WebMD vs. Drugs.com: Audience and Communication Analysis
This paper compares WebMD and Drugs.com as health information websites, examining how each platform addresses different audience types, from general consumers to medical professionals. The analysis covers persuasive strategies, use of technical language and jargon, writing style and structure, advertising presence, and the use of graphs and figures. The paper argues that Drugs.com serves a broader range of audiences through a multilayered approach to content, while WebMD consistently targets general readers with simplified language. Together, the two sites illustrate key principles of audience-aware communication in online health writing.
- Introduction: Overview of both health websites compared
- Audience: General vs. professional audiences served by each site
- Persuasive Strategies: How each site informs rather than persuades
- Technical Language and Jargon: Jargon use and multilayered discourse compared
- Style and Structure: Sentence length, formality, and voice analyzed
- Presence of Advertising: Ads, sponsored content, and consumer discounts
- Use of Graphs and Figures: Visual content differences between the two sites
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The memo format allows for clearly delineated, parallel comparisons across multiple evaluative criteria, making it easy to follow the analysis of both websites.
- The paper identifies a meaningful distinction between the two sites—Drugs.com's multilayered approach versus WebMD's uniformly simplified content—and consistently applies that distinction across each section.
- The analysis moves beyond surface description to evaluate rhetorical choices, such as noting that WebMD's avoidance of jargon risks oversimplifying content for its audience.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates comparative rhetorical analysis: rather than describing each site independently, it uses a consistent set of evaluative categories (audience, tone, jargon, structure, advertising, visuals) to directly contrast the two platforms. This parallel structure is a hallmark of effective comparative writing and shows how shared criteria can reveal meaningful differences between subjects.
Structure breakdown
The paper is organized as a short analytical memo with a brief introduction followed by seven thematic sections. Each section addresses one communication variable and applies it to both websites before drawing a brief comparative conclusion. The conclusion is embedded within the final section rather than appearing as a standalone paragraph, which suits the memo format. The paper is concise and appropriate for undergraduate communications coursework.
Introduction
Not all websites are written for a general audience. Some websites include technical information geared toward professionals in their field. There are also a number of websites that aim to serve both types of audiences: those who understand rich technical or scientific jargon and those who do not. This memorandum compares and contrasts two health information websites—WebMD and Drugs.com—to illustrate the importance of audience awareness when composing and presenting health-related information online.
Audience
The WebMD website is written for a general audience with limited understanding of science, or low science literacy. To a degree, Drugs.com is also geared toward a general audience, but the key difference between these sites is that Drugs.com also has a section for professionals that can be used to make educated and evidence-based decisions about pharmacological treatments. There is, for example, a "Pro Edition" section of Drugs.com as well as detailed information about each drug listed in the online database. Therefore, Drugs.com provides a comprehensive set of information for a wide range of audiences, including both people who have a high degree of science literacy in pharmacology and those who do not.
Persuasive Strategies
Neither website actually aims to persuade. Both are designed to inform the public about health-related issues, with WebMD being more focused on diseases and conditions and Drugs.com stressing pharmacology and pharmacological interventions for diseases and conditions. Both websites encourage the public to consult with doctors before making any decisions based on what they read online.
Technical Language and Jargon
WebMD aims to avoid jargon, almost to the point of pandering to an undereducated American audience and oversimplifying many issues. Drugs.com has several layers to its discourse, avoiding jargon on the general audience introduction pages for each drug but then using the necessary technical language when offering scientific evidence and supported research for the professional viewer. This multilayered effect is helpful and distinguishes Drugs.com from more uniformly simplified health sites.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.