Open your eyes. Open your eyes. I said... OK, somehow that worked. Enter what you thought about in the box on this page.

Now look up at the dog. Now back at… Kidding, kidding. I'll leave Old Spice parodies to Elmo.

I'll guess that some of you thought of two people having a conversation. You know, the old-fashioned face-to-face kind. Others probably thought of the new kind of conversation taking place on social networks. Many, however, likely thought of something with more pizazz. Maybe a Flash presentation with moving graphics, video, sound and 3D-like effects. Certainly this is the right answer. Certainly this is more interactive than a simple chat or — is it, is it OK to say this, New York Times? — tweet.

It might be. It might not be. I'll make the case, though, that this humble blog post is more interactive than many more sophisticated presentations.

Interactivity has become such a buzzword that many otherwise thoughtful people don't fully think about what it means. They confuse bells and whistles for interactivity. Bells and whistles can contribute toward engagement — a topic for another post — but don't in and of themselves contribute toward interactivity.

More than any other two elements, interactivity is about multilateral feedback and choice. This blog post allows for ongoing human-to-human feedback — you can answer the poll or write a comment, I can respond to it in the comments or with a new post, and you can respond to my response by writing another comment or answering another poll — and virtually infinite choice — each of us can write pretty much anything we want.  

The average Flash presentation allows for sporadic human-to-computer feedback — you hover over a button, it changes color; you click on it, up comes new text and graphics for you to click on or hover over — and limited choice — your options and Flash's responses have all been pre-determined by the developer.

Am I saying that text polls and comments are better than Flash presentations? No. What I'm saying is 1) Don't overlook opportunities for simple interactivity. And 2) Don't assume something's highly interactive just because it's highly involved.

Always think in terms of value-added. How is presenting this this way adding value for users? How is users accessing it this way adding value for you?

Creative Commons photo by Flickr user SMN