1. Who is our target audience? (hint: Don't try to be all things to all people)
1st - Media and Congress
2nd- General public – Includes Interior Dept workers.
2. What is the competitive landscape? (hint: Sites that do it well)
GAO does it better. They have well defined list of recent reports – new technologies like Twitter – links for Congress and media clearly labeled.
3. How do we differentiate ourselves? (hint: Secret sauce)
Create an IG home page that reflects the many projects that the office has investigated and issued reports on, using visuals including still pictures and video, with news summaries that are easy to read and link to full reports. One element of this would be a map of the U.S. to highlight investigations, listing topics to the right of the map. This could be a small icon on the main page that pops up and can be interactive.
4. How do we create our site? (hint: Staff and schedule)
Have a core group of two editors who write the news summaries and organize the home page. Also have a public relations person Twitter information about the latest reports. Have an IT person execute the act of putting new items on the Web site. Use an independent contractor to actually redesign the Web site and create a template that others can easily implement.
5. How do we get our content? (hint: Pre-built, manual, automatic, updated)
From investigations, audits, evaluations, inspections and assessments conducted by Interior’s IG. Many of these products have video and still pictures. Also, the Freedom of Information Office already creates two versions of the reports – one for the pubic and one for internal files, so this would not be an added step.
6. How do we market our site? (hint: Spread the word)
Get a list of media outlet contacts and have the PR person create e-mail lists to alert them to the reports, linking to the site. Send a press release highlighting that there are visuals, and link to reports on the site. Use Twitter, Facebook, YouTube. There is an existing campaign marketing the IG complaint hotline. Since this already needs to be updated, create a new brochure to highlight the new IG Web site. Also link the Interior IG Web site to Recovery.gov – and on the Recovery.gov site, have a link to Interior’s IG. Finally, change the Web site address to InteriorIG.gov – easier to market than the current “doioig" name.
7. How do we sustain the site? (hint: Show me the $$$)
Federal appropriations/budget and employees already on the payroll. President Obama has already said he wants to make the federal government more transparent and interactive.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Friday, June 26, 2009
YouTube: The Go-To Site for Talent Shows
Who can forget Susan Boyle's quick rise to fame when she sang "I dreamed a Dream" on Britain's Got Talent? I first saw the video clip on YouTube after reading an article on Yahoo about the singer, and I was astounded. I watched the video probably five times in a row. Then, like many others, I began searching for other talents featured on the show. Since then, YouTube has been booming with searches on everything from dance crews to young ballerinas. The talent shows are definitely gaining momentum, and YouTube seems to be the place to download clips. I just got an e-mail today with a link to three young, amazing Italian singers.
But with the good also often comes the bad. Watching young Holly Steel have a nervous breakdown in front of millions of people on Britain's Got Talent was heartbreaking. And Susan Boyle's very public meltdown can be seen all over the Web.
YouTube has definitely played a large role in the popularity of these shows, allowing people from around the globe to tune in. But are the shows doing more harm than good? Are they thrusting ordinary citizens in the spotlight, with little to defend themselves from the thirsty masses? Or are they not only fulfilling people's dreams but giving citizens a reprieve from the gloom filling so many news sites? As the U.S.'s version of Britain's Got Talent entertains for a third season, I have to wonder what direction the show will go and how many more Susan Boyle's we will see.
But with the good also often comes the bad. Watching young Holly Steel have a nervous breakdown in front of millions of people on Britain's Got Talent was heartbreaking. And Susan Boyle's very public meltdown can be seen all over the Web.
YouTube has definitely played a large role in the popularity of these shows, allowing people from around the globe to tune in. But are the shows doing more harm than good? Are they thrusting ordinary citizens in the spotlight, with little to defend themselves from the thirsty masses? Or are they not only fulfilling people's dreams but giving citizens a reprieve from the gloom filling so many news sites? As the U.S.'s version of Britain's Got Talent entertains for a third season, I have to wonder what direction the show will go and how many more Susan Boyle's we will see.
The General Idea
Many government websites are dry, disorganized, and hold little up-to-date information. With the Obama Administration's call for transparency and accountability, what better way to improve your government than redesign the website of one of its watchdogs -- the inspector general. As a class, we can create a model for an innovative government website that tracks corruption and mismanagement and focuses on the needs of its number one audience: the American taxpayer.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Building a Community Around Content
When it comes to developing a website, creating content that keeps people coming back can be a challenge. So how do companies use content to develop a community of individuals who continue to use their site? My professor in Web Soup, the class I take right before Multimedia, gave a great example of this last week. He talked about how when he was hired by the Discovery Channel to redo the website, he noticed that the majority of searches that were taking place on the site were for television shows. Yet the content on the website had nothing to do with the channel. It had links to different topics, but it did not focus on its television programming, which seemed to be what people really wanted. In finding out this valuable fact, my professor was able to help Discovery revamp the content on its website to focus more on the needs of its audience.
When building content for a site, I guess the number one question to ask is, “Why should people come here?” A website needs to be a reliable resource to which people can turn. Some may criticize the Washington Post’s website, but I think they have definitely succeeded in building an audience around their content. Some may argue that they are the dominant newspaper in the city, so of course their website would be frequented. This may be true, but people can turn to many other news outlets for similar information. I think that for the most part, the Washington Post understands the needs of its audience. It covers a diverse population with different interests and needs, yet there is something for everyone. Many, like myself, turn to the site for the latest local and national news, but I have also started going there for book reviews, health information and suggestions for stuff to do on the weekend. I'm ashamed to admit I even turn to the “people” page for celebrity gossip.
I also like the fact that I have a voice on the site. I don’t have to submit a letter to the editor -- I can simply comment on any article or blog that I read and engage in dialogue with many others in the DC area and beyond. Allowing the audience to add content definitely helps build a sense of community.
I believe consistency is also very important. When I open the page, I see the logo at the top, and I know where to find the opinion section, the classifieds and the daily photo slide show, just to name a few. Being a reliable source definitely keeps people coming back.
I think the Washington Post succeeds much like Wal-Mart. People come to rely on it for many purposes, and as long as they continue having positive experiences, they will keep coming back for more.
When building content for a site, I guess the number one question to ask is, “Why should people come here?” A website needs to be a reliable resource to which people can turn. Some may criticize the Washington Post’s website, but I think they have definitely succeeded in building an audience around their content. Some may argue that they are the dominant newspaper in the city, so of course their website would be frequented. This may be true, but people can turn to many other news outlets for similar information. I think that for the most part, the Washington Post understands the needs of its audience. It covers a diverse population with different interests and needs, yet there is something for everyone. Many, like myself, turn to the site for the latest local and national news, but I have also started going there for book reviews, health information and suggestions for stuff to do on the weekend. I'm ashamed to admit I even turn to the “people” page for celebrity gossip.
I also like the fact that I have a voice on the site. I don’t have to submit a letter to the editor -- I can simply comment on any article or blog that I read and engage in dialogue with many others in the DC area and beyond. Allowing the audience to add content definitely helps build a sense of community.
I believe consistency is also very important. When I open the page, I see the logo at the top, and I know where to find the opinion section, the classifieds and the daily photo slide show, just to name a few. Being a reliable source definitely keeps people coming back.
I think the Washington Post succeeds much like Wal-Mart. People come to rely on it for many purposes, and as long as they continue having positive experiences, they will keep coming back for more.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Let's Give a Government Website a Face Lift
Last fall, the U.S. Department of the Interior issued a report on the state of health care in the Pacific Islands, including Guam, American Samoa and the Federated States of Micronesia. Interior manages federal lands, national parks and natural resources, just to name a few, but it also has a responsibility to those in the Pacific Islands, many of whom are U.S. citizens. The report drew some compelling conclusions. Because of the islands’ lack of specialized physicians, many patients were dying during flights on their way to larger hospitals in Hawaii. Equipment shortages had nurses squeezing two infants in incubators and morgue employees embalming bodies on metal gurneys without drainage. In the end, however, the report was filed in a database on the website and received little attention. That's what we need to change.
The office that issued this report at Interior is one of many “offices of inspector general” in the federal government. They are essentially the watchdogs for their agencies, investigating fraud and evaluating programs. Their responsibility is to the American people, especially now with the enormous stimulus package trickling through their agencies. In many ways, they are like journalists, reporting on the transgressions occurring within their departments, but like many government agencies, they tend to focus mostly on their paper products.
It’s time that government agencies, particularly the watchdogs, give their websites a face lift, and we can help them by starting with Interior. They reported on the deaths caused by abandoned mines, the Jack Abramoff case that rocked DC lobbying and a sex scandal in the oil and gas industry. For our class project, we could create a plan to revamp their website to be more like a news site, with photo galleries, video and up-to-the-minute news. We could examine how the site should be designed and what type of information should be presented. We could look at the overall vision for the project, balancing the duty to inform the public with the protection of sensitive information such as privacy data. We could also look at the costs involved, the timetable for completion and what skills we would need to accomplish our goals.
The Obama Administration has called for transparency and accountability in government, and with our project, Interior could lead the way.
The office that issued this report at Interior is one of many “offices of inspector general” in the federal government. They are essentially the watchdogs for their agencies, investigating fraud and evaluating programs. Their responsibility is to the American people, especially now with the enormous stimulus package trickling through their agencies. In many ways, they are like journalists, reporting on the transgressions occurring within their departments, but like many government agencies, they tend to focus mostly on their paper products.
It’s time that government agencies, particularly the watchdogs, give their websites a face lift, and we can help them by starting with Interior. They reported on the deaths caused by abandoned mines, the Jack Abramoff case that rocked DC lobbying and a sex scandal in the oil and gas industry. For our class project, we could create a plan to revamp their website to be more like a news site, with photo galleries, video and up-to-the-minute news. We could examine how the site should be designed and what type of information should be presented. We could look at the overall vision for the project, balancing the duty to inform the public with the protection of sensitive information such as privacy data. We could also look at the costs involved, the timetable for completion and what skills we would need to accomplish our goals.
The Obama Administration has called for transparency and accountability in government, and with our project, Interior could lead the way.
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Politico 44
According to Politico 44, its website is supposed to be a “living diary of the Obama presidency.” It documents the President’s daily schedule minute by minute, showing everything from his 8:10 a.m. visit to the Normandy American Cemetery and Memorial to the designer labels his wife is sporting at lunch. The site also posts the President’s weekly address, about a dozen stories covering his administration and a variety of commentaries and videos.
The content of the site is fairly straightforward, covering the daily life of the President and Vice President as well as news about anything involving their meetings and decisions. The design of the site is similar to Politico’s main page, with the three-column layout, headlines and short introductions for stories. Stories on the main page often lead to the “44” page when clicked. But the “44” site outlines its stories and videos differently, with rounded borders, setting the page apart in a subtle way.
The President’s schedule at the far right is also pleasing to the eye. Designers use a time-line approach with text boxes and “white space” to separate the information from the rest of the page.
To build and operate this site it would take a team of developers as well as one project manager or “managing editor” to lead a team of news editors, reporters, copy editors and designers. The daily processes involved in maintaining the site would need to be well organized and consistent. The dozen or so reporters writing content for the site would need to meet their deadlines for submitting stories to the news editor, who would then work with them on major story edits. After this, the stories would go to the copy editors, who probably edit copy for the entire Politico site. They would need to quickly edit stories for grammar and style as well as fact-check for accuracy. From here, the stories would go to site designers and developers to post. Then the page would need to be reorganized to highlight the latest stories. Because the site’s design is fairly straightforward and consistent, this would probably involve moving stories down on the page or deleting them and then replacing them with new content.
To put this site together, an enormous amount of information would need to be acquired quickly. Because the site offers up-to-the-minute information on the President’s whereabouts and activities, one to three reporters would need to be focused on obtaining the latest information from White House contacts and then transferring it to other Politico 44 team members. Reporters working on more in-depth stories would also need to develop sources to document the most recent information involving the White House, from a new Supreme Court appointment to the President’s meetings with foreign officials.
Politico 44 has figured out how to offer the most recent information on the President and his decisions and activities in a compelling way. Those involved in producing this site have most likely adopted the basic project management tenets, such as setting schedules and assessing risks – like sources not returning calls, copy editors calling off sick or technical glitches on the site. As outlined in Making Things Happen, by Scott Berkun, project managers also need to examine the personalities, abilities and weaknesses of team members, which Politico 44 managers no doubt assess. Some reporters’ copy might require more editing than others, which would need to be considered, just to name one example.
Overall, after examining the “44” site, the success Politico has had is no surprise.
The content of the site is fairly straightforward, covering the daily life of the President and Vice President as well as news about anything involving their meetings and decisions. The design of the site is similar to Politico’s main page, with the three-column layout, headlines and short introductions for stories. Stories on the main page often lead to the “44” page when clicked. But the “44” site outlines its stories and videos differently, with rounded borders, setting the page apart in a subtle way.
The President’s schedule at the far right is also pleasing to the eye. Designers use a time-line approach with text boxes and “white space” to separate the information from the rest of the page.
To build and operate this site it would take a team of developers as well as one project manager or “managing editor” to lead a team of news editors, reporters, copy editors and designers. The daily processes involved in maintaining the site would need to be well organized and consistent. The dozen or so reporters writing content for the site would need to meet their deadlines for submitting stories to the news editor, who would then work with them on major story edits. After this, the stories would go to the copy editors, who probably edit copy for the entire Politico site. They would need to quickly edit stories for grammar and style as well as fact-check for accuracy. From here, the stories would go to site designers and developers to post. Then the page would need to be reorganized to highlight the latest stories. Because the site’s design is fairly straightforward and consistent, this would probably involve moving stories down on the page or deleting them and then replacing them with new content.
To put this site together, an enormous amount of information would need to be acquired quickly. Because the site offers up-to-the-minute information on the President’s whereabouts and activities, one to three reporters would need to be focused on obtaining the latest information from White House contacts and then transferring it to other Politico 44 team members. Reporters working on more in-depth stories would also need to develop sources to document the most recent information involving the White House, from a new Supreme Court appointment to the President’s meetings with foreign officials.
Politico 44 has figured out how to offer the most recent information on the President and his decisions and activities in a compelling way. Those involved in producing this site have most likely adopted the basic project management tenets, such as setting schedules and assessing risks – like sources not returning calls, copy editors calling off sick or technical glitches on the site. As outlined in Making Things Happen, by Scott Berkun, project managers also need to examine the personalities, abilities and weaknesses of team members, which Politico 44 managers no doubt assess. Some reporters’ copy might require more editing than others, which would need to be considered, just to name one example.
Overall, after examining the “44” site, the success Politico has had is no surprise.
Saturday, May 30, 2009
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
Here are the websites my group discussed in class last week.
The Good
Newsmap: We love this site. It takes a few seconds to load, but it's great. It shows the top headlines all over the world and color codes them by subject matter. Clicking on a headline also opens up the original article.
Center for Public Integrity: The best quality about this site is its lead stories are always obvious, and they normally come with a great graphic that catches your attention. The "top story" slide show also gives readers a chance to see the most important information without having to scroll down the page.
Don't Touch My Moleskin: This site is really unique. Mostly, we like photos, which have a certain artistic quality to them. The site may not be in English, but it keeps your attention.
The Bad
The Telegraph: The site is incredibly slow. Clicking on a tab or conducting a search can make minutes seem like hours. The layout doesn't really bother me, but there are too many competing graphics and photos.
DC.gov: The home page looks pretty good, but all it takes is one click to see how much work the inside pages need. They really fail on substance and design.
The Food Network:We love our food sites, but this one needs some help. The lists on the site aren't inclusive and finding recipes is a challenge.
The Good
Newsmap: We love this site. It takes a few seconds to load, but it's great. It shows the top headlines all over the world and color codes them by subject matter. Clicking on a headline also opens up the original article.
Center for Public Integrity: The best quality about this site is its lead stories are always obvious, and they normally come with a great graphic that catches your attention. The "top story" slide show also gives readers a chance to see the most important information without having to scroll down the page.
Don't Touch My Moleskin: This site is really unique. Mostly, we like photos, which have a certain artistic quality to them. The site may not be in English, but it keeps your attention.
The Bad
The Telegraph: The site is incredibly slow. Clicking on a tab or conducting a search can make minutes seem like hours. The layout doesn't really bother me, but there are too many competing graphics and photos.
DC.gov: The home page looks pretty good, but all it takes is one click to see how much work the inside pages need. They really fail on substance and design.
The Food Network:We love our food sites, but this one needs some help. The lists on the site aren't inclusive and finding recipes is a challenge.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
