best format for an e-mail newsletter?

I am looking for the best format for an e-mail newsletter. A format that is readable by users in various formats. Anyone have a source or a template source?

I suggest using simple text format as being the most compatible and least likely to be blocked by spam filters.

Hi,

Christian is correct that plain text will be the most widely readable. However, my open rates on html newsletters have been much higher, now that I have switched to that. If you are interested in html newsletters there are several ways to get templates. Is this something that you are interested in?

Best wishes,

Sasha that's an interesting observation - It's generally accepted that plain-text is more widely accepted for a variety of reasons... Perhaps your audit of html includes some form of track-back image or URL? (I'm not sure how else you could audit "open rates"), and this would of course include any email client that automatically "opened" a html newsletter (most still open html automatically although this is something an increasing number now block).

Just maybe your "open rates" do not equate to "acceptance" and/or "read rates"... How did you audit the "open rate" of a plain-text newsletter?

Cheers, Don

If you run a website that can contain any rich content you want to present then use a plain text newsletter as a driver to your website.

Most modern mail clients will see something in the form "http://www.mysite.org/article_253.html" and convert it to a link automatically. This means you get the link functionality without the HTML overhead or potential for being blocked.

[Note: the quotes around the URL are to keep the forum software from turning it into a link.]

Hi, Don,

It's generally accepted that plain-text is more widely accepted for a variety of reasons

I've noticed that this is the case here in the TechSoup forums, and I think that it might make people not experiment with html newsletters. In my personal experience (and I was a die hard for plain text) html's generated more excitement and readership.

The reason that I concluded this was a combination of hits to a forum (where longer articles were posted) and Urchin stats. What I mean is:
I sent out a plain text newsletter, with a short paragraph about the article. Then I posted the longer article in a forum. I was able to see the number of reads on that article.

When I moved to an html newsletter, I did the same format, ie short paragraph in the html newsletter with the longer article posted in html on the website, and I tracked the click throughs with Urchin. So I compared the numbers of reads in the forum (plain text newsletter) to the number of page views to the article posted on the website (html newsletter).

Does that make sense?

Best wishes,

Hi Sasha,

The procedure makes sense, but I think there might be any number of extraneous factors that influenced your outcome.

Did your test involve sending the same article to exactly the same people? (the fact they received two copies would of itself influence the outcome). If not, maybe the article promoted by HTML was simply more interesting than the article promoted by plain-text? - or maybe it was just more relevent to your demographic...

The main issue I (and many others here) have with HTML newsletters is really very simple... Depending on your target market it's highly unlikely a HTML newsletter will ever be read, especially if the intent is to raise funds and/or awareness amongst Government and/or large business enterprises.

The reason for this, is most large network administrators (Govt and corporate etc.) block HTML newsletters at the gateway - it never reaches the intended recipient. Conversely plain-text Email is almost always delivered. My own gateways trash about 250,000 HTML postings sent to (approximately) 1,000 people per month. We do not trash anything sent in plain-text format... Why?... Because the vast majority of HTML "newsletters" are in fact Spam sent to us in contravention of anti-spam laws.

Yes, I accept that we also discard a few legitimate newsletters in this lot... not much we can do about this except advise anyone wishing to do business with us to send their newsletters in plain text format.

Cheers, Don

Hi, Don,

Thanks for explaining the thinking here. I really appreciate that.

I agree that my experience doesn't qualify as a true test. It did take me by surprise, however, and made me look at my own assumptions.

What I take primarily from what you say is that the answer to the orginal question depends on what the target audience is. There are some audiences that could respond better to html. For instance, if a nonprofit is fundraising primarily in a grassroots way it is possible that they might do better with an html newsletter.

Best wishes,