Whilst the referendum itself was David Cameron's hubris, the constitutional controversy which has come about this week is entirely the fault of each and every one of the 650 MPs and 812 lords who were too bone idle or too incompetent to give the Referendum Bill the proper scrutiny during its passage through parliament to ensure all the Is were dotted and the Ts were crossed. No wonder the overriding theme of every Adam Curtis documentary the last 15 years has been about the failure of politics to organise society.
There are 126 posts in total.
Remember kids, a spring general election can only happen if a majority of @UKLabour MPs think they can win one. Does it seem likely that a majority of Labour MPs would think they could win?
The Labour Party should just split and be done with it; let the voters choose which wing of the party they prefer - https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/25/jeremy-corbyn-critics-will-not-be-silenced-despite-unity-calls
Local Government Digital Service Standard Summit, 19 September 2016simon gray - 2016-09-19, 13:20:35
Earlier in 2016 the Local Government Digital Steering Group, of which I'm a member, held a workshop day at the Government Digital Service to discuss whether there was any mileage in creating a local government version of the GDS Digital Service Standard. Not surprisingly, there was overwhelming agreement that it was indeed a good idea, so the steering group set to work in collaboration with local government digital practitioners up and down the country to create one - the Local Government Digital Service Standard. Today there's a summit at City Hall in London to share the work that's been done so far, gaining insight from people working in central and local government in their experiences of using the standard - and an important point being emphasised that it's not about creating a whole load of bureaucracy, and neither is it about replicating the same thing across hundreds of councils - it's just about creating good digital services.
Here are my notes from the morning main speaker sessions.
Natalie Taylor, Head of Digital Transformation, GLA - City Hall and the Digital Service Standard - Building the new london.gov.uk
- changed the focus to be based on user needs and user research.
- Introduced an agile development methodology, with clear roles. Daily stand-ups, sprint planning, retrospectives, show and tells, and moved to fortnightly sprints with continuous development and testing.
- Reduced the content by 75% to make it better written and relevant to the users, by proper talented content editors.
- Got successful buy-in from senior management, as well as gaining their trust to move from old-style PRINCE2 RAG status updates to the show-and-tell methodology
- Success at London wasn't necessarily achieved by the top leading on digital, rather it was achieved because the top trusted and supported her in delivery
- Invested significantly in training the relevant staff in the relevant skills for ongoing maintenance
- Moved the site to an open source platform (Drupal)
- Further work is to rationalise the 50 different microsites to make it more coherent, to improve the tools and hardware which is in use around the authority, and to introduce digital working practices around the organisation.
Why does Local Government need a Digital Service Standard?
- It's a helpful framework
- It's a proven methodology
- It puts users first
- It introduces consistency
- It encourages collaboration and sharing
- It'll be helpful for suppliers
- It's not a tickboxing exercise - a true understanding of the principles is key to success
Olivia Neal, Deputy Director for Standards Assurance, GDS
- GDS Service Standard has been mandatory in central government since April 2014
- It's always been at the heart of the GDS mission
- It's how they demonstrate to teams a common understanding of 'what good looks like' - to create services which are so good people prefer to use them over traditional service delivery, always thinking about the needs of the service users over the needs of the service deliverers
- The GDS methodology is about more than just the services themselves - it's about developing staff so that when they're shared around other departments to improve their delivery
- They're about empowering individuals and teams who've been traditionally blocked in trying to deliver good digital services
- But they still too often hear the phrase 'what do we need to do for GDS' rather than 'what do we need to deliver a quality digital service'…
- Sharing and reuse is a cornerstone of the GDS philosophy
- When a new service fails a DSS assessment the assessment team feeds back with a detailed report containing recommendations on how it can subsequently pass
- In the early days the most common area in which services failed the DSS assessment was in making their code open, so they did a lot of work in developing guidance in how to share code whilst still keeping it secure
- Another early struggle was in providing assisted digital support for people unable to directly use the digital service themselves
- The most commonly failed point nowadays is 'build a service that is simple and intuitive'!
- They still have difficult conversations with teams who are under pressure to make a service which is not yet ready live because the responsible minister is planning on making a speech launching it the next day
- The most important message is that in order to deliver great digital services, you need experts - to design, build, and assess
- And you need to be willing to adapt and iterate - both in the method of delivering the service, and also in the method of assessing it
- It's a good start to improve the public facing aspect of a service, but proper transformation also requires the back-end of the service to be improved so that the staff delivering it also becomes a system which is so good the staff want to use it
- One of the biggest challenges to local authorities is the limited number of third party suppliers for specific applications; too many of those third party applications are very poor indeed, with too many of the suppliers being completely unresponsive to demands for improvement. We need to be much better at demanding these suppliers improve the quality of what they're offering
Matthew Cain, Head of Digital, Buckinghamshire County Council - How we adopted the LGDSS and how it's improving the experience for residents
- In the early days before adopting the standard there was a lack of co-ordination with many service areas creating their own platforms, and there was a lot of opinion with very little evidence
- They changed to adopt a clear guiding principle - 'we'll do it the GDS way until we decide not to'
- They started by lining up the correct people in the right order - digital leaders across the organisation, the contract managers of the existing websites.
- They looked at the 18 points of the GDS DSS and established which of those points wouldn't work for them
- Followed the prove path of Discovery, Alpha, Beta, and Live, showing their work at each stage to the relevant people to get buy-in to proceed to the next phase
- They adopted a 'soft on means, tough on ends' attitude; they committed to fast turnarounds for assessments, and assessed proportionately according to the impact of the service
- Feedback was using an approach of 'this would be even better if…' attitude
- But there still remains a key skills gap for assessing the high profile services
- Having a spending control governance model helps prevent service areas going rogue to do their own thing
- They've also published their DSS on their own website so that they are making it clear to the public what their aspiration is, and so the public can hold them account for services which fall short
- They've also got cabinet member buy-in so that councillors know to come to them before agreeing to new digital service
- They monitor their new services after go-live on a publicly available customer performance dashboard
- The ongoing experience is that meeting their standards is getting harder - but this is a good thing, because it increasingly matters more that they get it right
- We all need to be much more honest with our suppliers of rubbish third party applications - we need to make it clear to them in advance of contract renewal time that if they don't improve their offers we won't be continuing to use their products. We also need to have a plan B for these third party applications - for many of them, we're behelden to the supplier because nobody else is providing a credible alternative
Kit Collingwood-Richardson, DWP - The Joy of Standards and what she's learned from using the GDS DSS
- The standard saves money - it helps reduce the cost of service delivery and the speed of service delivery
- Get your customers online quickly and keep them there
- Prioritise the things users need
- Iterate swiftly based on feedback
- Running services, not just building them - it doesn't end when the new service has gone live
- Building to the standard will make the services better
- Key focus on design quality - make sure it's simple enough people can use it first time unaided
- Do this based on continuous research
- It's only successful if it's far easier to use than the alternative channels
- It's based on repeatable and shareable patterns - be consistent across services
- Whenever she had a problem she was able to consult with peers to find how they'd already solved it, rather than reinventing the wheel
- Consistency is a user need
- Look at other successful online services - Amazon, Google, eBay, etc - if another successful online service is doing a certain thing a certain way, consider following that way yourself
- Consistency builds predictability
- Predictability builds trust
- Trust keeps people online
- It will help you move from outsourced IT to the digital age
- "'Digital' is applying the culture, practices, processes, and technologies of the internet era to respond to peoples' raised expectations" - Tom Loosemore
- Equipping an organisation for the internet era is hard
- The ability to evolve and iterate needs to be part of the organisation's DNA
- It's a lightning rod for culture change
- The standard strongly encourages an organisation to be open - not just open sourcing the code, but being open about describing what you're doing along the way and why
- It also attracts better quality people to work for the organisation
- Colocated multi-disciplinary teams
- Flatter hierarchies
- More diverse workforce
- More open and collaborative organisation
Paul Ward, Head of ICT Strategy, Systems, and Development, Coventry City Council - Implementing the standard at Coventry City Council so far
- Because they're building some new office space to reduce the number of desks to seven desks per 10 staff members, it's just as important for them to implement sensible digital services which work for staff as it is ones which work for citizens
- This includes moving to abolishing phones in favour of computer-based voice communication, two-in-one laptops to detach the screen from the keyboard for one to one situations, online / cloud-based working, etc
- Opened a city centre Customer Service Centre which is modern and pleasant to visit and is relevant to all citizens, for assisted digital services
- If as a sector we can harmonise our business processes using the LGDSS we can use that as part of putting pressure to the rubbish third-party suppliers to improve their offers
- Use the best technology for the job rather than trying to shoehorn something designed for one thing into using it for something completely different
In group Public / Third Sector Digital
Dude just ran in front of a tram carrying a roll of poundland binbags. Buying binbags from poundland was a pretty dumb thing to do.
- Pork fillet
- Orzo pasta (or rice)
- White wine
- Calvados (or brandy)
- Stock cube
- Double cream
- Salt and pepper
Set your piece of pork fillet cooking the way you like to cook it. Because I'm a bit pretentious and have a sous-vide, I cook mine at 62C for about an hour. If you don't have a sous-vide, either follow the cooking instructions on the packet, or cook it the way you usually like to cook it.
Start your orzo pasta cooking. Although it's small it still takes a bit longer to cook than you'd think, but because it's small you've got to be more careful about stopping it sticking to the pan than than usual pasta. If it's cooked before the sauce is cooked, just turn the heat off.
Chop the celery and the leek as finely as you feel motivated to, and fry in a pan for a few minutes, then add the garlic to fry for a few moments more; add a fair amount of white wine and a bit of calvados and reduce for a bit, then add a big dollop of the cream, the amount of salt and pepper you like, and the tarragon. Let all that bubble nicely for a while; the final consistency you're after for this is creamy, but not too thick nor not too runny - whilst it's cooking if it's getting too thick then thin it down a touch with some milk, but keep it on the thicker side of how you want it. When the orzo has almost finished cooking, pour some of the cooking water into your sauce as well (which is why you don't want to thin the sauce too much whilst it's cooking), and mix the orzo into the sauce for just a minute or two longer.
Assuming the pork has fnished cooking at the same time as the sauce and the orzo, pour the orzo / sauce combination on to your plate, and slice the pork into medallions and place attractively on to the sauce bed. For extra points, scatter some torn up fresh basil leaves or nasturtium flowers into some of the gaps.
Given how often They have to Rewrite The History Books, you'd think they'd abandon the book format entirely and just use a wiki instead
In the aftermath of the referendum vote to leave the European Union, one of the things being focussed on is a petition (which ironically was created a month before polling day by a Leave supporter when it was looking like there would be a likely Remain win) calling for a second referendum. At over 4 million signatures it is probably the most-signed petition in history. Or at least it would be, if those signatures were valid.
Suspicions started to be raised when somebody had a look at the raw open data JSON feed for the petition and noticed there were a number of signatures appearing to come from the UK - including more signatures from certain countries than those countries' populations! The Government Digital Service is already investigating these potentially fraudulent signatures and removing them.
As much for a programming exercise to learn how to parse a JSON feed as anything else, I decided to make a tool to make that country data human readable, and display on a pie chart what the proportion of UK to non-UK signatures might be, and how significant that proportion might be.
So the tool is at https://perfect-curve.co.uk/toys/petition, and on there you can see a live real-time feed of signatures as they are logged in the system after a user follows the confirmation email..
The first thing to note is the proportion of (notionally valid) UK-sourced signatures vs (notionally invalid) non-UK signatures, at 96% UK to 4% non-UK; i've done some checking with other petitions on the site, and that split is broadly commensurate with other petitions, which makes a claim of there having been an orchestrated attempt to get foreigners' signatures a bit tenuous.
However, more importantly, if you leave the page open you can see there's a continuous trickle of new signatures. 'not surprising for a popular petition' you may think, however that continuous trickle is indeed just that - not many peaks or troughs, which you'd expect from normal user behaviour. but more to the point, I observed between about 11pm last night until about 7am this morning, including at 3am (no, I didn't stay up all night just to watch a graph...) that continuous trickle carry on. Now you might think there would be the odd person still awake at 3am who thinks there's never been a better time to sign a petition, but I doubt you'd get a trickle of such people all the way through the night.
So on that basis I conclude that the petitions website has been compromised by a botnet, which is also linked to disposable email accounts to verify the signature, which is autosigning the petition. This means that not only is this particular petition an unreliable measure of public feeling, but until the GDS addresses and plugs the exploit, none of the petitions on the site can be considered reliable.
One thing to be clear about, though - at this stage it is not possible to reliably conclude who or why this compromise has been exploited - we can no more reliably conclude that it is down to a disgruntled Remain voter trying to bolster support than we can conclude it is a Leave supporter trying to discredit what was already becoming a record-breaking petition; indeed for all we can tell, it could just be a random l33t h4x0r taking the opportunity to try out their skills.In group Public / Third Sector Digital
In a previous job role on the main corporate webteam for a local council, one of my main focuses was on website content strategy, for the Birmingham City Council website; towards the end of that role (before the team itself was fundamentally changed in a departmental restructure) I completed the first draft of that strategy. As departmental and corporate priorities have shifted my original document has been changed and expanded considerably, but I thought it seemed worthwhile sharing it here for the wider community - the Local Government Digital community and any other public / third / educational sector digital community to use as a basis for their own work on developing content strategies.
It is high-level, strategic in nature; its goal is to outline principles to be followed when creating content; although there are some specific matters of detail towards the end of the document, a content strategy should not be expanded into a highly detailed how-to guide for creating content or checklist for evaluating it - such detailed information is best contained in separate documents rather than expecting content designers to read and absorb one large all-encompassing document.
Many of the principles outlined are taken from the work of others, most notably the Government Digital Service’s Style Guide and LocalGovDigital’s Content Standards, and further details can be found there.
Content Strategy has been described as…
‘…the practice of planning the content creation, delivery, and governance…’
‘…a repeatable system that defines the entire editorial content development process for a website development project…’
‘…words and data to create unambiguous content that supports meaningful, interactive experiences’.
In a nutshell this can be summarised as the distillation of audience, purpose, and intended outcome.
On a site as large and as wide-ranging serving as diverse a range of citizens’ needs as a council website, there cannot be one single definition of the above three factors – the audience is ‘everybody’, the purpose of the site is ‘to inform the public about the services we offer and enable and encourage the public to carry out some of those services themselves online’, and the intended outcome is ‘the website visitor has achieved what they came to the site to achieve, and maybe something else as well’.
Rather than thinking in terms of all of our content serving ‘everybody’, we instead must take each individual piece of content we intend to publish, and identify specifically audience, purpose, and intended outcome for that individual piece of content, being careful not to inappropriately mix those factors in that content – for example, it would be inappropriate to mix specific information intended for a member of the business community with general information intended for the general public on a page, or to mix information about how a citizen may access a service on a page which details the policies and strategies underpinning that service. Even amongst broad audience categories care must be taken not to mix specific sub-categories of audience – for example, under the audience category of business, the information and transactional needs of the corner shop owner in many cases will be different from the needs of the SME owner which will be different again from the needs of a venture capitalist looking to make an investment of over a million pounds in the city.
In common with standard practice in the communications, marketing, and brand management industries, content is best designed having in mind a number of fictional individuals and families which are intended to represent the breadth of potential users of the website. The purpose of these profiles is to enable web editors and content authors to have in their minds a picture of actual people with real and definable needs who will be users of the web content to focus on, rather than thinking in terms of a generic amorphous mass of ‘just anybody’. The profiles also are there to remind us of the wide diversity of citizens we provide services to and who wish to transact with us, find out information from us, or otherwise wish to engage with us (or indeed with whom we ourselves wish to engage) – indeed, to remind us not to focus on one particular group of citizens at the expense of other groups of citizens.
Whilst by nature these are stereotypical, they are not intended to be seen as stereotypes of users or locations, rather they are intended to be broad brush descriptions by which it is helpful to personalise the content by picturing actual individuals going to the website to access it. It is not intended to represent a comprehensive list of the diversity of the area and its citizens, rather it is intended to acknowledge the breadth of diversity we have.
Any given town, city, borough, or county will have its own unique mixture of demographics which its own Citizen Insight team will have researched - however, it is fair to say that any area will broadly consist of the following demographics:
1) Mr and Mrs Mercury
A family living in council housing in a former council estate area, with one child at school and another grown-up child living at home unemployed, and an elderly relative living in a care home in the area. Both parents are employed; they are not on the breadline, though they have little left over for luxuries. They are sceptical about the internet (although they have internet access at home they would not be considered power users), and sceptical about the council - they are aware the council empties the bins and has some responsibility for the local park, but little knowledge of how the council works beyond that and unaware of the extent of council services they do actually use; indeed, they do think of the council as being still responsible for the buses - as well as living literally on the edge of the city, they are also metaphorically on the edge of the notion of civic engagement.
2) Mr and Mr Venus
A couple of young professionals living in a private rented apartment in the up-and-coming hipster area of the city; the bulk of their use of council services is in the leisure and culture sector - libraries, sports facilities, the museum and art gallery, and council-organised cultural festivals and events. They are both digitally and civically engaged - active participants on Twitter and hyperlocal blogs, in the local Neighbourhood Forum, they were active participants in the campaign to introduce a directly elected mayor for the city, readers of the local broadsheet paper on their iPads, and keen to keep an eye on all that is going on at the Civic Centre (from both the elected members and paid officers) and chatter about what they find amongst their friends. Environmental issues feature highly on their personal agendas.
3) Mr and Mrs Mars
A couple running a family-owned business, they have little interest in standard residential council service beyond the basics of roads, bins, schools, and council tax, but a high level of interest in council services for small businesses - they pay business rates, have their rubbish collected by the commercial waste team, occasionally need to engage the services of the council rat-catcher, have to ensure they are complying with relevant council regulations and have the appropriate licenses for their business, and are also interested in what help and support for small businesses the council can offer.
4) Ms Jupiter
A successful career woman living in one of the swanky city centre penthouses, she is not remotely interested in the services the council provides to residents beyond core services such as roads. She is however on the board of the Local Enterprise Partnership. Although she doesn't have any interest in what the council provides to her personally, she is fully aware of the full spread of council service, and is very interested in what the council can do where its work crosses over into her own job.
5) Mr Saturn
A student in his final year at the university, living in shared accommodation in the north of the boroughand intending to stay in the county after he finishes his course. Has no job yet lined up at the end of the year in July so would not be surprised to spend a short time on benefits, however does not expect to spend a very long time unemployed if that occurs - but he could just as easily secure a job ready to walk in to come graduation as he could spending several months seeking work in what has become a tight and competitive jobs market.
6) Mr and Mrs Neptune
These south of the county residents represent the average, the so-called silent majority who don't care about this policy or that initiative, and are not interested in a compelling user experience which excites and engages them in that process - they know what they want, and just need to get things done with the minimum of fuss and agro.
7) Mr and Mrs Uranus
A retired couple living in the relatively well-off north east of the borough who own their own home outright with two grown-up children, one of which living nearby on the verge of making them grandparents, the other living in the South Yorkshire part of the Peak District.
Clearly the above profiles are non-exhaustive sweeping generalisations, and clearly there will be many citizens and potential users of the council website who straddle more than one profile in their needs and interests. However, between those seven profiles they cover a significant amount of both of what people are looking for in the council website, and what the council wishes to provide to people on the site. From these seven personas we can then consider what their needs as users might be.
Before designing content or functionality for a site, it ought to go without saying that the designer should establish what the need for that content or functionality might be. The organisation will have its own needs to fulfill - which in crude terms will usually boil down to a need to get people to do stuff online rather than phoning up about it - but in order for the site to be successful, those organisational needs must be mapped to the needs of the user.
Some needs will be obvious - users will always need to pay their council tax, report potholes, or report that their bins haven't been collected. Some needs which seem obvious on closer examination will turn out to be less critical and can be deprioritised in favour of more important work - for example, the amount of investment which many councils go to in creating elegant solutions to check online when your bin day is. Have you ever actually needed to contact the council to check when your bin day is? Myself, I've never needed to check my bin day; whenever I've moved into somewhere new, it becomes pretty obvious when bin day comes around - you'll get home in the evening and see half the street has already put their bins out! If you're super eager on moving into a new house, you're almost certainly more likely to ask one of your new neighbours than you are to ask the council.
That said, do not let the absence of user immediately asking for something be an excuse for stifling innovation. Nobody ever asked for contactless electronic ticketing on London transport, but can you imagine a London Underground now without the Oystercard? The establishment of user needs should not be restricted simply to what users are asking for; care sure be taken to validate the true extent of a user need whether asked for or innovated before proceeding with costly or time-consuming development. Doing this will also have the bonus of helping you market your content and functionality to your users thus making a successful site more likely.
Start with why
The traditional method of mapping users to needs is to follow the format
As a [user profile], I want to [do something] because [of a reason], so that [an outcome is achieved].
So we might see
As a resident I want to book a bulky waste collection because I've just bought a new sofa so that I can get rid of the old one to make room for it.
As a parent I want to check what the dates for half term are because I'll need to organise childcare and activities so that my child is properly looked after and entertained during the week.
For the simple, tried-and-tested, obvious pieces of functionality and content, this formulation works well enough. An argument could be made that such content is so obviously needed it doesn't even need spelling out this much.
An alternative way of thinking about user needs mapping is emerging stemming from Simon Sinek's 2013 TEDx talk, Start With Why; he turns the traditional what-> how mapping into a why -> how -> what map.
Taking the example of Apple, the traditional marketing message would go:
"[What] We make great products - [how] they're beautifully designed, simple to use, and user-friendly - [call to action] want to buy one?"
But he speculates the reason for their success is because they start with the Why:
"[Why] Everything we do, we believe in challenging the status quo; we believe in thinking differently. [how] The way we challenge the status quo is by making products which are beautifully designed, simple to use, and user-friendly. [what] We just happen to make great products - [call to action] want to buy one?"
By focussing on why the users' needs exists before what the user wants to do, we can both design content and functionality more in tune with the users' needs, and better encourage those users to use it.
I need to make room for my nice new sofa. The council can take away my old worn out sofa; I'll book a bulky waste collection to arrange that.
My child will need looking after during half term week. I can book some annual leave to be off during that time, and arrange with a friend for them to go there for the other days; I'll check what the dates for half term are so I can organise this.
After identifying our user profiles, their needs, and the reasons for those needs, most councils now have determined a need to move away from the traditional topic-led top level categories of the Local Government Navigation List and instead sorting all the council’s services in a user-centric manner. Liverpool City Council were the first in the UK to follow standard marketing principles of segmenting their site according to audience requirements by introducing the navigation top levels of Residents, Business, and The Council, and this content strategy extends that further with About The City and Leisure.
Audience – everybody who lives in the borough, or is contemplating living in the borough.
Purpose – to give people access to all the information they need to know living in the borough, and to enable them to do things such as pay, book, report, and confirm services (‘carrying out transactions’ in the jargon of the field) online.
Audience – everybody who runs a business – large or small – in the city, or is contemplating starting one, or who may run a business outside Birmingham who could benefit from the business services the council offers.
Purpose – as with Residents, to give business customers access to all the information they need to know, to enable them to carry out business-related transactions, and an additional purpose of marketing council business-related services to business customers.
Audience – everybody who lives or works in the county, or is a student of politics or organisational design, and more specifically has an interest in the political and organisational structure of the council, and/or interested in the policies and procedures which underpin the services we offer; citizen activists and people with other research interests in the political and organisational layout of the council.
Purpose – to educate citizens in the workings of the council and to stimulate and encourage active citizenship, to enable citizens and journalists (whether professional or amateur) to hold us to account, and to enable citizens to understand the policies and constraints around the way we deliver services.
About the city
Audience – everybody with a general interest in the city, whether they live here, work here, visit here, are contemplating investing here, applying for a job here, or have any other research interest in the city.
Purpose – to provide information about aspects of the city which are of relevance to everybody regardless of marketing segmentation – information about the history of the city, its demographics, census, transport and economic information, to market the city as a first class place to live, work, and play; a section of the site which transcends the narrower residents / business audience demarcation.
Audience – everybody who lives and works in the area or who might be visiting the area.
Purpose – to market and promote the city’s leisure offer – events, arts and culture, museums and galleries, community centres, and spectator and participative sport and fitness, and to enable bookings of activities.
The audience of your site goes beyond the people who live there, so for example this is why sections such as Transport should not be in the Residents top level, because visitors are unlikely to look there. Similarly, whilst Leisure may not be the best label for that top level, do not be tempted to call it Visitors, implying that only visitors to your town are going to go to the museum whilst residents ignore it.
Whilst most services – eg, council tax, schools, licensing, and commercial waste collection – can be obviously fitted into just one of the above top levels, some services – eg libraries – have some ambiguity around which of the top levels is the best fit for them. For these services, the home top level will be decided upon where all of those relevant pages will sit, but there will be signpost pages under the other top levels to take the visitor to where the bulk of the content can be found.
When redesigning your site, content, and information architecture, be ready to challenge everything that currently exists; most council website place their pages about markets under the leisure section of the site - but since when has going to buy the weekly vegetables been an activity comparable with a walk in the park or a visit to an art gallery?
The intended outcome of the five top levels is shared – primarily that the website visitor came to the site with a goal in mind – whether that goal is finding out information or performing a transaction – that they were able to quickly identify where on the site (whether by menu navigation, a-z directory, or free text search) their goal might be fulfilled, to quickly and easily fulfill that goal, and as a bonus outcome be made aware of other related and unrelated activity they can carry out on the site. The corollary of the outcome is that their satisfaction as a user is high, that they use the website as their first stop on achieving future goals rather than phoning up or visiting a council office, and they recommend the website to their friends and family.
The expected audience
There are many different audiences for the site as a whole and individual pages within it. Each individual page itself should also be written in the context of audience, purpose, and intended outcome – is the audience general members of the public, an expert in the service, students learning the craft of the service or pupils doing a project, somebody wanting to buy a service, etc. If the audience is the general public then the content should conform as closely as possible to Basic English.
The commonly accepted wisdom has it that roughly 80% of a council website audience and page accesses represents people acting as members of the general public, having an interest in roughly 20% of the total content of the site – the content which is standard resident-focussed content about bins, potholes, schools, housing, benefits, council tax, and planning permission for extensions. This is the content which will deliver the most benefits to the council in terms of channel shift, so this is the content to which the greatest attention should be given to ensure it’s right, and stays right; this content should be presented in such a way that the web user can see what they need to see immediately, complete any task with ease, but where possible it should also be content which is capable of nudging that visitor into other areas of the site where they can also complete other tasks rather than phoning us up to complete them.
Although the general public represents 80% of our audience, the audiences which make up the remaining 20% should not be dismissed as unimportant – these audiences represent people acting in the capacity of business users, visitors to the city (whether business or tourism), citizen activists wishing to scrutinise our work and our policies and hold us accountable to them, experts in any given field or service area wanting to find out more details about how we deliver that service and its underlying policy imperatives, schoolteachers and parents, social care professionals, investors and potential investors in the city needing information to inform their decision making, and even students and schoolchildren doing research to support college and school projects.
The content for these audiences is important too – but content on pages and groups of pages must be structured in such a way that content targeted at one audience does not conflict with content targeted at other audiences – whilst some visitors to the page to report a suspected case of food poisoning may be interested in the additional information about the different kinds of bacteria which cause food poisoning, the Food Law Enforcement Plan or the Food Sampling Protocol, most visitors will not be interested in this – they will just be feeling unbelievably ill and be wanting to get the report over and done with with as little fuss as possible! There is a place for this content – but as additional information separate from the key facts needed by the majority.
The content onion
As stated above, do not mix audiences; a web user needing to report the possibility they’ve contracted food poisoning from a local restaurant does not need to be given on that page guidance in how to register a food business, and vice versa – both aspects of the same Environmental Health service have different audiences, resident and business, so the pages containing information about the former should be under Residents whilst the latter should be under Business.
In structuring the content of the page its purpose and intended outcome must come to the fore – so for example, thinking about the school term dates page, consider what the purpose of the page from the perspective of the customer might be. Finding out what the dates of the school terms are for the current and forthcoming academic years are the obvious purposes of the page, but think more closely – is there a high chance that most people coming to that page have come in order to find out the dates of the next school holiday or half term break? Any page on the site to justify its existence will by definition have a fair amount of content on it, but in considering what the most important to the customer or mostly likely nugget of information might be, put that information at the top of the page clearly visible. If the website visitor is interested in the detail of the page they’ll go on to read it anyway – if they’re not interested in that detail, then they’ll likely not bother anyway and just be cross with you for confusing them or wasting their time. The author of the page then needs to structure the text according to a content template:
- The key fact – captured in a single sentence, what is the single most important fact this page has been created to convey – bus lane enforcement is now active in the city centre.
- The summary – one or two paragraphs expanding on that fact – the reason bus lanes exist at all, how much getting caught contravening in an enforcement zone will cost, and the fact that the enforcement area will be expanded over time.
- The call to action – a prominent link inviting the user to do the most appropriate thing as a result of arriving on this page – pay or challenge your bus lane fine.
- The main content – the substantial detail the visitor to the page has come to find out; details of the fact of the policy to carry out enforcement being one which be being gradually expanded around the city, guidance on how to recognise bus-only areas and a note that difference precise restrictions apply in different places (so a reminder to be careful to look at the signs), a reminder that it is drivers’ responsibility to make sure they’re not about to drive into a bus lane, information about how enforcement is happening, and links to further information.
- Further information – background detail on the underlying policy behind the implementation of enforcement, benefits to the council and to the citizen expected to result from the policy, and other additional details about bus lanes and their enforcement.
Aspects 1-4 above belong together on the same page, in that order; content fitting into point 5 belongs on a separate page, or a series of separate pages – and indeed those pages themselves if possible should in turn themselves structured according to that principle of progressively revealing more detail on the page.
Content for a page should not be shoe-horned inappropriately into this structure; for example some content may not have an obvious call to action arising from it, or other content may not have a single important key fact or be appropriately summarised in one or two paragraphs – but when preparing content for the site always use this structure as a starting point, and be prepared to be challenged where it doesn’t follow it.
This may seem an obvious statement, but there should neither be too little nor too much content on the page for the audience and intended outcome; the average reader should feel like they have gained information from visiting the page, whilst at the same time the page should not contain so much information that they just run away immediately – comparing for example the page about Gift Aid on the HMRC website with the one on www.gov.uk shows this well – if you already know there is such a thing as Gift Aid, you are not going to be any the wiser about the process from the latter page (and if you don’t know, you’re probably not going to now learn about it by stumbling across that page), whilst probably the only people not to be completely put off by the former will be professional tax accountants! Seek always in the first instance the middle path, except where the page is for true experts.
The philosophy underpinning the above structural principle is a form of progressive enhancement, and is tied into to a mobile first strategy.
In the early days of emerging mobile access to the web, with small screens and it being difficult to type into, the general philosophy of mobile provision was for a separate mobile site containing a cut down version of the content. In the modern era with much improved displays and capabilities of modern phones, plus the mass market penetration of intermediate devices such as tablets, we can no longer assume that mobile users only want to carry out web activity when on the move away from home, and we can confidently provide a richer experience to mobile users than previously. At the present time at least 40% of many sites' traffic is coming via mobile devices; this may be the peak or it may become a higher proportion still in the months and years to come – but it is unlikely to ever drop below 30% in the future.
A mobile first strategy means we adopt an assumption all information and functionality that users need to carry out can be accessed on a reasonably mid-specification modern touchscreen smartphone. If they are unable to complete the whole of the task on their mobile device, the page needs to give them sufficient information to reassure them that this is the correct page to come back to in order to transfer to the desktop environment at their convenience, ideally they would be able to hand off the progress they've made on their mobile device to the larger screen without having to start again from the beginning – thus, the visitor should be able to gain some value from having visited the page on their mobile device, with added value for those who have visited on the desktop.
The value of every page
Our website visitors are busy and important people; our website editors are also busy and important people. Accordingly, every page on the site should have a value – a good reason for you having created it in the first place and be continuing to maintain it, and a good reason for the citizen to have come to it and read it.
Each case is different, but the intended outcome will in most cases be the best measure of the value of an individual page. Is the page intended to result in somebody making a payment, booking something, or reporting something via a linked webform rather than them phoning up the contact centre to do so? These are the highest value pages. Is the page intended to help somebody get more value out of visiting, investing, working, or living in Birmingham as a result of visiting the page? These are also very high value pages. Is the intended outcome to turn the un-engaged citizen into an engaged citizen, and the engaged citizen into a more engaged citizen? These are quite high value pages, too. Is the page an explanation of who the team are, what they do, and pictures of them? Hmmm, these maybe reasonably valuable pages, depending on additional context and placement – them being located in the section of the website devoted to explaining the council structure as part of citizen engagement would tend to increase their value, whilst being more prominent in the section of the website devoted to delivering the service than the actual service delivery information would tend to decrease their value. Vanity content has little value on the site. Is there no real intended outcome from the page? Is it just a page containing a graphic of a poster campaign which just happens to have been done some time ago, with no additional contextual information? These will be the lowest value pages, which would probably be considered trivial.
Redundant, Outdated, Trivial, Essential
All content on the site should be regularly checked for whether it is Redundant, Outdated, Trivial, or Essential.
Contrary to some messages which have been previously been received, we are not seeking to have a wholesale cull of content purely in order to reduce the number of pages on the site by an arbitrary number.
As above, all content on the site must prove its value in some way; it is particularly important though to determine which content is essential – the essential content is content which won’t necessarily have the most attention paid to it, rather it is content which come what may must be ensured is properly maintained. Examples of essential content could be:
- Information about statutory services,
- Information which the council has a legal obligation to make available,
- Information that the council or service area has highlighted as being for particular strategic or political focus,
- Information about a high-volume form which we want people to complete rather than phoning up about,
- Information which we know attracts significant call volume from people phoning up to find.
It stands to reason that if a piece of content is essential, then a high degree of attention must be paid to the presentation of it; a complex legal or consultation document included as an attachment should have a Plain English abstract as an executive summary, outlining what the document is about and why it is important.
Trivial content is that content which seems to have no real purpose of interest to citizens, whether they are ordinary citizens or experts in the field. Examples of this include:
- Welcome from the service director,
- Explanations of what a team does,
- Archive photos of old poster campaigns,
- Explanations of basic facts which most people living in the modern world ought to be expected to know.
Whether or not content is trivial will usually be contextual; the welcome from the service director will be inappropriate for content under residents, but will probably be relevant to content in the council structure section of the site; if the service provided by the team is dependent on the web visitor knowing who the team is and what they do, then clearly this is not trivial; archive photos of events or poster campaigns are trivial, but archives of documents of conferences which attenders may need to refer back to will probably have value for one or maybe two years after the event.
Outdated content should need no explanation:
- Projects which have long been completed or abandoned,
- Teams which have been restructured several times since the page was written,
- Projects which are still ongoing, but that the page relating to the project hasn’t been kept up to date to reflect recent developments on it.
Redundant content is content which effectively clogs up the information space for the user, causing the user to need to carry out unnecessary extra clicks, misdirecting them along their journey, causing additional delay to the user in completing their task or worse still, causing them to give up the task uncompleted:
- Pages which say ‘this content which used to be here is now on a different page’ – if that’s the case, the new content should have been put on the original page at the original url in the original menu structure replacing the original content, rather than a new page being made,
- Pages which are part of a group of several pages each containing just one or two paragraphs of text which could all instead be more effectively conveyed on just one page with all the content together – do not be afraid of the scrollbar; users are perfectly happy to scroll down a reasonable length of page when they can see the content warrants it,
- Pages which are about something which has no connection to Birmingham, the council, or the work of the council.
Niche content helping to build good search engine visibility or that serves a clear need
Some content which might on the face of it appear to be either trivial or redundant we know from the context or purpose is actually far from such – either because we know from from our access and search statistics people are looking for it, because it contains information we know people frequently ask for by phoning up for it, or because we simply know it’s information we should be providing because, to coin a phrase, ‘it stands to reason’.
Part of the reason to maintain content of this nature is because although it might not be directly related to a council service, it’s still information about the city which users have an interest in knowing – and, so long as we can be sure the information we provide is authoritative and accurate, our general good positioning in search engine results means that if users find that information they’re looking for on our site, once they’re here there is the opportunity for them to stay here and be encouraged to learn about the things they can do on our website which are part of our services, thus encouraging them to do so online rather than by phoning us up.
Local history information is a good source of search-engine-generated traffic of this nature – in Birmingham's case, our pages about the history of the canals are the most obvious ones; Salford City Council has its page on the history of Eccles cakes, and following an appearance on The Great British Bake-Off Haringey Council put up a page containing a recipe for Tottenham cake which resulted in a significant upswing of traffic to their site.
Pages containing ‘interesting facts’ can also result in traffic being driven to the website as a result of user searches; a once-popular page on the Birmingham City Council website was the main page for Highways services, which as well as listing the specific service information links also used to contain the facts about how many miles of roads Highways maintains, and how may thousands of traffic lights, street lights, benches, and traffic signs there are in Birmingham. The audience for this information? Children doing their school Geography projects, who before the information was put on the site were making a steady trickle of phone calls to the council asking for this information!
Be wary of just creating pages of facts with no contextual or additional information though – instead, embed this information on main pages for the service area so that it is clear what else the visitor can do online that they might also be interested in doing. Never create such content in the form of FAQs.
Why Frequently Asked Questions are not
The FAQ format is a handy aide-memoire to be used as advisor guidance by council staff members sitting in neighbourhood offices or at the contact centre, but it’s a much less satisfactory method of conveying information to the public – it’s lazy, and rarely comprehensive. In the context of advisor guidance, it’s usually information the advisor already knows, and is present in order to jog their memories; the advisor probably doesn’t need to refer to it, but if they do they consult it sufficiently frequently that even if they haven’t memorised the full content they’ve memorised the order of the questions on the page. A citizen web user on the other hand if, for example, their Local Housing Allowance doesn’t cover their rent, is unlikely to know that the answer to what additional help they may be able to get is on the second page of the list of FAQs; furthermore, also on second page of the LHA FAQs is the Question, apparently Frequently Asked, ‘What is Local Housing Allowance?’ – this is basic information which should be covered in the introduction to the page!
Instead of artificially and arbitrarily breaking up information into a series of – from the user perspective – random questions and answers presented in a random order, instead turn this information into proper English prose structured according to the content onion described above.
Front-load page titles and links, and list alphabetically
Always order lists of links or services etc alphabetically. Any other ordering which might be obvious to you or your service director will be completely opaque to the user, and will just appear to be random – which will make it much harder for the user to find the relevant link within the list. Be especially resistant to resist requests to order links in some form of popularity order – the fact of any given service being the fifth most popular in that list will not mean anything to the user when they themselves are looking for it.
When creating page titles and lists of links, it’s tempting to write them in the order verb-noun, ie ‘pay council tax’, or ‘report a missed bin collection’, because after all, that’s the natural language of people, isn’t it? However, when a user is scanning along an alphabetised list, a sea of ‘request a…’ or ‘report…’ isn’t going to help them, so once they see that the list is alphabetised and front-loaded, they will switch their mental focus from the report they are wanting to make to the fact that it’s a pothole they are trying to report, so will then much more easily see ‘pothole – report’ in the list of links.
There are rare occasions when you might deviate from this, where there are pages which might be duplicated in function if not in content across other areas of the site – for example, you might have a page which itself is a list of the common forms related to that service area, which you can put first on the list, or you might have a contact page (which you can call ‘contact us’ rather than ‘us – contact’!) which should always appear at the end of a list. The golden rule is consistency, learnability, and predictability.
How long should a page be? The unhelpful, but true, answer is ‘as long as it needs to be and as short as it can be’. Don’t fall into the trap of the quote (attributed variously to Blaise Pascal, Mark Twain, and Voltaire) which goes ‘I didn’t have time to write a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead’.
On the other hand, whilst you don’t want to overload people with excess words, people have come to the page for a reason, and you don’t want to leave them coming to the end of the page unsatisfied. Think back to the era of Ceefax, and how frustrating it was to read a screenful of text that due to the constrictions of the format meant you learned little more about the story beyond what you’d already learned from the headline.
As above, always consider both the audience and the purpose of the page when looking at whether it’s the correct length, but since numbers are often helpful to content writers as targets to aim for:
- 200 words makes a good introductory text for something; pages should not contain fewer than 200 words – if this is going to be the case, consider instead whether the topic could be combined with other topics onto a single page,
- 500 words should usually be enough to give the casual and interested user enough information to satisfy most of their information needs on the topic, and
- 1,000+ words is suitable only for a page containing serious information intended for the serious user who needs to know all the details of the topic at hand. Pages with this amount of content should be liberally scattered with relevant headings amongst the text to enable easy scanning.
They say a picture paints a thousand words, and a well chosen picture can bring colour and life to an otherwise dull page.
If a picture paints a thousand words, are they the thousand words you want to say? Just as a well chosen picture can bring colour and life to an otherwise dull page, a poorly chosen picture can turn what was an interesting and informative page into one which is at best tedious to read through and at worst a complete car crash; bland or cliché stock photography images of paper cut-out people holding hands, expensive looking pens, piles of money, close-ups of telephone buttons, and the obligatory group shot of people in hi-vis jackets and hard hats on a construction site smiling and pointing at large plans are the worst offenders.
By all means do use images to liven up your pages, but please avoid clichés. Think ‘does this image genuinely enhance the content of the page, or does it just get in the way’? Only use sharp, well colour saturated high quality images taken with a decent camera, never use blurry washed out images taken with a cheapo phone camera.
Make absolutely sure you have written permission which you can produce immediately if challenged before including an image you have not created yourself on any council web page.
Many events and initiatives are done in conjunction with external partners; it’s traditional to include their logos in a block at the bottom of the page.
A small number of logos isn’t so bad, but when it becomes more than five in a block, we really would rather you didn’t. If it is absolutely a condition of funding that all ten logos are displayed on the page, be sensible about it – ensure they are all the same visual size (design and shape permitting), that they are all clear and any text is still legible whilst at the same time ensuring they are all reasonably small so as not to dominate the page, and that the visual spacing between them is equal; be aware when spacing that some logo image files issued by organisations have the logo flush with the edge of the file whilst other files will have spacing in the file – so use your eyes and a ruler to measure spacing rather than relying on butting files adjacent to each other.
Most organisations will have brand usage guidelines applying to the usage of their logos, which they should send to you when they send the image files – the most relevant part of them for your purposes will usually be the part relating to exclusion zones. Take extra care with these when combining multiple logos on a page – the purpose of exclusion zones is to ensure a logo isn’t crowded out by other design elements, and the purpose of brand usage guidelines as a whole is to ensure an organisation’s logo and brand isn’t shown in a poor respect. However, with many organisations’ brand usage guidelines if they were all followed strictly to the letter on an image block containing multiple logos, the result would be an ugly mess making all the brands look bad. For safety, consult a professional designer in these situations.
Assume as a starting point that attachments are banned.
There are four valid reasons for including attachments on the site:
- The attachment contains a long form that the user is being expected to fill in (for which there isn’t an online form equivalent) – in these circumstances the attachment must be a Word document, and never a .pdf document,
- The attachment is a leaflet or a brochure which has been set by a graphic designer, for which the design and layout is as much an essential part of the information to be conveyed as the text; this might also include a poster intended to be printed out and pinned to a wall,
- The attachment is a long policy document or similar that would be impractical to turn into a series of web pages, and that would be impractical to read online, which the user is more likely to want to print out or send to their eBook reading device and read in sections at their leisure, or
- The attachment is a data file such as a .csv or Excel document which the user is as likely to want to interrogate and manipulate as they are to want to simply look at.
Apart from the first example above (for which the first question must be whether it could realistically be turned into an online form), even if the content is appropriate for an attachment, any attachment should be included on a page only with an appropriate introduction giving sufficient information for the user to determine whether they want to spend their time downloading it and opening it – for the second example, a simple description of the attachment and any information from it will suffice; cases of the third example should be accompanied by a substantial abstract of 500 – 1,000 words in the form of an executive summary of the content, and the fourth examples should be accompanied by a description of the file and the key summary of the numbers presented in a table on the page.
Attachments which the webteam judge to be unjustified should not be published.
A website to be proud of
At the end of the day, we all accept that few people are going to come to our website to read all about the customer services performance statistics as a leisure activity.
However, if by treating all our content as if people will read it for pleasure, as if it matters to us that they read it and digest it, we will achieve a website to be proud of. And, indeed, maybe they will start to become more active and engaged citizens as a result, as well as being more inclined to transact and find information online rather than making expensive phone calls – and better still, tell their friends to as well.Public / Third Sector Digital
Back in May 2014 after the results of the elections to the European Parliament, I speculated that I didn't believe that the whole of the 17% of people who voted for UKIP were actually the xenophobic bigots my fellow left-liberal friends were painting them as; I speculated that most of them were probably simply ignorant (in the unaware sense) of what the EU is, and ignorant of the true nature of immigration into the UK, and simply wanting to give the Tories a bit of a kicking. This was a year before the General Election, when all the polls were expecting a year later to see a win for Labour (a tight one if not a comfortable one), and there was no serious expectation at the time that a referendum on the UK's membership of the European Union would be happening any time soon. My response was rather than complaining about so many people voting UKIP, wouldn't it be nice instead if we could spend the forthcoming year actually explaining properly what the EU is and isn't, how it works, emphasising the real benefits of its existence and our membership of it, and indeed acknowledging the downsides as well.
Two years on and approaching the end of a referendum campaign about whether or not to stay in the EU, rather than there having been any real attempts to explain the EU properly, rather than either side having any interest in engaging in an actual debate on the matter (the national broadcasters hosted TV sort-of debates, but for the most part the representatives of the campaigns refused to debate together, rather mostly getting whole programmes to themselves in Q&A, I created a website in order to facilitate online debate and discussion which went mostly ignored by people), instead we've seen mostly shouting into echo chambers of self-selecting groups of people who mostly agree with what's being shouted anyway, we've seen both sides mostly paint supporters of the other side as being stupid idiots for holding the opinions they do, we've seen campaigning based on lists of famous people who support both sides with the captions 'who do you trust more - these people or those people?', we've seen a Leave campaigner saying the UK's curry house scene is under threat because of the difficulty of bringing enough trained chefs from Bangladesh into the country and we've seen David Cameron, the leading Remain campaigner say that if we do leave one possible consequence could be World War Three its very self.
We've seen perhaps the most important decision the country has had the opportunity to make in two generations, for the next two generations, reduced to Facebook and Twitter memes of pictures of rum folk with dodgy hair pitted against pictures of nice folk posing for the camera with suitable gravitas.
Both sides have produced their various tame experts to express their points of view on the consequences of either result to jobs and the economy; the problem is, all these points of view can be nothing but speculation - economists are very good at explaining current circumstances and analysing past circumstances, but when it comes to forecasting the future, they're no more accurate at it than weather forecasters. Since nobody knows what kind of deals we'd be able to negotiate on a Leave, and nobody knows whether there are any further gotchas lurking around the corner which could bring the Eurozone to its knees, nobody can know with any useful degree of certainty what the comparative economic risks and benefits might be of either result. Both sides have produced business leaders to support them, but, being frank, I care little for the fact that remaining is good for Richard Branson's business or leaving is good for James Dyson's business - the fact of one result or the other being good for one or the other's business has no bearing on whether one result or the other is good for everybody or not.
There are some facts to be had - there's the fact that no matter what Remain say, the EU is fundamentally an undemocratic organisation. It's undemocratic by design, partly because that's the whole point of it - a realisation that some areas of shared human endeavour are not best left to the whims of whoever can be bothered to turn up to vote that day, because you'll never see turkeys voting for Christmas, and it's undemocratic by nature - there is no pan-European demos for a democracy to function in because the sad fact is, democracy doesn't scale well anyway - it just about works at a local council level (or it would do if people bothered to participate), and it just about works at a national level, but barely does it work at a continental level. And if you're main objection to the EU is the level of control which is in the hands of the unelected bureaucrats, how much control do you think the unelected bureaucrats of your local council or the nation have compared with the elected representatives?
And there's the fact that no matter what Leave say, the EU is not interfering with every minute aspect of your life or of UK legislation; sure, there are EU regulations which affect all of us, but those are regulations - on food quality, on workplace safety, on product safety, on human rights - which any decent human being agrees are good regulations to have, and the existence of those regulations across the single market are what ensures product and service providers get to compete on a level playing field without rogue traders claiming to be selling something they're not. But there's no EU law which forced the UK to privatise the Post Office, contrary to what Leave campaigners claimed several years ago. And the aspect of EU law which comes to us in the form of Directives - they're basically points of principle which national legislatures are left to implement as they see fit anyway. And guess what - most EU Directives which have been implemented into UK law, the UK government has tended to what's known as Gold Plate (add a whole load of other stuff whilst they're at it) on the implementation, so for example a fictitious example of an EU Directive saying bananas must be sold no longer than 10cm long, UKGov historically would always implement by saying bananas should be sold no longer than 8cm long, and show have between 27 and 42 brown spots on the skin at the point of sale.
And oddly, when both sides have left open goals in their position, the other side has done little to exploit them. The fact is, the deal David Cameron came back with after his reform negotiations was so inconsequential few people can even remember it having occurred, never mind what was in it. If the Leave team had any degree of competence, they'd have been all over this the whole campaign as the perfect demonstrator of just how closed to reform the EU actually is - if that was the best reform DC could get when he was in the room saying 'look, lads, my arse is on the line here - if you don't give me something good to go back to the country with, the country's going to quit', then it shows just how little influence we actually have when the stakes for the Union as a whole aren't so high. And when the Leave camp have kept banging on about immigration and how terrible it is and how we need to Take Back Control (repeating those three words ad nauseumlike they were a topic on Just A Minute), the Remain team have done little to counter it by explaining how the level of net immigration is not remotely what Leave claim it to be, that immigrants are not actually driving down wages (because we have minimum wage legislation which most Leave campaigners would abolish at a stroke), and that by and large immigrants are net contributors both to the economy itself and to the organisations they're working for. Instead, the official Remain campaign has basically agreed with Leave about needing to do something about All These Bad Foreigners, and bizarrely their counter argument is to say that the so-called Australian Style Points System which most Leavers refer to will let in more immigrants than we currently get.
Apart from the German-born MP Gisela Stuart (who with no sense of irony is the chair of the official Leave campaign), Labour has broadly stayed out of the ding donging, point scoring, and petty mud slinging that has characterised most of the campaign; for once under their current leadership, Labour MPs have realised that since most of the campaign has been characterised by Tories flinging used cat litter at each other, their own interests are better served by watching them get on with it, taking a temporary break from the business as usual practice of flinging mud at Jeremy Corbyn. The Tories have almost certainly been seriously damaged by the referendum splits, but don't get complacent, Labour folks, the Labour Party is just as split and needs to make a bit more of an effort to get it together by 2020 if it wants to win.
And now as the stakes start to get higher, as the polling is showing the result is less and less predictable, the campaigning has been getting dirtier - as somebody has pointed out that the referendum isn't legally binding anyway, claiming that since there's a parliamentary majority of MPs for Remain, then they'll block a Leave result regardless. This has been bandied around as if some kind of conspiracy in the legislation which created the referendum in the first place, missing the point of how laws are actually made in this country - legislation happens when the government (or very occasionally an individual MP) brings forth proposals to parliament which is then voted on, amended, and voted on again. That's how the British constitution works - laws are made by MPs and Lords, not by popular vote in a referendum. But that said, it would be political suicide for any government to ignore the clear result of a referendum, just as it would be political suicide for most MPs, unless there's a local context otherwise, to vote against legislation resulting from a referendum. The nightmare scenario could be if the result is close - a majority less that 52%/48% - especially if turnout is lower than 60%. If this happens the recriminations from both sides will be orders of magnitude greater than they're currently being.
But whichever side wins, the one thing I can say with 99% certainty is the main blame for the losing side will not because the odds were stacked against them or the other side cheated, it'll be because they failed to make a convincing case; their campaign was poor and shallow.
You Won't Believe What Happens Next.