Filed under: Crimes Against Usability
Status: Case 007 – Active Investigation
Subject: Death by Infinite Scroll
Case Summary
The body was found buried beneath a wall of endless content. Pagination and “Load More” buttons had long since vanished, replaced by a conveyor belt with no visible end. Users scrolled until thumbs blistered, memories decayed, and the footer was declared missing, presumed dead. Cause of death: cognitive overload, disorientation, and one too many cloned content cards.
The Evidence
- Viewing time is spent above the fold 57%
- Viewing time within just two screenfuls 74%
- Users never scroll past the fold 80%
- Page views show zero scrolling at all 58%
Infinite scroll promises discovery, but the stats show most users never make it past the top. When attention collapses this early, burying content in an endless feed is less a growth hack and more a UX grave.
Sources:
Exhibits
Exhibit A: The Endless Feed
A ribbon of content, stretching on like a crime scene corridor with no visible end. Users scroll, scroll, scroll — waiting for closure that never comes. The footer has gone missing, presumed dead. Orientation is lost, memory collapses, and the average attention span has already left the building. Cause of injury: infinite repetition without relief.
Exhibit B: The Sticky Note Confession
Pinned to the board in scrawled biro: “MOTIVE: Addiction Metrics.” The handwriting reeks of strategy decks and growth-hacking meetings. Engagement, not usability, was the killer’s goal. The note reveals premeditation: keep users scrolling endlessly, disguised as “delight,” while siphoning their time and sanity. Exhibit suggests motive was corporate greed, not user need.
Exhibit C: Detective Down
Our goblin investigator, once sharp-eyed and trench-coated, found sprawled under an avalanche of cloned content cards. His magnifying glass pokes out from the wreckage, one shoe missing. Post-mortem notes: collapsed from thumb fatigue, cognitive overload, and a rising tide of identical recommendations. The detective fought bravely, but infinite scroll proved too relentless an opponent.
Exhibit D: The Vanishing Footer
Witnesses swore there was an end, a place to stop and breathe — but the footer has disappeared into digital purgatory. Screen readers report “No more content,” but the scroll continues regardless. Like chasing a horizon, users never reach closure. The footer is listed missing, presumed murdered, and infinite scroll is the prime suspect.
Motive
Follow the money.
Infinite scroll wasn’t designed for usability, it was engineered for addiction. The longer you scroll, the longer you’re measured. More “time on site,” more “engagement.” Never mind that users lose orientation, accessibility collapses, and performance tanks.
The Trade-Offs:
-
Short-Term “Engagement” ≠ Long-Term Loyalty
Users may scroll endlessly today, but frustration builds. Trust erodes. Eventually, they bounce — and they don’t come back. -
Accessibility Fallout
By ignoring basic navigation needs, you alienate whole audiences. Screen readers, magnifiers, keyboard users — lost in the void. Legal risk, brand damage, and user fury bundled together. -
SEO Obliteration
Search engines can’t index what they can’t reach. Infinite scroll buries content under a mountain of “maybe someday Googlebot will find it.” Spoiler: it won’t. -
Performance Debt
Every auto-loaded chunk bloats the page. Memory climbs, CPU groans, browsers stall. Mobile users in particular rage-quit when the experience burns their battery. -
Brand Reputation
“Addictive design” may look good in a growth-hacker’s deck, but outside the bubble? It reads as exploitation. No user has ever thanked a product team for infinite scroll.
Victim Impact Statement
Where am I? What did I just look at? Why is my laptop on fire?
Endless Addiction
“I came here for one thing. Just one! Next thing I know, I’ve scrolled so long my thumb looks like it’s training for a marathon. Even the dude who invented this says it was a mistake — and he’s right. I want my evening back.”
Memory Blackout
“Honestly, I couldn’t tell you what I just looked at. It’s gone. Poof. Like my brain pressed delete on itself. I remember the scrolling… but not a single thing I actually saw.”
Cognitive Collapse
“At some point, I completely lost track of where I was. Did I pass that post already? Wasn’t there a footer? Did I dream that? I swear I saw daylight before I started.”
Accessibility Annihilation
“I tried this with a screen reader once. Never again. It was like being stuck in Groundhog Day but without Bill Murray. Just the same thing, forever, no escape.”
Performance Carnage
“My laptop sounded like it was about to take off. Fan screaming, battery draining, browser gasping for air. All that… just so I could scroll through another 400 cat memes.”
SEO Severance
“I found something useful! I wanted to send it to a mate. But nope. No link, no anchor, no nothing. Might as well have scribbled it on a napkin and thrown it out the window.”
Guilty As Charged
- Accessibility murder: screen readers, magnifiers, and keyboard users lost in the void.
- Cognitive overload: memory erased, attention spans burned out.
- Performance manslaughter: bloated feeds slowing to a browser-crashing crawl.
- SEO homicide: no unique URLs, no crawlable content, no justice.
Real-World Penalties for Accessibility Crimes
Target — ~$6M class action
In National Federation of the Blind v. Target Corp. (2006–2008), Target paid $6 million in damages and legal fees—and agreed to long-term accessibility oversight—after its website was ruled inaccessible to blind users. The court affirmed websites fall under ADA “public accommodation” criteria.
Sources:
whoisaccessible.com
accessiBe — ~$1M fine (FTC)
In early 2025, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission fined accessibility overlay vendor accessiBe $1 million for falsely claiming the tool could make any website WCAG-compliant. The company was also barred from misleading marketing—a sharp legal slapback against “fix-it-with-a-widget” snake oil.
Sources:
Federal Trade Commission
EU-bound businesses — Facing up to £200K in fines
Starting June 2025, under the European Accessibility Act, UK companies selling into the EU risk fines of up to £200,000 (~€250,000) for digital inaccessibility. That’s a serious price for thumb-blind UX.
Sources:
i-finity.co.uk
Sentencing
🪓Crimes against attention spans and basic human decency
Judge Goblin bangs the gavel, the courtroom falls silent.
“The court has reviewed the evidence: fractured memories, lost footers, accessibility casualties, and performance carcasses littered across the web. This is not mere negligence — it is design malpractice of the highest order. You stand guilty of exploiting human psychology for engagement metrics, while burying usability six feet deep.”
He leans forward, eyes glinting yellow.
“Infinite scroll is hereby sentenced to solitary confinement in the UX Penitentiary. No parole until it reinstates pagination, provides stopping cues, and respects assistive technology. The defendant will perform mandatory community service for every user lost in the void — including, but not limited to, carrying screen readers across endless feeds, cleaning blood from scrollbars, and restoring murdered footers.”
The gavel slams one last time. “Case closed. May the jury never again suffer the crimes of the endless feed.”
