Oct. 16, 2001

Congress Online Analyzes Opinions of Web-Savvy Voters

Citizens Not Impressed With Congressional Web Sites

By Matthew Nehmer

Technology-savvy citizens seeking to connect with their elected officials via the Internet are not overly impressed with congressional Web sites. Such is the finding of a new focus group study conducted by the Congress Online Project, a continuing research project undertaken by GW through its Graduate School of Political Management (GSPM), the Congressional Management Foundation, and The Pew Charitable Trusts.

Drawing analysis and conclusions from 80 focus group participants, the study attempted to answer the question, “Just what does the public want to see on congressional Web sites?” What they discovered was that above all citizens want accountability: when they visit a member’s Web site they want to know what their representative is doing, how they vote, and where to go when they have questions or problems that need resolution.

“What they don’t want is fluff,” says Dennis Johnson, GSPM professor and principal investigator for the Congress Online Project. “The biggest surprise we found is that people want what very few member sites have — content.”

Titled “Constituents and Your Web Site: What Citizens Want to See on Congressional Web Sites,” the study reports that “citizens are used to seeing glitzy, interactive commercial Web sites. But they don’t expect that from their legislators. In fact, they were decidedly, uniformly turned off by glitz and self-promotion. They liked seeing a simple picture of a legislator on the home page, but criticized photos of legislators at rallies, surrounded by balloons and babies, or even holding press conferences on the steps of the Capitol.”

Content wise, focus group participants cited voting records as the number one thing missing from congressional Web pages. According to the study, participants did not wish to see a list of bills that the representative sponsored or co-sponsored, but a comprehensive list of how the member voted followed by an explanation in understandable language of why he or she voted that way.

“I want to see their voting record on everything, and that’s going to tell me where they’re ultimately going,” says a Phoenix participant.

Having an idea of what their representative does all day was another suggestion by participants to improve congressional Web sites.

“I’d like to be able to log on tonight and pull up a congressman’s schedule for tomorrow, who they’re meeting with, etc.,” says a participant from Richmond. “Even some follow-up, not just the personal appearances where we may be able to see them or hear them, but who else they’re meeting with and do they attend committee hearings they’re scheduled to attend.”

To this end, the study suggests that members should include on their Web pages a public schedule that highlights legislative activities and upcoming votes. member travel plans is another area where participants wanted more information. “In many peoples minds,” reports the study, “when Congress is on recess, the member undoubtedly must be off to some exotic tropical location goofing off on tax-payer expense or on a trip funded by a powerful interest group.” This notion was discounted when participants were shown actual schedules from member offices detailing his or her busy schedule as well as information on travel plans, complete with explanations of why that travel is important.

A third component of congressional Web pages that participants found lacking was an easy-to-use forum to express their views. According to the study, participants “want assurances that their views are taken into account and acknowledged; just as importantly, they appreciate it when a member does not agree with them and has the courtesy to tell them so.”

One suggestion finding support was an interactive online poll where constituents could weigh-in on specific issues. Even though such polls would not be scientifically based, participants liked the idea of having a venue to express their views.

“I’d really be interested in seeing a little survey on issues that are coming up,” says a Richmond participant. “Are you in favor or not?”

The study was conducted from late January through March 2001 with eight focus groups in four cities — Washington, DC, Richmond, Phoenix, and Philadelphia — consisting of citizens comfortable using the Internet and E-mail. Half the participants were labeled as “engaged” citizens, in other words they had at some time writing to their representatives and actively followed public affairs. The other half, or the “general” audience, were savvy Internet and E-mail users but not too interested in legislative issues.

“We asked the participants their views on four Web pages, giving them 20 minutes to view each page,” says Johnson. “Two of the pages were House sites, one for a Democrat member and one for a Republican member. The other two were Senate sites, one Democrat, one Republican.”

Johnson adds that the four sites were chosen based on their look ranging from a high-tech look with limited content to sites with a simple, “handmade” look and heavy content. None of the sites chosen came from legislators in the four states where the participants resided.

On a broader scale, in addition to communicating what citizens expected in congressional Web sites, the report also spoke of a deep sense of frustration by participants in Congress and the way Members communicate with the public. “Part of that frustration, and certainly we saw it in the focus group participants, was a sense that legislators do not keep in touch with them,” reports the study, “that citizens do not receive timely answers to questions, and that there is a communications barrier between Washington and people back home. Well-designed, content-rich Congressional Web sites, attuned to the needs of the public, can help mitigate that sense of frustration, while poorly designed sites that don’t consider the needs of constituents in fact may reinforce that sense of frustration and disconnect.”

The report in its entirety can be found at www.congressonlineproject.org.

The Congress Online Project is a two-year program funded by The Pew Charitable Trusts and conducted jointly by GW and the Congressional Management Foundation, a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that provides management publications, programs, and services for House and Senate offices. The project’s mission is to improve electronic communication between members of Congress and the public by examining the use of Web sites and other forms of online communications by congressional offices.

 

Send feedback to: bygeorge@gwu.edu