Is web content localization a race to the bottom?
It often seems that the primary purpose of localization is to create unreadable English that is cheap to translate into unreadable German.
A great many organizations do not believe content has any real value. They see it is as a cost, a necessary evil. Thus, they want to produce content for the lowest possible cost.
This approach leads to awful websites that lose sales, infuriate customers and damage the brand and reputation of the organization. What senior managers in particular have failed to realize is that these days the first impression many customers get of an organization comes from its website. First impressions last.
Let’s say that the primary market of the organization is America. Whatever attention the American website gets, you can be pretty sure the Japanese or German versions will get much less.
A large European multinational once ran a workshop in Japan with a view to helping it do a better job on its Japanese website. During the workshop the team was shocked to find out that hardly any of the Japanese customers in the room were going to the Japanese website. Instead, they were going to the English version. Why?
“The English version at least has a chance of being up-to-date,” one Japanese gentleman stated. “And the quality of the Japanese is not very good.” I dealt with a Danish company once who I’m sure had a very good Danish-language website, but whose English-language version was awful.
I want to let you in on a secret: You don’t get brownie points for trying on the Web. Web customers are ruthlessly impatient, skeptical and cynical. They don’t look at your badly translated content and say: “Well, at least they tried. I think I’ll buy from them.”
Do you know what some organizations are doing in order to address the problem of having to have multiple-language websites? You won’t believe this unless you work for a large multinational. Pull up your chair. Take a deep breath.
What they’re doing is reducing the quality of the content of the primary language so that it’s cheaper to translate. Here’s the way a typical conversation goes:
“You can’t write it like that.”
“Why not?”
“Those words are not easily translatable. You have to use these words that are easy to translate.”
“But these are not the words that our customers use.”
“Doesn’t matter. You still have to use them. Saves money for the organization.”
You may have heard the old saying: “penny-wise, pound-foolish.” Well it truly, truly applies to how many organizations manage-mismanage-their content. Somebody please tell these people who run these content sweatshops that in a race to the bottom everyone ultimately loses.
Cheap, badly-written, awfully-translated content spends its toxic life circling the drain. But it never really flushes away. It just leaves a stain on your reputation and brand. And if you don’t believe that then you don’t believe in the power of the Web.

Marc Poulin says:
Added on November 2nd, 2008 at 5:41 pmI am from Montreal, Quebec, Canada. I speak English fluently but my daily life is spent in French. On the web, I visit most often American and Canadian site. Whenever I go to a multilingual web site, I always choose the native language of the web site.
Even in 2008, too many web sites have poorly choosen words for navigation in the primary language. Imagine how much care is given to the other language.
David Farbey says:
Added on November 2nd, 2008 at 10:11 pmYou are absolutely right. Driven by a desire for top search engine rankings based on keywords, writing for the web has become commoditised, and it is bought and sold on price alone. No-one thinks about web site usability, or bothers to understand customer behaviour. Words are just a means to drive traffic, and not intended for reading by humans. The original texts are rubbish, and rubbish remains rubbish whatever language you translate it into.
Robert Charbonneau says:
Added on November 3rd, 2008 at 4:09 pmSites should not be translated. Period. They should be adapted, localized (visually and in their writing) to respond to the needs and the culture of the target audiences. The best selection of terms or customer carewords in English almost always end up with the worst possible selection of terms in French or in any other language.
What you want is not a translation but a complete rework of the page to carry the message with the highest possible level of efficiency in all the languages used. To adapt, to rewrite, to reorganize in order to clearly respond to expectations the readers have.
Content is key! My hope is that some day “second languages” websites will be given way more attention.
Eve Demange says:
Added on November 4th, 2008 at 12:45 pmWell, I have a very good example of a bad wording due ti false translation in French.
The English version of Google analytics can be seen at this address http://www.google.com/analytics/
The French version of Google analytics can be seen at this one http://www.google.com/analytics/fr-FR/
As you may see, on the French HP, they translated “Access analytics” which is perfectly clear in english into “Analyse des accès” which doesn’t mean anything in french !
So, at the beginning, each time I started by the French page I clicked on the bad button and got lost on a few pages before I actually managed to see my report. Until I finally ended up on the original HP in english and understood they just made a translation mistake !!
One could think that such a big company with such great applications, would invest in good translations at least for their Home Pages. Well aparently, it’s not the case.
It gives a small idea of the total lake of interest for translation’s quality on the web…
J.D. Abolins says:
Added on November 6th, 2008 at 1:55 pmI like Robert Charbonneau’s comment that Web site should not translated but built specifically for the foreign audience.
Communicating with other cultures is not merely converting the words. Colours, symbols, design themes and such can often speak louder than words. A US company might emphasise individual autonomy in the theme of its Web site. Translating the words without adjusting the theme may backfire when dealing with a market that values familial duties over personal autonomy.
Colours have different meanings across the globe. Some colour schemes may send an unintended negative message.
A company may try to make extra efforts to adapt a site to another culture but miss important cues. For example, it try using traditional cultural designs and themes but miss the cue that the intended audience in that country is trying to modernise and will interpret the traditional designs negatively.
Localisation can be helpful but it needs competant understanding of the cultures & trends and, as Gerry McGovern has well said, good content.
Brian Anderson says:
Added on November 11th, 2008 at 2:02 amThere’s an easy way around this - create a number of different sites overlaid upon each for the major groups (countries-wise) of customers who visit the site as indicated by an analytics program. Site visitors would click on a flag and the site would change to that country’s language and preferred colour scheme.
But this probably isn’t going to happen owning to a stubborn and stunning ignorance of the importance of a well written website. To answer your question Gerry, “Don’t these companies understand that a website represents a first impression?” Well, no. Being a content writer myself, I know that most companies fail to see the connection between their website and the company’s real-time fortunes. The emphasis is still on design and special effects and just getting stuff up there is good enough.
Why is this so? Because it’s easier to service the irritated customer on the other side of the phone or the ones that shows up at the retail store than worrying about some ‘mythical’ person who abandons the website for whatever reason. It’s known concrete vs. abstract unknown and therefore less important because they cannot be seen. So, so many companies do not measure the effectiveness of their websites; it seems enough that they have one.
Eve Demange says:
Added on November 19th, 2008 at 2:53 pmA message to inform you that Google Analytics France changed the wording on the HP access button for the reports. One can read now : “Accéder à Analytics”. Much better ! Incredible reactivity for such a big company…
Marc Poulin says:
Added on November 23rd, 2008 at 9:31 pmMessage to Brian,
Please do not associate country flags and languages. In Canada, more than 20% of the population speaks French. In the United States, 30 million people speak Spanish.