FREEDyourMind

Q1 E-Gov Satisfaction Results are Here

How are e-gov websites doing in the eyes of us citizens?  The latest report from ForeSee Results and the University of Michigan is now available, measuring over 100 e-government websites using the proven methodology of the American Customer Satisfaction Index.

Quick Summary:
Overall satisfaction with e-gov sites is 73.6 (on a scale of 1-100) down from 74.1 last quarter. This follows 3 quarters of increases. 

Why?  One reason is expectations are much higher now then in the past.  With President Obama's internet savvy campaign and internet savvy staff, the expectations are for better, more usable and more functional e-gov sites.   Well, it has been 100 days, which is a lifetime in an internet company, but a relatively short time for Government.  The future looks bright but we are not there yet.

Get the full commentary here.

Yahoo, Microsoft, and Google Agree on Something

 . . . and that is that info from federal government websites should be findable through using private sector search engines.

Apparently up to 1000 federal websites are not searchable on Google, Yahoo, Ask, or MSN because the information is held in a way that the search engines can't index it (often behind a form that needs to be filled out).

It will be interesting to see how this changes now that Obama has named Google and Yahoo people to his inner circles of tech advisors.

Sure, the search engines probably want access to the info because it will help them. But it also seems it would really help the citizenry if all of that information was available through a standard Google search instead of having to go to the agency website and know exactly what to look for.

Wow - 15th in the world! Not good.

President-elect Obama, in his Press Conference last Saturday, spoke about how poorly our broadband adoption in the US is and vowed to improve it.  I was shocked that we are 15th in the world.  That is sad.

He went on to say, "Here, in the country that invented the internet, every child should have the chance to get online, and they'll get that chance when I'm President, because that's how we'll strengthen America's competitiveness in the world."

Now I clearly agree that we should have much higher adoption of broadband usage (which means we need broader and cheaper broadband made available).  And clearly, the youth of today are the ones that are the hope for our future competitiveness.  But I think it will take a little more then just getting every child online: we also need to rise above the competition from other countries on Instant Messenger, Facebook, YouTube, etc..  And in my house of 3 boys, we definitely can take on the world in Fantasy Football.

All kidding aside, it is embarassing that we are 15th in the world in Broadband adoption.  Maybe part of Obama's works program will include a national grid of internet accessibility.  This might be a good use of wimax. Eric Peterson's letter to Obama (which was excellent) should have a p.s. added to it on building an accessible internet grid. Also a good reason for a E-Gov Czar (or Chief Internet Officer) to be added to the office of the Government CIO.

Dear President Obama

Eric Peterson has a great post up about the issue of persistent cookies and federal government websites. I think many of our clients would agree that their inability to use persistent cookies has been a barrier for them. Any federal government web people care to weigh in on this?

Change.gov

As predicted, some of the unprecedented levels of citizen involvement in the Obama campaign are trickling over into the administration, or at least the interim period.

Change.gov is up and running. One of its features is a page where you can submit your thoughts on what the biggest priorities for the federal government should be, and you can also share your ideas on solutions. I don't know who will be reading these ideas or how they will be integrated into government, but it's an ambitious application of Web 2.0 feedback to the federal government. The trick will be showing people you are actually listening to them and actually acting on their ideas, and that they are not just submitting thoughts into a vacuum. It will be interesting to see how they actually implement citizen feedback in the next administration...I don't think any previous administration has tried anything like that.

Also, I would like to see the craziest ideas they get compiled into some kind of coffee table book, because I bet they will get some doozies.  Who knows, the revenue they could make from that coffee table book could help fund the bailout.

Obama Prioritizes High-Tech Policy

According to the Washington Post, Obama has named high-tech executives from Google and IAC to his transition team, sending a strong signal that he's going to continue his campaign's focus on technology into his administration.

Obviously ForeSee Results operates in a sector of government that is even more specific than "high-tech:" specifically e-government and the way that the federal government can use the internet to offer citizens information and services. And the fact that Obama specifically chose execs from Google and IAC does indicate a heavy focus on the internet. All signs are that an Obama administration will expand federal initiatives online; hopefully there will be a continued interest in accountability and metrics as well.

One example only two days after the election: Obama's team is developing a new website, www.change.gov, which will supposedly launch today. This is a sign to me that Obama understands the power of the internet as a communication tool and as a way to involve citizens in governance, though it will be interesting to see how the change.gov website develops and how the administration evaluates its success at meeting stated objectives.

No matter what, Obama's campaign certainly revolutionized the use of the internet, and it would be a mistake to pull back from his exploitation of that powerful tool.

We work with hundreds of federal government websites. To our clients: is there any specific support you would like to receive from the new administration that would make your efforts to interact with citizens online any easier?

E-Gov Continues Upward Trend

Our quarterly rating of nearly 100 federal government websites is available today. You can read about it in Internet News or in the government trade publications, or you can download the full report on our website.

The report finds that the government has done a great job satisfying citizens with e-gov initiatives so far, But we’ve really only scratched the surface of e-gov’s potential, and a change in administration is the perfect time to implement new policies, executive orders, and legislation that will support the work of federal workers to deliver superior information and services to the citizenry via the web.

One week from today, we will be electing a new president. Each candidate has promised that his administration will bring change, improve transparency, and increase accountability to United States citizens. Fears about the economy are at a fevered pitch, and whoever wins will inherit an economy where efficiency in government has never been more important. It will be crucial to save money wherever possible.

As the candidates spar about saving money on earmarks, energy independence, federal government efficiency, or any of the other proposals intended to offset the controversial $700B bailout, let's talk about how technology—specifically increasing adaptation and sophistication of e-gov initiatives—could kill two birds with one stone. E-gov programs that satisfy citizens will encourage more people to use the website not only to get information but also as their primary channel of interaction with the government. These two kinds of usage save the government and the people both time and money while fostering democracy, increasing accountability, and improving transparency.  

I'm working on an op-ed about this topic. I know that the next prez will have a lot on his plate, but anything that saves money and increases efficiency and transparency should be a priority.

Meanwhile, kudos to all the great federal employees who are working hard to make services and information available to citizens online, and extra kudos to those who are succeeding with flying colors.

Multichannel VP Debate?

It's all-politics-all-the-time over here and I'm thinking that people are watching the debates the same way they watch the Emmy's . . .maybe people are taking even more advantage of the merged channel idea when it comes to political things because of the flurry of emails and blog posts and YouTube clips that pop up starting even minutes after the debate is over.

So the true political junkies could watch the debate on TV while fact checking and reading along with pundits and live bloggers on their laptop, then review key moments on YouTube, network websites, etc. the next morning. You can use your iPhone while you're stuck in traffic to post a snarky status update on your Facebook page, mocking whichever candidate you thought was more mockable.

In what was the most hyped VP debate that I can remember, did it live up to your expectations?  A search on Google News for "VP Debate" yields 4,613 stories.  I think the headline from the Boston Herald probably sums it up pretty well, "It's all substance, and no sideshow".

Out of curiosity, how many of you skipped the televised debates all together and just watching selected clips online the next day?

Event: Digital Citizen 2008--Leveraging Online Metrics in the Public Sector

If you haven't already signed up for Digital Citizen 2008, you can still register. We've been doing these annual conferences for the public sector for a few years now, and they are a great way to see how federal government websites, associations, and nonprofits are measuring and managing online citizen satisfaction to improve the quality, cost-efficiency and accessibility of services to the public. 

There will be case studies and best practices; even a panel on the future of e-gov with a surrogate from the McCain campaign (we are still waiting on confirmation from the Obama campaign). McCain surrogate Robert Cresanti will be on a panel designed to uncover the campaigns’ approach to e-gov in a potential future administration.

Other speakers include leading interactive industry analyst and author, Eric Peterson, in addition to e-government leaders from organizations such as Dept. of State, Small Business Administration, World Bank, Smithsonian and National Cancer Institute.

October 7, 2008
8:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.
Ronald Reagan International Trade Center

Top 10 Political Websites

Interesting data from Hitwise, ranking the top political websites in terms of market share:

Rank     Website                                    Market Share
1.          www.huffingtonpost.com              8.55%
2.          www.realclearpolitics.com           6.26%
3.          www.politico.com                       4.9%
4.          www.barackobama.com             4.53%
5.          elections.foxnews.com               4.24%
6.          www.freerepublic.com                3.44%
7.          politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com      3.33%
8.          www.dailykos.com                    3.24%
9.          www.johnmccain.com               2.23%
10.        www.townhall.com                    1.92%

There are a few things that strike me about this list:

# 1. Huffington Post (left-leaning) has more than twice the market-share of Fox News (right leaning), just as Barack Obama's website has more than twice the market share of John McCain's. In fact, let's lump right-leaning, left-leaning, and neutral sites and see how market share shakes out:

• Left leaning (Huff Po, Politico, Barack Obama, and Daily Kos) = 21.22% market share combined
• Right-leaning ((Fox, Free Republic, John McCain, and Town Hall) = 12.01% market share combined
• Neutral sites (Forbes' Real Clear Politics and CNN's Political Ticker) = 9.59% market share combined

It's a well-known fact that the population of internet users skews younger than the population at large, as does the Democratic party. So is this huge disparity attributable just to the fact that there are more Democrats than Republicans turning to the internet for info?

The right wing has totally dominated the radio space, but these stats make me think that the left wing is starting to dominate the online space. The future is online, not radio, and so Rove and company are going to have to try and figure out how to compete better online.

#2. Obama beats McCain 2:1. Other studies have shown that Obama takes better advantage of the web channel than McCain, but in an era of close elections, can one party afford to surrender so much market share in such a critical channel? And what can they do about it at this late date?

#3. Only two of the top 10 sites are affiliated with major traditional media outlets: CNN's Political Ticker and Real Clear Politics, which is owned by Forbes. (full disclosure: Forbes is a client of ours, and we are running satisfaction surveys on RealClearPolitics). Why are none of the other networks or major national print media outlets on this list? I think it goes back to what we've seen in the annual ACSI ratings of news and information sites like ABCNews.com, USAToday.com, MSNBC.com, and NYTimes.com. For many years in a row now, none of these sites have been able to significantly differentiate themselves from one another.

In addition the domination by sites with a clearly partisan voice makes me think that people are looking to political websites with a viewpoint they already hold, rather than a neutral one.

#4. Hitwise also has some interesting data on what political issue search terms led people to each candidate's website. For McCain, the top search terms leading to his website were: Healthcare, Environment/Global Warming, Oil Prices, Education, Immigration, in that order. For Obama, the top search terms leading to his website were: Abortion, Education, Environment/Global Warming, Healthcare, and Immigration.

However, the majority of people went to Obama's site looking for biographical info, vs. going to McCain's site to get his position on the issues.

This behavioral data gives us some interesting peeks into the role the internet is playing during these campaigns. But I don't see anyone that is too comfortable making predictions based on this data.