What is the role of government on the Web? Part 3 of 3

Get politicians off government websites
Shouldn’t there be a law against having politicians’ pictures on websites, particularly on homepages? Taxpayer money pays for these websites. So what gives politicians the right to take taxpayer money and hijack government websites and turn them into campaign websites?

If you look at the homepage of North Korean websites then you will inevitably see pictures of “great leaders.” But if you look at the government websites of Irish, American, Canadian or European Union websites, you will also see pictures of “great leaders.”

Recently, I came across a government website responsible for famine and relief aid. On the left was a picture of a starving child. On the right was a picture of a politician.

The Web is about the informed, skeptical, cynical, questioning, impatient society. Citizens feel empowered by the Web. The last thing a clever politician should do is use old, failed North Korean propaganda tricks.

Stop government vanity publishing
If most government websites are to be believed then most government entities have massive insecurity complexes. Visiting many government websites it’s like sitting beside a bore on a bar stool. The bore drones on endlessly about all that he has done for everybody.

The Department ‘welcomes, launches, improves, exceeds, excels, is celebrating its anniversary, and on and on and on.’ It’s all about them. Giving control of a website to a government communicator is like giving a pub to an alcoholic.

Nobody cares.

Nobody cares about the vision and the mission statement. The Web is about putting a vision into action, not talking about it. Nobody cares about how much money is being invested in health care. They’re at a health website to solve a health problem, not to eulogize the Department of Health.

I came across a government flood warning website recently. Here’s the first piece of content that greets someone who’s worried about whether their house is in danger of being flooded:

“Welcome to XYZ flooding information and advice website. In Vanityland XYZ is the flood warning authority and we work closely with other organisations to manage flood risk in Vanityland. (Click to see exactly who does what.)”

Develop a government archive
Governments urgently need to develop a national archive strategy. The vast majority of information that governments produce has minimal value. In fact, it gets in the way, acting as a weed and smothering the useful information.

In one city council website I dealt with recently, out of 22,000 pages on the site, 200 were getting 80 percent of the demand from citizens. This is quite common. It is probably safe to say that 1 percent of government information has the potential to deliver 80 percent of the value.

The other 99 percent delivers the remaining 20 percent of value. Thus, 80 percent of government effort should be spent managing the productive 1 percent, and 20 percent of effort should be spent creating a separate giant archive where the rest is stored.

Right now, we mix the 99 percent and 1 percent in the same website. There’s an old saying: What do you get if you cross a fox with a chicken? A fox.

If we manage the 99 percent archive (fox) in the same environment as the 1 percent of high value information (chicken), we get the giant, sprawling out-of-control website that sucks resources and delivers a frustrating and unusable experience for everyone.

We can do much better. And it’s still all to play for.

 

7 responses


  1. In the late 90s, I lived in Virginia and the state began a phase-out of its much-loathed excise tax on cars. That had been the main topic of the last gubernatorial election.

    When I got my car tax information from Richmond, it explained that “Governor Gilmore’s car tax repeal” would be beginning, and that each year it would drop by a specific percentage under “Governor Gilmore’s car tax repeal.” We would still get out county tax bills under “Governor Gilmore’s car tax repeal,” but the tax bill would indicate the reductions under “Governor Gilmore’s car tax repeal.” If we had questions about “Governor Gilmore’s car tax repeal” there were contact numbers to call.

    It was so heavy-handed that it was hard to believe that it wan’t a joke. This stuff predates the internet…


  2. The problem government websites have are how departments, councils and town halls view and serve their customers.

    As a local authority webmaster, there are very few websites which have a coherent and focussed approach to their customers. A website is another channel working to deliver customer focussed services - how these channels work together is crucial.

    For webmasters, a local authority website it’s about putting a nice, golden pie-crust (design) over a filling made of dog food (content). Initially visually pleasing but pick away at the presentation and the experience becomes less appetising for the customer!

    To get a truly customer focussed website operation, all other channels (phone, face to face, mobile etc…) need to be pulling in the same direction - a multi channel mix with consistent customer standards and values. A web team can’t solve these problems on their own so need to work together with other channel owners.

    A lack of senior management buy-in to the value of the web is normally a barrier to this and in my experience results in disproportionate resourcing of call centres, counter services and printed media.


  3. Once again I find myself agreeing with a lot, but not all. On the point about politicians emblazing themselves across websites. There’s a difference (at least here in the UK there is) between MPs as elected members of a political party, and MPs as ministers of the government appointed to serve the people. Don’t you think that citizen’s might be reassured when leaders make pronouncements on issues rather than them emanating from a faceless bureaucratic organisation? Mind you, the example you give is pretty tasteless!


  4. Your comment about visions and missions applies to more than government organizations. Many companies, especially it seems in Scandinavia where I’m based, treat vision statements as an academic exercise. In fact, one marketing manager told me that the vision and mission statements for her company’s website had to be written in the way she had learned at business school. She wasn’t thinking of the website’s users, and there wasn’t even a hint of putting the vision into action. It was a huge missed opportunity, because the company actually did have a compelling story. I think it’s sad that companies fall into this trap.


  5. Neil, you’re right. The Web is a collaborate space. It cannot exist in isolation. It’s part of a mix of services, and it doesn’t usually get the focus it deserves because senior managers never built websites when they were young.


  6. I’m a bit harsh on politicians, Jeremy. Of course they have a role, a very critical one. But often they use the Web as a PR stunt and go press release mad. People want to do something on the Web. Can the politician help? Yes. But by moving into the background most of the time. And politicians don’t like that.


  7. It’d be a dream come true if all around the world there was a massive protest about the lack of usability on gov’t websites to make seniour management and politicians realize they should have listened to their ‘web standard obsesssed team’. One along the theme of quit wasting our money would be nice.

    Too often I’m seeing gov trying to improve websites by getting web teams on the project, and then suddenly, its time for approval - and senior management request their changes. All that work for nothing!

Leave a Reply