Content Management Systems harm websites
Yes, you read that right! Customers looking to build a web application are often wooed by the many ‘benefits’ of using a Content Management System. But before we begin: What is a content management system (abbreviated CMS)?
When a web site is built, complicated code is written to allow it to function. Some of this code builds what we see on the surface on each page. For example: the design of the site, the layout, and its content.
(Oh dear, we’ll explain that screenshot later!)
Web developers have built systems which now allows clients to edit the content themselves and have instantly updated content without having to go through experienced web developers. These systems are called Content Management Systems and supposedly pose these benefits:
- Site content changes are seen instantly as the client thinks it up
- Clients feel more ‘in control’ of the site
- No need to pay web developers to make small and frequent edits
Sounds excellent, right? Cheaper, faster, and you’re in control. Well, unfortunately, it’s not the entire story.
What most clients don’t realise is that editing a website is not like editing a word document. CMSes create a rather similar interface which is easy to use, but causes serious side effects:
- The CMS editors don’t know how to cleanly separate content and style. This is the difference between what is being displayed, and how it should look like. This cruft builds up over time, making your page load slower and making it increasingly hard to make changes in the future.
- The CMS editors only allow you to change what things look like on the surface. Although you might not notice the difference, search engines are less likely to be able to understand your pages, and this will negatively affect your search engine rankings.
- They don’t discipline against bad media practice. These editors will let you upload any type of media without any considerations of how to optimise them for the web. Unoptimised images and videos mean slower website loading, more server loads (and thus server costs), and often ugly looking content.
- They add a lot of unnecessary code. This is another invisible side effect which leads to slower page loads and poorer search rankings.
- The editors don’t refer to the underlying engine when linking pages. This means that should you want to rename pages for SEO, or move site, your links are almost guaranteed to break.
- There is no version control. It becomes much harder to track series of changes to a single page and undo edits when problems occur.
- It gives you the illusion that you are an interface designer. Experienced interface designers pay attention to details such as padding, ratios, consistency, and usability that clients simply cannot match. A well designed site will slowly degrade in usability and aesthetics until it has to be redone from scratch.
- It lets anybody change anything. It doesn’t stop you if you’re changing a vital system page, butchering crafted copy that has undergone hours of SEO, or even edit the text of something you don’t have authority to. It becomes a human single point of failure.
- It exposes you to system internals. If you’re a client, all you really want to do is edit some text on your page. Modifying forms and dealing with modules is out of your league, and likely out of your contract scope. You’ll have to learn how to use a complex system just to change what is often just a simple site.
- You’re stuck with it. CMSes are walled gardens. They lock you into the system you’ve chosen and when you want something customised in the future, don’t be surprised when you get billed extra.
With the site almost fully in the client’s hands, clients can unknowingly break the system internals, or worse, install 3rd-party low-grade modules which can compromise the site’s security. With the power to edit now fully in the hands of clients, these system changes do not pass through the developers eyes. Over time, these accumulate and you end up with a broken site.
It isn’t all cheaper – to attempt to prevent some of these effects, developers have to spend extra time to develop custom modules for you to manage sections of the site. These costs, of course, have to be passed to you.
CMSes are also rapidly changing and constantly targeted by hackers. Not only does this mean you’re open to security breaches, the server will likely be under extra load by hackers and bots attempting to crack your site. You’re then pushed into a maintenance race to constantly update modules and your system that quickly gets forgotten: until you’re left with an outdated, unable-to-upgrade system that’s a sitting duck for hackers, even if you’ve never needed to make a single change to your content.
Did you receive training for how to use a CMS to edit your site? Bad news. You’re the only one who knows how, and probably not for long. CMSes change very rapidly – so your training will become outdated. There also isn’t much of a standard when it comes to CMSes, so you’re restricted to development firms who specialise in your CMS should you ever need professional help in the future.
Funnily enough, using a CMS is no picnic for developers, either. All CMSes cause developers to build things not the way they should be built, but the way the CMS forces them to build it. This may save time in the short-term, but often leads to costly maintenance nightmares in the long-term.
Together, using a CMS turns the craftsmanship of your site from the costly investment you poured into experienced developers into a cheap, ineffective website. You’re practically throwing away the money you spent going through detailed design revisions, search engine optimisation, training, website optimisation, responsive design, and even choosing the firm you hired to begin with. And given the accumulative nature of these adverse effects, you can be guaranteed that any changes you need done in the future will become much, much more costly.
These aren’t one-off improbable horror stories. These are things I have witnessed again and again with CMS-run sites. It is practically guaranteed to happen: the only question is when. The industry knows this, too – it’s just that CMSes are good at the short term and the prospect of self-editing content is alluring as a selling point. But it’s time to spend your money properly: get an expert craftsman to manufacture it right the first time, and keep the quality you paid for.
… coming up next: CMSes done right.