Traditional proofreading techniques help you spot typos in e-mail. Spam content checkers also help. But e-mail is a different medium and requires more extensive quality assurance than print, just as publishing a Web site does. In response to my recent proofreading column, David Baker, VP of e-mail and analytical solutions at AGENCY.COM wrote the following:
Most companies wouldn't publish a new Web site without extensively testing it in different versions of browsers and operating systems. So why would they send an e-mail out to hundreds of thousands of people and not even know how they view it?

I couldn't agree more. As Baker points out, e-mail quality assurance has several aspects:

Functional: Is the e-mail constructed properly? Do images render? Are links correct, and landing pages rendered and directed? Is it coded properly?

Reception: Does it render properly in all tested e-mail environments? How does it look with image blocking? Does it represent a good mix of text and images in the preview pane?

Compliance: Does the e-mail contain all CAN-SPAM elements and any other required functions (opt-out page, brand standards, corporate links/language)?

Most marketers spend a lot of time in the creation and design phases, according to Baker, but then send badly coded e-mail that doesn't function properly and renders poorly when ISPs block images.

Proofreading Isn't Enough: The E-Mail QA Lab Posted by: DTB at 9:15 PM  |  Permalink