It's Not About You
As detailed in Dr. Johnson's Congress Online Project, many elected officials make a common mistake in designing their website that was first brought to our attention by Vincent Flanders in week two: they make the website with their own needs in mind, rather than those of their visitors. As Flanders says, there are two things to remember when designing a website:
While Flanders had corporate sites in mind, these rules certainly apply to elected officials' websites as well. The website exists for the purpose of providing important information and solving constituent problems, and should be designed with that in mind.
As Johnson describes it, the typical congressional website is primarily updated by the press secretary or chief of staff, and very little thought is given to posting information constituents want (p. 126). As we saw last night, accountability is typically at the top of the list for the average constituent, whereas the candidate often prefers to provide "soft" content like his or her biography.
Elected officials should concentrate more on giving the people what they want, and not only because these sites are paid for with taxpayer dollars. By providing a website that helps constituents solve their problems, the elected official will build up good will that will ultimately translate to votes in the next election. Candidates are elected because they ostensibly show they will be the better man or woman for the job; having a helpful website is a great way to show that to be the case.
1. The only reason my web site exists is to solve my customers' problems.
2. What problems does the page I'm looking at solve?
While Flanders had corporate sites in mind, these rules certainly apply to elected officials' websites as well. The website exists for the purpose of providing important information and solving constituent problems, and should be designed with that in mind.
As Johnson describes it, the typical congressional website is primarily updated by the press secretary or chief of staff, and very little thought is given to posting information constituents want (p. 126). As we saw last night, accountability is typically at the top of the list for the average constituent, whereas the candidate often prefers to provide "soft" content like his or her biography.
Elected officials should concentrate more on giving the people what they want, and not only because these sites are paid for with taxpayer dollars. By providing a website that helps constituents solve their problems, the elected official will build up good will that will ultimately translate to votes in the next election. Candidates are elected because they ostensibly show they will be the better man or woman for the job; having a helpful website is a great way to show that to be the case.
posted by Mike D at
7/06/2005 02:53:00 PM
4 Comments:
I agree.
By
Shadow, at 7/06/2005 03:23:00 PM
Such a typical case of using new media with an old media lens... traditional campaign media has focused on the candidate. New media has such a greater potential...
By
GauRag, at 7/06/2005 04:31:00 PM
Do you think it's done intentionally though? Is there a reason that Congressmembers don't want their voting record or other information online?
Most people do not understand our complicated government. Remember how Kerry said he voted for the $87 billion before he voted against it?
That's the kind of cannon fodder for political attack ads.
There are many votes in Congress that are procedural, and it is easy for the general public to look at one vote and distort the vote's intent due to their lack of understanding.
If citizens actually knew what happened on a vote-by-vote basis, there's a large chance that a politician might not get re-elected.
By
Jorge, at 7/06/2005 05:27:00 PM
That's an interesting point. I still think that if there are votes that can be presented to the public in such a way that it will hurt the elected official in an election, that will happen whether or not you put the votes online or not. At least when you put your voting record online you can frame each vote advantageously.
But if you're a spineless politician who simply votes whichever way the wind blows, then maybe it is a good idea to keep it as private as possible. But in the end, the bad votes will catch up to him no matter if they're on the website or not...at least in theory.
By
Mike D, at 7/08/2005 12:31:00 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home