One of the dominant memes in GOP circles since November 5 has been “the need to use the internet better”.
And while that’s a fairly big, amorphous concept, there is at least one empirical measure of the Obama and McCain campaign’s successes (other than online fundraising, although someone really should investigate all those millions in anonymous donations); someone has done a Usability Test comparing the two campaign’s websites:
A quick online usability study of the Obama and McCain websites was conducted on November 3rd and 4th, 2008. [Note: Passive must be avoided – Ed.] Preparation for the study took about 2 hours and data analysis took about 4 hours.
I should point out that Usability Testing is a part of what I do for a living. We’ll come back to this.
One of the key questions you have to ask when doing a usability test is “what is the user trying to accomplish?” These tasks should, ideally, reflect things the the user actually would need to accomplish using your website, software, hardware, store design or whatever it is you’re testing:
Participants were asked to do four tasks on one of the sites: find where to vote, find the candidate’s position on Social Security, find a photo of the candidate waving, and find the impact of the candidate’s tax plan on them.
I’m trying to picture someone trolling the web thinking “I need to find a picture of Barack Obama waving to a crowd. Where, oh where…“. But three out of four ain’t bad.
The next step is qualifying and quantifying your results:
Participants were randomly assigned to one of the two sites; 44 of them completed the tasks. Task success (self-reported), task times, and task ease ratings were collected, as were ratings on several scales, including the System Usability Scale (SUS).
Pay no attention to the terms of art among Usability geeks; let’s jump to the results:
Overall, the users were successful with 78% of their tasks on the Obama site but only 47% on the McCain site. Users of the McCain site also took 28% longer and rated the tasks as 27% more difficult. Users rated the Obama site as being significantly easier to find information on and significantly more visually appealing. And the Obama site received a mean SUS score of 76% compared to 45% for the McCain site. Usability issues with both sites were identified from user comments. Overall, it was a landslide usability victory for the Obama website.
Just a quick note to whomever runs for President in 2012; the little things count. And I know a few conservative usability geeks that’d love to lend a hand getting that particular problem solved.
You realize that 85% of McCain voters don’t know how to use the cable remote, right?
“How did Senator McCain get inside my e-mail box?”
When your campaign exists of 10 cliches, making the “information” easy to find should be an easy task. But then, my friends, McCain only had 13 cliches to deal with.
It’s a good point, & Obama deserves credit for his approach to the new medium. One of the reasons FDR did so well electorally in the 1930’s, was he figured how to use his voice on the new medium of radio. He did not sound shrill, & he could address you in a very personal way, never available before, in your home. I think every journalism student is shown the 1960 JFK-Nixon debate. Nixon could have said “He throws puppies in to wood chippers!” & JFK could have said “Yes I do, but that’s my personal life & off limits.” & JFK would still have been seen as the candidate who mastered the new media of TV, and won the debate.
I’m not sure that the internet dilemma is a Republican problem & not a McCain problem though. He fell asleep at the campaign wheel numerous times, some one woke him up with less than 2 weeks to go, but it was too late. I don’t know why his site would’ve been any different.
Both Romney’s & Giuliani’s sites were pretty decent. Easy to use, clear, concise, well organized & to the point. Lots of embedded video & audio. In terms of layout & functionality, they were both very similar to Obama’s website during the primary season.
“You realize that 85% of McCain voters don’t know how to use the cable remote, right?”
Yeah, right. That’s why Porn-O-Rama Franken is working like hell to get assed up ballots counted…’cause he wants to protect the franchise of teh stoopid Republikins.
Clown,
Have you seen the polling on how many Obama voters muff basic facts about Washington?
Like, 3/5 of them thought the GOP controlled Congress (this from a Zogby poll)? Worse than a coin toss…
Say, AssClown?
You seen the cavalcade of moonbat genius’s yet? You dolts really look good on camera, I’ll tell ya…pffft.
www dot howobamawon dot com
Oh geeze…Mitch and I were on the same wavelength…
Mr Shirt, you forget about Roosevelt’s great 1929 TV address.
Funny enough, Hoover actually did appear on TV while he was president but I don’t remember the year.
Hoover was an engineer by trade & was fascinated with the march of technology. He visited the labs where the prototype TV was being developed. while there, his fellow engineers put his image on screen. It was closed circuit & not broadcast obviously, but technically, a sitting president did appear on TV circa 1929! 🙂
Have you seen the polling on how many Obama voters muff basic facts about Washington?
Ha, ha, you freaks can’t even do polls right. Nate Silver handily dismantles Zogby’s push-poll in this
awesome interview with the ineffectively furious John Ziegler, who no doubt had a good long cry after he hung up.
Riiight, because all leftists supporters are geniuses based solely on their blind support for collectivism.
I dun for got!
Oh & Tim,
FWIW, Zogby himself is a democrat who likely voted for Obama.
“Nate Silver handily dismantles Zogby’s push-poll ”
BWAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAanother scary smart Democrap!HAHA
HAHAHAHAawesome interview!!!!HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAcoff…coff..Oh, I’m dyin’ here!HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA!!!!11!
Oh geeze, that was good.
Say Timmie? Do it again, pleeease!
From the blog tim links to:
The transcript below is intended to be representative as possible from my shorthand transcript, with the exception of two or three rapid-fire ad-hominem exchanges being edited out. The transcript, however, is not safe for work.
I think maybe you were distracted by the “Don’t Waste Water” Girl right next to this statement.
In other words the interviewer is tacitly acknowledging that the interview didn’t quite happen the way he portrays. Gee, Mr. Silver was calm & collected & John Ziegler was just a hyper defensive hot head for no reason.
Have some more Kool-aid!
FWIW, I’ve heard 7 people claim that Palin said “you can see Russia from my house.” When I challenged them, they adamantly claimed they saw her say it on the Gibson interview.
I bet you can see the underside of the High Bridge from Tim’s house.
Shirt,
“Being a Saint Paul DFLer means not needing to worry about logic or fact”.
Don’t confuse Tim. Not that it’s easy not to.
Considering how many times Ziegler reportedly drops the F-enheimer, why would the full transcript be “not safe for work”?
Just a cover for how Silver likely acted like a stark raving ass, & is not proud of himself. However, he’s more than happy to print the visceral emotion that his arrogant insipidness evoked from Ziegler in an attempt to make Ziegler look like he was “ineffectively furious”.
I’m surprised Silver had the kahunas to print this-
“You are never going to have the guts to post a representative transcript on your website!
Because Silver admits that he did not!
Ho, ho, keep it coming losers. “Who needs facts to show what we’re talking about, FUCK YOU!” You all get Salem Radio contracts.
Hey, Timmie, don’t get your undies in a wad. It’s not our fault that you’re a dim-wit (someone has to go to the public schools), and no one is forcing you to drink from the Feverswamp.
If you’re going to traipse in here and do your lillte moonbat asshat dance for us, we’re gonna laugh!
Twirl your propeller again, will ya?
HAHAHAHAHA!
Who needs facts to show what we’re talking about
You believe everything you read on the internet, Tim?
“The transcript, however, is not safe for work.”
Um, what?
The language is too strong to be viewed at a workplace? Does Nate Silver work at a petting zoo?
Moonbats have to read out loud, phonetically and veeeery slowly.
^^and apparently that doesn’t even help much.
Hey Timmy,
Without using Google or any other information not already in your head…
Who wrote The Federalist papers?
Who wrote “Common Sense” & “The Rights of Man”?
What is the purpose of the US Constitution?
What is the difference between the Constitution & the Bill of Rights?
Where do “Rights” come from?
And lastly, why don’t leftists think the above are important?
Tim in St. Paul-
Silver did not ‘dismantle’ Ziegler. All he did was attempt to make Ziegler look like a partisan hack, aka ‘anybody who did not vote for Obama’.
Care to defend your ‘dismantle’ statement or, as usual, are you going to pull your skirts up and runaway?
$10 (zimbabwe) says he’s long gone.
I’ve read the interview. Silver asks Ziegler if he surveyed McCain supporters as well, Ziegler says he did not. Later Silver asks Ziegler if he thought McCain voters would give more accurate answers; Ziegler says that he believes they would and gives his reasons for believing so but he does not misrepresent his survey as proving this point. The rest of the interview is all ad-hominem attacks by Silver. Does Ziegler believe Obama is a muslim? Does Ziegler consider certain types of voters misinformed?
Lefties pull this crap all the time. For instance they’ll read on Kos or atrios that the Swift boat vets have been debunked & then post comments on blogs asserting that the swift boat have been debunked, but when they are called on it they just can’t quite find the logical reasoning or the evidence that they assumed was behind the ‘debunking’ claim.
The party of unreason strikes again.
“For instance they’ll read on Kos or atrios that the Swift boat vets have been debunked & then post comments on blogs asserting that the swift boat have been debunked…
Gosh, I’ve never seen that happen here! 🙂
How about Silver’s baiting him on the senators of South Dakota, then when he got that right he moved on to South Carolina, Want to bet the next one was president of South Africa?
Sort of like the press badgering Bush… “who’s the president of…” then move down the list until he gets one wrong.
Ho, ho, keep it coming losers. “Who needs facts to show what we’re talking about, FUCK YOU!” You all get Salem Radio contracts.
Wow, TiSP. Most people can manage a little grace in victory. You’re just getting more and more deranged.
Oh, and if think Silver “debunked” anything…well, it’d explain a lot.
Hvae a nice day!
And neither Tim in St. Paul nor Silver seem to understand what a ‘push poll’ is.
And yet another thing!
The whole @$%& “reality based community” thing came from a story by Susskind in the New Yorker. He claimed that Bush staffer had accused him and the anti-neocons of being part of the “reality based community” that were going to be left behind when the Bushies changed reality, or something like that.
Susskind never gave a source for the quote and there were no other witnesses.
Our friends in the “reality based community” seem to be unable to tell verifiable facts from a sympathetic writer’s imaginary conversations.