Social Government

In Need of Repair: The Supreme Court’s Web Site

By Ethan Klapper on March 15th, 2009

The U.S. Supreme Court has always been a more secretive institution of government. Cameras aren’t allowed when court is in session and most deliberations go on behind closed doors.

But isn’t it time their Web site got with the 21st century? The poorly designed site makes it difficult for anyone to find information. You’re also out of luck if you don’t know how the court operates, since many terms are used without explanation.scotus

Forget about Web 2.0 suggestions for the high court. Let’s bring their Web 1.0 presence up to acceptable standards first.

  • Lose the splash page. This splash page serves no purpose and is intimidating. Replace it with a homepage containing news and information.
  • Don’t bury the information! Court decisions are hard to find on the site. Once you find them, they’re displayed in a poorly organized fashion.
  • Buy a content management system. I’m all but certain the court is using Microsoft FrontPage or similar software to maintain their site. If they invested in a CMS, it would be easier for more information to be posted.
  • Make Web sites for each of the justices. Each of these highly respected members of the court deserves more than a one-paragraph biography in a PDF file.

These are just a few suggestions. Hopefully this site, which is an embarrassment to our nation’s legal system, will soon be fixed.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • MySpace
  • NewsVine
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

No related posts.

Posted in Web Site Reviews | Comments
Tagged With:   • •
  • Jeffrey--

    I always appreciate when someone with your expertise participates in the conversation here!

    You do raise some valid points, and I will try my best to stay more positive when I post here.

    Keep reading!
  • Not a bad review, but I suggest you decide your goal for this blog. If you want to be heard by the people whose work you're reviewing, then focus on constructive criticism: help people understand why you want to see the changes you recommend. Even more strategic, help them understand why it's to their benefit to improve their web presence. By all means, recommend change, but do so in a way that shows you're trying to help, not tear down for failing to meet your standards.

    A different approach is to insult people and try to get them to change out of fear that you might insult them again.

    Your posts seem to wander back and forth, both within individual posts and between them.

    For example, in this post, you provide a good reason for why there should be more than a one-paragraph bio. So that's the helpful side.

    But then you use language like "it's an embarrassment to our nation's legal system."

    So - what kind of blogger will you be? Which do you think is more likely to get the people actually running these sites to do what you'd like?
blog comments powered by Disqus