Why do people visit the Guardian’s website? Because of Polly Toynbee, of course (and the excellent political judgement it routinely demonstrates). But—on a day to day basis, why do people end up on The Guardian’s website and what do they want to do when they get there?

Here is a list of visitor scenarios, based on my own usage and, well, not much else really. In particular order:

1. they’ve been directed to a story via a web link, Facebook, Twitter or email
2. they’ve been searching for something specific and entered via a search engine link
3. they come to the home page and initiate a search for something
4. they want to find out about the major news story of the day
5. they just want to browse the news
6. they’re interested in a particular section or collection of stories (e.g. football results)

I think that’s a pretty reasonable list of scenarios. So, my next question is: Which of these home page designs best serves these user requirements?

Or:

And the answer is: The mobile site. Why? Well:

• a simple navigation menu with just three choices means that readers 3 and 6 can easily find their way through the site to wherever they’re heading. Desktop readers have a choice of 29 links on two levels in various beautiful colours to pick their way through
• readers 1 and 2 can’t do much more than read the story they’ve been directed to; there’s no sidebar, no social media icons and no dating links—just a column of text and a choice of moving up the page or down the page
• the first thing reader 4 will see is the lead story, and it’s really obviously the lead story
• reader 5 can browse up and down the mobile page for a list of stories and articles. She starts at the top and proceeds to the bottom of the page. If there’s nothing that interests her the choices are simple: Try a section or a search. The poor desktop user has a choice of hundreds of stories across several columns: video, navigation lists, big, bright pictures. Lots and lots of stuff to sort through: Too many decisions and routes through the content, too many competing stories

Of course, I’m simplifying somewhat: You could argue that the reader can go straight to the search box on the desktop site, whereas his mobile equivalent has to go via a search link. But there’s clearly a much simpler path through the content on the mobile site.

I’d kind of given up on The Guardian after the Lib Dem debacle. But the new mobile site has got me browsing through it again. And here are two interesting things: I’ll spend far longer on the mobile site reading more stories than I would on the desktop site, simply because it’s easier to scan, navigate and actually read.

And that reading is done in a more traditional, print–like way, from the top of the story down to the bottom.