Menu Search
Jump to the content X X
Smashing Conf Barcelona

You know, we use ad-blockers as well. We gotta keep those servers running though. Did you know that we publish useful books and run friendly conferences — crafted for pros like yourself? E.g. our upcoming SmashingConf Barcelona, dedicated to smart front-end techniques and design patterns.

How To Raise Your Email Above Inbox Noise

If we look at email from a signal-to-noise perspective, then one-to-many emails are undeniably in the “noise” category; people are exceedingly good at ignoring them. Even Gmail and Hotmail are helping us ignore them by providing smart inboxes that sort incoming messages.

Emails from our families, friends and coworkers, however, are “signals.” We go out of our way to read them. But those emails aren’t the only ones — on occasion, we’ll happily read messages from businesses or complete strangers. Why? Because these emails are interesting, engaging and, most importantly, full of personality.

Further Reading on SmashingMag: Link

We’ve become very selective of what we consume in order to keep from drowning in our overfilled inboxes. Emails from Dad or a lifelong friend take priority, because they’re people we know and trust. Emails from outside our circle? Not so much. Our brains have an upper limit; we don’t have the capability to focus on an unlimited number of things, and our mental ability to care about the things that do interest us wanes over time.

But ultimately, we crave interaction, whether it comes from a trip to an unfamiliar part of the world, from conversations with friends or from the deluge of stories delivered by the 24-hour news cycle. We need to be engaged by ideas and people. It’s built into our psychology.

So, what can we do to make our email more engaging? How can we make sure that people are eager to read it? What gives an email personality? Before we can answer those questions, we have to overcome a couple of problems.

Information Overload Link

The first problem, as unintuitive as the notion might be, is the inability of humans to multitask. In “The Myth of Multitasking165,” Christine Rosen shows that more and more evidence is being found to indicate that our brains simply aren’t wired for it. Despite what many believe, performing several tasks at once (like sitting at a computer and browsing the web while talking on the phone and taking notes) isn’t multitasking, because we aren’t actually doing all of those things simultaneously.

What we’re actually doing is moving laterally, and switching quickly from task to task. Because of this, we end up in a state of “continuous partial attention,” a term coined by Linda Stone6 to describe the broadening of our focus from one task to many. Whether or not this sort of divided focus is a bad thing depends on the context; it serves us well at our desks, but take that phone conversation behind the driver’s wheel, and the effect is detrimental.

Our failure to maintain a high level of interest in a subject can be traced to what’s known in psychology as “secondary traumatic stress disorder,” colloquially known as “compassion fatigue” (see the chapter by Charles R. Figley in the “Sources” section below). You’ll find compassion fatigue in just about any caregiving profession — therapists may eventually need therapists of their own, and doctors’ bedside manner might cool over the years. You’ll also find it in customer service, where burnout is common. The growing cynicism over the state of news media is another clear example, as people become wearier of the “always on, always a scoop” environment. To combat that fatigue, news outlets double down on their tactic, and the problem turns into a cycle. So, compassion fatigue is our second problem.

To capture someone’s attention, we have to overcome these issues. For email, it lies in convincing people to take that first look, and then getting them to care enough to hang on for the long term. As people become more exacting of what they allow in, we creators need to become just as discriminating about what we put out.

The Subject Line Link

Getting people to take that first glance at an email can be difficult. Inboxes all seem filled to the brim, so finding a good hook is important. Writing captivating email content arguably starts in one place: the subject line. There’s no shortage of theories on what tone works best, or which words to avoid, or how long a subject line should be. It’s not an exact science, and a wealth of studies out there prove it. One of the more interesting looks at subject lines comes from the recent re-election campaign of US President Barack Obama.

Back in November, Bloomberg Businessweek published an article by Joshua Green7 on the short, familiar subject lines used in the Obama 2012 campaign emails. “Would love to meet you,” “Do this for Michelle” and “Hey” are three examples of subjects the campaign used.

Some of them read more like subject lines you’d find in spam than anything from the President’s camp. They’re not much better than what I’m seeing in my own junk folder today: “Let’s hang out!”; “Check this out”; “Hey!” In fact, I recall receiving the “Hey” email from the Obama campaign and immediately marking it as spam. Seriously? The Obama campaign sending an email that opens with “Hey”? Get real. That’s absolutely spam.

As it turns out, I was in the minority.


“Hey” was incredibly popular, and that email raised quite a bit of money for Obama. The single-word subject, incredibly light in tone considering its source, came out of left field and snagged the attention of millions of people. A casual tone for a decidedly non-casual topic worked as a hook and got people to open the email. Green goes on to highlight how the Obama campaign team didn’t stop there — it kept iterating and testing and running with different quirky subject lines, and in turn raised a large portion of its $690 million worth of online donations through emails. But the subject lines always kept that simple slant.

The Content Link

The success of the Obama for America emails didn’t just come from the subject lines, and the team didn’t reach everyone it targeted on the strength of “Hey” alone. The subject lines were the initial draw, but the content of the emails, written in a familiar and conversational tone that belied their lofty source and that subverted expectations, made them effective. (See “Message Machine: Reverse Engineering the 2012 Campaign199” by Jeff Larson and Al Shaw in ProPublica.)

An archetypal example of an email driven by great content is Dave Pell’s NextDraft10. Pell crafts each issue of NextDraft daily, with content curated from the day’s most important or interesting news, along with a smattering of related stories. What Pell does with NextDraft is undeniably successful: Today, the newsletter goes to more than 25,000 readers, and every month more than 2,000 new ones sign up. The open- and click-rate numbers for NextDraft remain so consistently high that they put the rest of his industry — media and publishing — to shame; the average open rate for NextDraft hovers around 57%, compared to an industry average that checks in at around 17%. Click rates are similarly impressive at around 30%, versus a industry average of just 4%. By all measures, Pell’s doing it right.


Much of the reason why NextDraft works so well comes down to the way he handcrafts each issue. Pell takes a different tack on writing, blurring the line between one-to-one and one-to-many emailing. “I am writing my content to be read as a newsletter,” he told me. “It’s not a repurposed blog. I write it as I would write an email to anyone.” The distinction that website and email content should be handled in fundamentally different ways is spot on. The contrast between the two is stark, yet many of the emails arriving in our inboxes today can be considered “website, extra small,” when they should instead be purpose-built to better suit the more personal environment that email makes possible.

Pell also likes the relative permanence of email “in this era of Facebook and Twitter streams, where the news seems to flow by in the blink of an eye,” and he says there’s a benefit to the fact that “a newsletter is right where you left it.”

The Audience Link

Crafting kick-ass subject lines and content won’t get you anywhere, however, if you’re writing to the wrong people. Recognizing your audience and what they expect is an important factor in crafting a successful email. In Pell’s case, NextDraft emails are written in a voice and tone of familiarity, which resonates with his readers and makes each issue valuable to them.

Knowing your readers is easier when you have a narrowly defined audience, like Pell does, but it’s not always clear from day one who your audience actually is; the readers of the Obama for America emails had all, at some point, opted in to receive the emails, whether through a petition, a donation or any of the million other ways there were to land on the campaign’s list. But over time, not everyone stuck around.

There’s a certain level of attrition in any audience. When I received my first Obama for America email, I immediately marked it as spam. Those “Hey” subject lines matched a pattern that I considered spammy, especially coming from a source that I didn’t believe would use such casual language. That doomed the endeavor from the start; working at MailChimp, I’m already preoccupied with junk email, so the notion that I’d mark the email as such isn’t really unusual (unless “Democrat 30-something user-experience designers working for an email service provider” is a segment of the population they’re specifically targeting — in which case, the subject line shows a lapse in judgment). So, admittedly, I’m probably not a good representation of who the Obama folks were trying to snag with those subject lines.

But the majority of their readers didn’t go anywhere. In this case, the remaining audience was very likely composed of Democratic and independent supporters of the President. That audience is part of what’s known in psychology as an in-group: a cluster of people who share a collective identity (see Henri Tajfel’s article listed below). Taking this into account, the notion that “Hey” worked makes a lot more sense when you also consider what your average email recipient expects. Obama’s “Hey” and a spammer’s “Hey” both work because we see “Hey” from our friends all the time; as an audience of social animals, people are already receptive to these short titles.

There’s a quote that reads, “I don’t know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody.” The remaining readers were already predisposed to open any email coming from the Obama camp. They made up a more narrowly defined audience that was emotionally invested in these campaigns, and they were exactly the right group to target.

The Source Link

Over the long haul, the combination of a catchy subject line, interesting content and an ideal audience will certainly get an email opened and read, but it also nets something else that contributes to long-term success: trust. When people subscribe to a list, they’re actively seeking a relationship with the creator and trusting that the communication they receive will have some value.

Here again, NextDraft is the perfect example. Dave Pell’s readers rely on him to curate, summarize and deliver each day’s important or compelling news stories. That’s a big responsibility for Pell, especially considering that some of those readers might be using NextDraft as one of their few news sources.

In a world where everyone has too much to worry about, many people can’t keep up with current events by seeking out stories from specific news websites, and instead rely on aggregators — be they friends, blogs or half-hour comedy news shows like The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. Given this, we can see how Pell himself acts as a news source. He isn’t simply forwarding content from various sources; he’s selecting meaningful stories, offering commentary and helping the reader to digest each item — much like an anchor you’d see on a nightly news round-up.

Pell has developed a trustworthy voice with a sense of gravitas, but he can also be funny and lighthearted, and his tone changes to suit the news he’s summarizing. Pell’s personality, combined with his interesting and reliable emails, builds trust. His emails resemble something we’d receive from a friend. Pell says there’s “a certain level of intimacy to the exchange… People let me into their inboxes, and if they have something to say, they can just hit reply.” This openness to discussion makes his readers trust him even more, and his conversational style of writing makes him more accessible as a creator.

Practical Application Link

The principles followed by Obama for America and Dave Pell are building blocks that we can apply to any other email campaign.

Knowing the audience might be the most important piece of data to have before that first campaign goes out, although we may not know who exactly that audience is. In the beginning, casting a wide net is OK. Eventually, defining the audience more narrowly will be essential; that broad view that we start with makes it harder to find what works moving forward. Specialization is key. We can begin to focus on a more narrowly defined audience simply by asking ourselves who we’re writing for, by finding our in-group. Is that group comprised of industry peers? People with similar cultural interests? Friends? We can adapt our content and style based on this better understanding of the audience. We can come to a place where we’re sending them email they actually want to read over and over because, in the end, it’s something we’d read ourselves.

Once we’ve defined our audience, then crafting subject lines that work is about fitting the right peg in the right hole. It’s not an easy task, but we can home in on what piques our readers’ interests and develop a good hook by using our own preferences as a baseline. What would I like to see? What would get me to open this email? From there, we can iterate. Just talking to family, friends and coworkers to get an idea of what subject lines hit the right note for other people is a great place to start. Once the audience is a little larger, something more formal, like A/B testing, is a logical next step. With feedback from others, we then have a chance to develop our voice and tone and write in a way that keeps people interested and that fosters the relationship between creator and consumer.

Panic uses beautiful emails with a friendly tone and voice.12
Panic uses beautiful emails with a friendly and helpful tone and voice. Larger version13. (Image Source: Lucien W. Dupont14)

Writing good email content is a craft of its own, and one that isn’t easy by any stretch of the imagination. We can start with some good baselines, however. Email isn’t a long-form medium, and in a world that’s becoming increasingly mobile15, lengthy and wordy often does more harm than good. Write like the audience is distracted. We’re dealing with small screens, busy lives and short attention spans — every email benefits from being short and sweet. What we write should be focused, clear and concise. We can better serve our readers by formatting content into digestible sections. If we have a lot more to say, then linking to external content or even returning to the topic in the next email might make sense; the semi-permanent nature of email allows for some episodic risks to be taken. Remember, too, the importance of design in email. Presenting content in a beautiful way, whether through images or typography, can also improve how readers respond to emails.

Even given great content, the importance of creating a two-way relationship with readers can’t be overstated. Building a connection and making an email something that our subscribers have a stake in is necessary for success. Trust is at the root of that connection. If we’re able to provide readers with something of value that doesn’t just add to the background noise of life, then they’ll find the time and commit to hearing what we have to say. This bond is the ultimate goal for creators. A little personality goes a long way when it comes to making email interesting and worthwhile. People don’t want neutral email; they want intriguing and familiar. If the Obama campaign can get away with a “Hell, no” in its subject line, we can all find a way to pour a little bit of our own personality into what we write. Humans are social animals by nature, so why not make emails more sociable?

One-to-many mass email is, by definition, a largely impersonal venture, so email often ends up boring and lacking in character. But with care and attention, we can buck that trend and create emails that mean something to people. By getting to know your audience and writing to them in a personable and conversational way, your email can rise above inbox noise. It can be about human connection.

Sources Link


Footnotes Link

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. 12
  13. 13
  14. 14
  15. 15
  16. 16
  17. 17
  18. 18
  19. 19
  20. 20

↑ Back to top Tweet itShare on Facebook

Fabio Carneiro is a User Experience Designer at MailChimp, where he spends his days knee-deep in HTML email, designing and developing versatile, responsive emails for 3 million MailChimp users. He’s given talks at Litmus, ConvergeSE, and The Atlanta Web Design Group, and has shared his expertise in email marketing with publications like 500Startups.

  1. 1

    Pankaj Parashar

    April 8, 2013 2:19 pm

    I think the grammar of the article topic feels out of place. Is there any other way to rephrase the statement?

    • 2

      Yes, it should be “too,” as in “One-too-many.” If we’re starting on the grammar bandwagon.

      Otherwise, interesting article. I’m a writer, so stuff like that bugs me and can even get in the way of the content. Fabio needed an editor to review it.

      • 3

        If you’re referring to the text in the first paragraph that reads “one-to-many emails are undeniably in the “noise” category”, that, to me, is correct. He’s referring to emails sent by someone addressed to many people (thus “one-to-many”), such as newsletters and other types of bulk emails.

    • 4

      Comment about the content, not the grammar!

  2. 5

    Well said. Perhaps a little off topic, but The Source section’s comments on trust intrigued me.

    “When people subscribe to a list, they’re actively seeking a relationship with the creator and trusting that the communication they receive will have some value.”

    I completly agree, but I also consider the amount of email I may be signing up for before I subscribe to a list. If the content is valuable, but the volume so much as to just create more noise in my inbox over time, I may not subscribe and just hope to come across the communication on my own later.

    I have to trust that the creator will not burden me with too much email before I subscribe.

  3. 6

    I love this article. It is short, nothing technical but it gave me a feel of what I might be doing wrong and some inspiration for new ideas. Key takeaways: personal, short, quality, interactive.

  4. 7

    Aaron Martone

    April 8, 2013 6:17 pm

    Maybe it’s just the pessimist in me, but when I see ANY email from a business, it’s written off immediately as solicitation. Maybe it’s because I know in my heart that businesses don’t really care about me beyond my wallet (and that’s understandable as we don’t have a personal relationship, it is instead, customer and business)

    There are a handful of businesses that I will initially read because of their importance (Paypal, my bank, my web host, etc.) but even those more times than not are solicitations and nothing of importance.

    One of the most infuriating email practices a business can partake in is automatically subscribing you simply because you chose to contact them via their website. I sent a company a “Thank you” for the excellent product they provide, and I never got a response from them, but a couple days later I started getting solicitations from them.

    When contacted to be asked for removal (because their email provided no automated method), they stated that it was a newsletter and not a solicitation (I’m not sure if they were being technical or just obtuse), but it’s little difference to me; it’s uncalled for and I did not opt-in to have my contact information used for those purposes.

    Maybe it’s the pessimist in me, but I just find it hard to believe ANY email campaign can be successful. It sounds like it aims at brute force methods. Cold calling, as it were, until someone bites. Like, “If we send out 1000 emails, and 10 people buy, we have a 1% success rate.” On the face of it, that doesn’t sound successful, especially if you consider that 990 of those emails may be considered as spam by their recipients. It just seems very disrespectful to me is all.

    I’m not anti-social by any means, but I will also counterpoint myself and state that I don’t do the whole Twitter, Facebook and social media thing. So maybe these types of campaigns are more effective on those with said mindsets?

    • 8

      Fabio Carneiro

      April 9, 2013 8:38 pm

      You’re not wrong about the primary reason businesses send out email; absolutely, they’re about making money – I don’t think there’s any question about that.

      There are businesses, however, that go the extra step of sending useful, thoughtful email. The one that immediately comes to my mind is BlackLapel, an online custom clothier. They send out the traditional “Hey, we’re having a sale, buy our stuff” emails, just like any other business (like this: But interspersed between those, they send out some more general “We want to make your life better” emails (like so:

      That’s the stuff I’m talking about; it’s personable, valuable, and builds up my love of the brand. And because they take the time to earn my admiration, you can be sure that they’ll get my money.

      Email campaigns can be and are very, very successful. Not for every business, of course, but I think if you looked at email marketing in general, it’s an unqualified success. It’s also not at all like cold-calling. Cold-calling is so named because calls are generally unwarranted. Email is, in most cases, the opposite; people opt-in to receive communication (I’m referring here to one-to-many email, not transactional email). When all is said and done, your hypothetical “1000 emails, 10 buyers” would actually be pretty darn successful.

      As far as your receiving email without solicitation, I’d hazard a guess that the company didn’t do it out of the blue – if you bought a product from them online and provided your email, that’s your opt-in. It’s not the nice “double opt-in” that everyone should be using, but it’s all they needed for permission. That being said, I understand your complaints about companies emailing without solicitation; that’s spam, and it’s illegal.

      • 9

        Although I agree on most parts of your article and comment, I find the following problematic:

        “if you bought a product from them online and provided your email, that’s your opt-in. It’s not the nice “double opt-in” that everyone should be using, but it’s all they needed for permission.”

        Which permission? If someone buys a product (or in this case gives feedback), that’s a transaction and not by any means a permission to send a newsletter or an explicit wish to be contacted in other ways. Companies often (arrogantly) assume that demand for their products equals desire for the brand or somehow gives them a right to further “engage” the customer.

        This is not the case and this standpoint can damage a brand: It demonstrates a lack of respect towards the customer, a lack of understanding and an “egocentric” attitude on behalf of such a company. As brands often are perceived as entities with certain attributes, similar to persons with character traits, this behaviour is equal to a self-centered, imposing douchebag with whom nobody wants to interact more than absolutely necessary. You don’t want your company (or brand) to be ‘that guy’.

        Unwished advertising (be it direct or indirect via helpful advice in the context of the product or brand) is not ok and contrary to your comment, a lot more is needed for a real permission: Unless I – as the customer – explicitly express my wish for additional or contextual information, I do not grant permission.

        • 10

          Fabio Carneiro

          April 10, 2013 2:40 pm

          I agree with your assessment that it’s a little presumptuous (I think arrogant may be too strong a word) of a company to start flooding in-boxes with email simply because a product was purchased; it definitely bothers me when it’s my own inbox.

          I’ve made plenty of purchases from places that I’ll likely never shop again; it’s unlikely I need or want their email. The continuation of that practice is why I still have multiple email accounts, with one I use specifically for online shopping that can be filled with whatever advertising gets sent out without my explicit permission.

          Is it annoying? Hell yeah, it’s annoying. Would it be better to let people opt in to receive email, instead of forcing them to opt out? Absolutely. No argument there.

          Regardless of that, companies that do use purchase-as-permission are within their legal rights to send email, so long as they conform to standards set out by CAN-SPAM.

          And that’s the problem with single-opt-in list subscription: it’s a really crappy way to ‘get’ permission to send people email, but it’s not illegal. So, yeah, in an ideal situation, “a lot more” would be needed for real permission.

          Fortunately, that’s what double-opt-in does, basically asking people “Are you sure you want this email? Yes? Okay, but are you REALLY sure you want this email? Yes? Great!” Unfortunately, not everyone is on the double opt-in bandwagon (even though it’s a demonstrably better practice:

          So put all of this in the context of my article —

          How you send email to your readers matters; it’s directly related to trust. Sending something to people out of the blue is a bad idea. Everyone hates the cold sell. Give them a reason to come to you by providing interesting, personable, and valuable content.

  5. 11

    I’ve sent out cold emails for my web design business in the past and I haven’t had the greatest results. This post has gotten me thinking again and I am definitely going to test out a more conversational, personal tone to see if we get some better results, just out of curiosity more than anything.

    I want to believe, and the evidence with the Obama “hey” message is convincing. Personally, If I see “hey” I immediately look to the sender. If I don’t know them, I automatically assume it’s spam. I do think that a more friendly, personable subject line would be important though.

    In the past our professional communications have been titled something like “Professional Web Design Services – Great Local Deals” – perhaps we could adapt this sort of thing into something like “We looked at your website, and it looks like you could use some help!”

    Just a starting point, we will probably test a few variants of more personalized messages and see which ones we get a better response from.

    Thanks for the insights in this post, it got me thinking, and that’s what it’s here for right!?

  6. 12

    Ade Rahmat Budiman

    April 12, 2013 9:03 am

    Hey I love this site, this is my imagination for designing everything.. You the best designer , very well..

  7. 13

    Greg Provians

    April 13, 2013 12:58 am

    I’m not sure what Spam laws are like around the rest of the world but purchasing a product and supplying an email address in that purchase is not an automatic “opt-in”. You must specifically allow the customer to say “yes – I want to receive emails” (the box / selection cannot already be filled in either) or you can end-up in deep trouble.

    • 14

      Fabio Carneiro

      April 17, 2013 9:49 pm

      That’s not true, at all. In the U.S., purchase-as-permission is a perfectly valid form of opt-in – according to CAN-SPAM – so long as you have contacted the person within the past 12 months and they haven’t objected or opted out.

      So, businesses can email a person once after they purchase something, and then email them regularly about sales etc. until they say stop.

      Where a company can run afoul of the law here is if they only the customer once and then try to contact them again 13 months later; that would be illegal, since the permission from the purchase would’ve expired.

      • 15

        Michel Hendriks

        April 27, 2013 10:32 am

        When does the permission from the purchase expire, and where does it say that? Since the laws over here seem pretty equal to the US, I’m guessing that there is no set term that defines a customer relationship. Which would make sense, since everyone will understand that buying ink or coffee is quite different from buying a laptop. Why wouldn’t the company be allowed to email me one year later that my standard warranty is about to expire for instance? But emailing me a year later about coffee that was used up a few weeks later, that’s something entirely different.

  8. 16

    gaurav khanna

    April 16, 2013 2:32 pm

    Awesome article… 5 star…very good for blogs post/articles which we share with our end users through emails only.

    Thank you once again… :)

  9. 17

    Michel Hendriks

    April 27, 2013 10:26 am

    Nice article, except for 2 things.

    1) You shouldn’t have included the Panic example, it’s a bad one. If you are cleaning up your list, you’re probably sending a campaign to those that are not opening your emails (as far as you know). The correct way to then do this, is to send a campaign that requires action to keep receiving emails, not inaction.

    2) I cannot believe that you wrote a huge article like this and did not include the word ‘relevance’ once! :) I love email marketing, and more relevance is what you should strive for every single time. It decreases spam complaints, improves your reputation and makes campaigns more successful!

  10. 18

    One of the biggest issues I have with this article is considering an email successful simply by looking at the open rate and click through rate compared to industry average. Statistics can be easily manipulated. When you look at the industry average some lists of all the different types of industries that use email may not include all types of businesses. I am a consumer also and I know that I am much more likely to open an email that is a news article that I have subscribed to then I would a email selling a product. In order to determine the success of an email campaign a better practice is to compare a click through rate and open rate with a similar business in the same industry.

  11. 19

    Really great article, I am excited about sending out our next edm and really working on the content to make it concise, natural and personable, thanks Fabio!


↑ Back to top