Over the course of Digital Dialogues, we have looked at how different web applications can be used in a range of policy and engagement contexts. Below, we highlight the benefits of each before listing some of the less conventional tools which can be used to supplement them.
Blogs
Blogs can be collaborative, or be produced by a lone author; they are generally text-based but can incorporate audio, images and video. Entries are date-stamped and presented in reverse chronological order – often with tags and categories that allow the reader to explore by theme and author. While blogs are a useful way of transmitting information to readers, they provide opportunities for user feedback and can generate new understandings of policy, political processes and ideas. They also provide the public with a direct interface with political institutions, commentators, and decision makers. For this reason, they are becoming common in an engagement context.
They can be as simple or as complex as the author wishes. Certain features come as standard: a text-editor similar to that of word processing software, requiring little or no knowledge of web programming; a content management system (CMS) that allows authors to moderate comments. Some types of blog software also incorporate web statistics, allowing the author to monitor traffic to and within the blog.
Blogs are cost-effective and simple to use; they can achieve a number of different things, from informing the public and raising awareness to developing networks (which requires the author to establish reciprocal links with other sites/offline organisations); they can also anchor consultations enabling discussion about particular themes that are emerging in policy debates. They demand a user-friendly approach to language and text (and make possible the supplementary use of video and images), but in so doing can help to raise the profile of ministers whose work would otherwise seem remote.
Essentially, they suit any engagement purpose (apart from one that requires instant response or is of short duration); a user base takes time to build, and therefore a blog should be viewed as a long term project. As a blog builds up momentum, it can be used for different purposes throughout the policy cycle, with spin-offs (such as webchats) supplementing it. Blogs can be used to link to other blogs and resources on the web, comment on other relevant websites: of prime importance is the need to keep content up-to-date and topical.
Forums
Forums (sometimes known as bulletin or message boards) are good platforms for structured, topic-based deliberation between large groups of users. Comments are presented either in a linear or clustered (threaded) format. Content and user comments are managed much like a blog. However, where a blog does not require registration to post, a forum usually does.
Forum sites, therefore, have community management tools built in. Users can participate in forums and share information about themselves in a profile to help other users contextualise their comments.
Deliberation often starts with broad points and the aim is to narrow down toward conclusions through interaction between the users and facilitation carried out by the site’s moderators. Deliberation is often asynchronous, meaning that users are not required to be in the same place at the same time to interact. Deliberation is structured around themes designated either by the site’s managers or its users. Comments are moderated, either before or after publication.
A condition of a successful forum is often the visibility and commitment of its moderators. In forums, moderators facilitate deliberation much like a chairperson in an offline meeting – keeping the discussion on topic, keeping the momentum, looking for actions and ensuring that the space stays inclusive to participants who may drop in and out.
Forums can be open or closed to spectators. They can be used to host deliberations of anywhere between a day and many months. It can be that a forum is opened out to general participation, but forums can focus in on particular groups of stakeholders to provide a space for detailed deliberation. Indeed, outside of politics and policy making, the most successful forums are often those maintained for special interest communities.
Webchats
Webchats differ from blogs and forums in that the interaction takes place in ‘real time’. These sites are based around instant-messaging software. In a policy context, they support question-and-answer interaction between the public and usually ministers or senior civil servants. These usually come as hour-long events, but can also be upgraded to online conference status carried out over the course of a day or more.
Webchats are popular because they feel like events and provide users with a unique interaction with decision makers. They are a useful addition to face-to-face meetings, and with audio and video-streaming technology, chats do not have to be purely text based. Some webchats can be general in their focus, but good sessions tend to focus on pre-defined themes.
The pace of real time interaction can make webchats quite difficult to manage. However, the scale of the task can be reduced by encouraging pre-registration and asking people to pre-submit questions. However, pre-submission should only be used as a guide and users should be able to submit different questions in the event. Moderation of questions and responses is possible in webchats, but should be responsive to ensure a quick turnaround.
Increasingly widespread mechanisms
File-sharing and Social Networking
The practice of file-sharing taps into the powerful network opportunities of the web and has given rise to popular sites such as Flickr (photos) and YouTube (videos), where people share content they have produced or sourced themselves.
File-sharing models like these are an interesting prospect for engagement exercises. They might in the future let participants post and download audio-visual content; videos and images can be embedded into blog/forum text; departments can set up channels on the main networks (YouTube and Facebook, for example) – as many already have – to provide the public with multi-channel methods of connecting with government; these can be linked up to other existing online networks, maximising the social networking potential of the internet.
Wikis
These are websites that allow anyone to edit content whilst allowing administrators to retain editorial control. In this sense, they are often referred to as ‘collaborative tools’.
Wikis require close management but as a collaborative tool can be used to develop policy documents, such as white papers and bills. The policy team can work closely with a team of experts who would be able to collaborate to rebuild documents and the arguments contained within; a wiki allows those consulting to track deletions and inclusions in a straightforward manner and provides a map of developments. In such cases, the public may be able to see the wiki as it unfolds, allowing for greater transparency – government shows how it has arrived at decisions.
Online petitions
Petitioning online is more commonly associated with citizen-initiated submissions to government rather than a tool for government to solicit the public’s views. People are able to suggest a motion and invite others e to sign the petition in support.
Usually petitions constitute a means of gathering public opinion rather than engaging in deliberative decision-making. Nevertheless, government has already experimented with ePetitions as a means of connecting people to policy; the 10 Downing Street website, for example, has encouraged ministers to take part in webchats to discuss issues raised in the most popular petitions.
Budget/Policy Simulators
The concept behind these programs is to provide the public with an opportunity to compare fiscal or policy options against one another. Users are presented with a scale of demands which they are invited to prioritise. Based on pre-set variables, prioritising one option can then demote another or increase its cost. The user sees the effects of taking a decision on other budgets or services in real-time and can adjust their choices before submitting.
Such ‘simulators’ are beneficial in enhancing citizens’ understanding of the competing demands and needs that budget-setters and policy-makers are often required to balance. However, the benefits are apparent to those on the government side. This tool allows government to see how citizens prioritise budgets and policy, and where these choices differ or reflect their own. Nor do these tools simply need to be simulations; they could involve real options allowing government and the public to engage in co-design of appropriate budgets or policies;
Choosing an application
Blogs, forums and webchats can all be run as sites in their own right; however, it is also worth considering combining these applications at different stages of an engagement process. Find out, from the people you want to talk to, what type of site they would like to use and what type of interaction they are looking for. Balance this with your needs.
It is not possible to give a specific recommendation of a company or system you should use; such a recommendation would be circumstance and time dependent. Be assured, however, that there are many different vendors and a range of software available. As with any market, shop around to get the best deal; ask questions, find out what others have used. Think carefully about your needs and those of your user base, and procure on that basis.
Almost all of the Digital Dialogues sites were built using open source technology, but proprietary systems were an option. Open source software is owned by no one and can be adapted by anyone; this suited us because it meant we could customise a basic platform based on the particular requirements of our case study owners. But this did require a detailed knowledge of web design and programming. Proprietary systems are owned, sold and licensed; they look good and are ready to use straight off the shelf. Plus, they come with technical support and usually automatic software upgrades. The potential drawbacks can be the cost, and that proprietary systems tend to be generic and are rarely bespoke.
Based on current standards (at the time of writing), whether you bring in an open source or proprietary solution, look for the following content and community management functionality:
- Simple content management system for static and dynamic pages;
- Changes to design templates or entries with no need for regenerating static pages;
- User commenting and moderation;
- Choice of hidden and open comments/password protected posts;
- Optional user registration;
- User account management;
- Multiple authors – levels of users, with configurable privileges;
- Text formatting/WYSIWYG text editor for authors and users;
- Create, maintain, and update any number of static link lists;
- Embedded links in posts;
- Content upload via email or external device;
- Word and PDF document upload;
- Capacity for audio, video or photo content (either as embeds or directly on site within size limits);
- Content scheduling;
- Creation of surveys/polls;
- Spam protection;
- Printable pages;
- Threaded/unthreaded posts;
- RSS;
- Trackback;
- Archiving and search facilities;
- Site statistics;
- Full compliance with accessibility standards;
- Content and data export.
- Each product will have a particular range of functions and associated costs. If in doubt, consult with a departmental IT or web team.
Less conventional tools
Virals
Viral emails and websites have been used in government campaigns in the past to inform people or drive them to sites. This is a creative approach that relies on peer-to-peer distribution, and in this sense can get the message out quickly and to new audiences.
They could, however, also be used to a greater extent to support consultation and gather responses by combining an email and a website to collect responses straight from a user’s inbox. Again, an intriguing way of throwing off the stuffy, laborious connotations of government consultations.
Online games
Like virals, online gaming can be more than just a marketing tool and might help to change the look and feel of government consultation. Well designed games could attract a new type of respondent and be fun to participate in whilst maintaining structure and returning good quality data.
Chatbots
Chatbots are programs designed to simulate dialogue with human users via audio or text. Using keywords and syntax, the bots retrieve information from a database and present it back to the user.
In a policy context they may provide an innovative, cost-effective interface for providing information about a department or policy. They may prove particularly appealing to young people or those who struggle with textual content. They may be useful for providing a limited form of ‘out-of-hours’ moderation where this was clearly explained to participants.
