strategist now makes me different from calling myself a writer, copywriter, editor-in-chief, managing editor, or even art director prior to the year 2000.

I say this because Wikipedia’s definition (via A List Apart) is completely accurate and the need its definition fulfills didn’t arise from a new demand now being met by myself and the content strategists of this world.

The definition is as follows:

Content strategy plans for the creation, publication, and governance of useful, usable content.

I have done all of these things, under various job titles, since 2008 – the year this definition was published. As yet, I’ve never held the job title of content strategist.

These titles have included but are not limited to the following: senior web editor; content manager; web content specialist.

At the same time, friends and colleagues in the world of print media have taken on similar roles. My partner’s job title is Managing Editor: she works with her editor-in-chief to do all of those defined tasks for her magazine’s print editions and for the magazine’s online content.

This might mean that we are all content strategists. Or that none of us are.

When did we start saying ‘content strategy’?

And yet, there are some specifics about the work of a content strategist that differentiate it from the rest. This has a lot to do with the timing of the term’s coinage.

This graph, taken from Google Books (so not infallible, clearly) starts in 1970 because mentions of the term before that are almost non-existent. The term is barely used (relatively speaking) before the year 2000.

To my mind, this is more important than what a content strategist does. Since content strategy is closely associated with the field of user experience (UX), also a term that replaces previous names for similar concepts, it’s the pairing of the two and the focus of a content strategist’s work online that makes his or her role different.

In other words: a content strategist combines aspects of the roles of editor-in-chief, managing editor, copywriter, art director, and more, into one role; he or she excels in UX; he or she more-than-likely has a stronger data analysis background than those other roles; he or she usually works for a primarily digital company.

And the idea that one would combine UX, data analysis and editorial in one role but have that role act primarily in a marketing or communications capacity – rather than an IT one – is specific to the 21st century.

This does not mean that somebody working as a managing editor (or an editor-in-chief, or a copywriter, or an art director) does not also perform combined duties. To the contrary. This is my main problem with calling myself a content strategist: plenty of other job titles exist that do basically the same thing by other names.

Which is why the key to the question ‘What is content strategy?’ is not the what but the when.

It’s tautological: a content strategist is a content strategist because that’s what we call them now.

As editorial, marketing, and information people, we needed a term that suited the time: changing the name is easier than adapting old definitions.

Alright cool. Seems like a bit of a cop-out. So then what is content strategy?

Now the name thing is out the way, let’s get to the good stuff. My definition:

Content strategy combines UX with a background in editorial, and usually (but not exclusively) refers to online content.

This comes in all kinds of forms. I would divide the role between frontend and backend strategy (as Ann Rockley does), and therefore separate the functions as follows:

Frontend strategy. The Editorial stuff

  • Developing the customer journey: what do customers really want, and when?
  • Writing of guidelines: tone of voice, branding, SEO, and style guides
  • Researching, creating and enforcing use of customer/user personas
  • Maintaining information architecture: where should content permanently live?
  • Developing content key performance indicators (KPIs)
  • Defining core concepts and messaging: what will be said, and why
  • Creating a long-term vision: what will the result of a strong content strategy be?
  • Maintaining a production schedule. Based on the backend strategy, what will be published?

Backend strategy. The technical stuff

  • Content types: how can we produce re-usable content? How will it be re-used?
  • Automation: What content can be automated based on other information, such as user group or behavior?
  • How will the content management system (CMS) function, so that writers and editors can work with it?
  • Backend information architecture: where is data stored and what (if any of it) is manually retrievable?

Even for the backend content strategist, my definition holds; in previous years, he or she might have been called an ‘information architect’.

So what do you do?

I’m primarily a frontend content strategist. I work with my colleagues to develop user personas, map out customer needs and journeys, and sketch a content plan that can fulfill their needs and aims.

I also manage the publishing schedule for that content – and I look closely at how a core concept should filter through channels and content types.

For example: if you were a travel brand publishing a series of destination tips from a local Brooklyn expert, should it be in text? Are we publishing it on our own website, through Apple News, or both?

Would a video suit better? Might we produce a video for use on social media and text for Apple News and our own site?

If we make a video, what sort of video should it be?

And most important of all: what is this content giving to our target audience? And which persona in our target audience is it meant to please and attract?

There is the pedantic-boring-guidelines aspect to that too. When we publish, are we meeting the guidelines set out in our SEO governance? Does it match the tone of voice guide? Is it (sorry) “on-brand”?

Then you’re not a backend content strategist?

I think about backend strategy a lot, and have quite a lot of experience in it — if briefing requirements to somebody counts as experience. That is, I tend to work with a product owner and his or her team of frontend developers to develop aspects of backend content strategy.

To give an example of how that worked: at Albelli, I worked in seven different CMS; one for each vendor in the Albelli group. Each of these CMS was identical to the other but for the language: we published content in Dutch, English, French, German, Norwegian, and Swedish.

Naturally this is massively unsustainable. It leads to both long and unnecessary manual work and, more worryingly, to human errors in basic information.

If you have to change the price of one aspect of a product (in the case of Albelli, that might be the price of changing a photo print from gloss to matte), and you have to do that manually seven times, often working in languages you can’t read, you’re likely to make a mistake.

Similarly, if every piece of content on your website is written in manually, it becomes almost impossible to know if something needs to change in more than one place.

Wouldn’t it be nice if you could change it in a single place or, even better, have that information pulled from a central database that a writer or editor never even has to see?

Well (here comes the twist) that’s what we did. As far as possible we made sure prices and product names, no matter where they were used, could be pulled from a central information source.

Then, we began to look at how we could connect our text translation software with our CMS, via a custom-built API, so that we’d have to do very little manual publishing at all. Instead, frontend developers would build a module that could pull the correct content from the translation system and then publish the module, with the relevant content, to the places we’d defined.

In this scenario, I (and my boss and my colleague, a visual merchandiser) would define our requirements and then I would work with the product owner, in this case acting as backend content strategist, to make it all happen.

Or at least, we started doing all of this. As with anything, not all the work was done when I left the company. No doubt the work continues now.

A content strategist is a content strategist is a content strategist

Such has been my experience: that product owners act as de facto backend content strategist and I work with them as the frontend content strategist; I take on aspects of the backend strategy and so do they.

I’d love to work with a completely dedicated backend content strategist one day, to see what difference it makes.

But I suppose most of all, I’d like to keep doing what we’ve all always done: keep mixing roles and responsibilities to perform our work, whether we’re product owners, managing editors, information architects, copywriters, art directors or editors-in-chief.


Enjoy that waffle? Contact me about developing a content strategy for your organization. 



On Misha Mengelberg – The Wire, July 2017

Published in July 2017. In print, though you can order from The Wire’s website.

From the piece:

The whole event was typically eclectic, so it was hard not to consider Mengelberg: a musician that added a wryness to whatever he touched — as it moved from free jazz to swing; from cacophony to melody — and yet had a sincere, sweet humour to all that he wrote so that often when I hear it, it genuinely makes me laugh. If you need a pick-me-up, try the 2003 Bimhuis performance of Mengelberg’s ‘De Sprong, O Romantiek der Hazen’, recorded for the album Aan & Uit, which combines a soft and almost saccharine jazz with semi-in tune and hilarious, nonsensical vocal ramblings.  

That recording might best encapsulate Mengelberg’s relationship with the ‘serious’ and the ‘light’ side of music. Because, while he made such recordings, Mengelberg was also responsible for some of the Netherlands’ most important musical institutions: he helped create the Bimhuis itself, and the ICP; worked as a director for many years of STEIM (the Studio for Electro-Instrumental Music); and campaigned over many years to improve levels of funding to the arts. It’s not a coincidence that my interest in Mengelberg and the ICP came some years after a performance of John Cage at a festival in Amsterdam’s Muziekgebouw aan ‘t IJ, the building to which the Bimhuis is joined and in which I first discovered that experimental music could make me laugh out loud — that, indeed, it was at its best when it did so.

Like what you read? Commission me.


Copywriting: some examples wot I did

Since 2009 I’ve written for a range of clients, for a range of projects. Aside from ‘pure’ copywriting, that’s covered SEO writing and UX writing.

Some of my work is below. In each case I’ve written content to dramatically decrease users’ interaction cost.

That is:

to make everything so clear that a user knows exactly what they’re seeing and what they need to do, which in turn increases trust and conversion rates. 

If you’d like to hire me, and decrease your customers’ anxiety, just get in touch.

Case study: Albelli (2016-17)

At Albelli, a European e-commerce brand, I incrementally improved every product page to speak clearly to customer needs and get users as quickly as possible to where they wanted to go.

Photo printing product at Albelli
Above: By adding a button with clear text to the header, Albelli improved clickthrough and conversion.

In the case of Albelli, this is the app where users can create and buy a product: so we added clear buttons to every header.

Case study: the International Baccalaureate (2014)

As with Albelli, the International Baccalaureate (IB) needed to streamline its content to make it clear to users what to expect and how to perform the tasks they came to the website to do.

There are numerous examples of this at the IB website, which I’ve summarized in the work I did on the IB’s information architecture (IA).

About the IB screenshot
A large international organisation with many offices and functions, the IB needed to easily communicate what it stands for.

The best example of the work I did, from a writing perspective, is About the IB. Before December 2014, the IB’s ‘about’ content sent users down various paths with no explanation at all; I rewrote it to explain clearly and succinctly to new readers what the IB was, where it began, and what it does. (See an example of the content before December 2014).

Importantly, I linked to areas of the website that could generate revenue for the IB, mapped against clear goals developed in the IA project.

Case study: The Key Support (2012-14)

Last: an example of pure, concise and plain writing that gives readers everything they need to know.

At the Key, an information service for UK schools, everything is written so that readers can understand everything about a topic in ten minutes. To explain it as The Key often explains it: a school leader should be well-versed on a topic after reading one article on the way to a meeting.

I worked at The Key as a writer and researcher from 2012 to 2014, producing two articles per day according to key web writing principles: short sentences, bullet lists, clear citation, and plain English.

To see how that looks, see The Key’s sample articles.


UX writing: wtf is that?

Defined by Google as writers who “shape product experiences by crafting copy that helps users complete the task at hand”, UX writing is the art of producing microcopy and text for microinteractions such as error, confirmation and help messages.

This is my favourite kind of writing and the hardest. If you’d like a free text review of your digital product, get in touch.

Case study: Albelli

From February 2016 to October 2017, I worked as Web Content Specialist at Albelli, an e-commerce company with two desktop apps, an online app, a smartphone app and a tablet app.

While writing all the copy for these, I took the opportunity to align messaging across apps and to slowly move the tone of voice from technical into conversational language.

I’m not allowed to give the figures (damn contracts) but, since its launch in February 2016, the smartphone app is doing very well indeed.

If you’d like to improve sales through your apps or improve your website microcopy, contact me.