LIVE ISSUE/PM ON THE NET: Fanfare of Blair’s Web launch implies spin over substance - Tony Blair live on the Web! Is this a great leap forward or PR puff, John Owen asks
JOHN OWEN, Campaign, Friday, 24 April 1998, 12:00am,
It’s not every day that the launch of a Website makes the front page splash of the London Evening Standard. But then, not every Website is launched by the spin doctors of Downing Street.
It’s not every day that the launch of a Website makes the front
page splash of the London Evening Standard. But then, not every Website
is launched by the spin doctors of Downing Street.
’Blair to go live on the Net’ screamed the billboards last
Wednesday.
In true New Labour fashion, the press release announcing the news saw
fit to embolden some of the more significant items - just so unruly
hacks could be under no illusion about what they should write if they
wanted to stay ’on-message’. It read: ’16 April sees the launch of the
official 10 Downing Street Website with a major first for Europe planned
for 29 April.’
Which, if you haven’t got it by now, means that the Prime Minister, Tony
Blair, is to answer questions from (gasp) ordinary voters on the Web
next Wednesday. ’Broadcasting’ direct from 10 Downing Street, Blair will
answer questions submitted by his humble electorate in a live half-hour
interview with Sir David Frost.
This ’unique and ground-breaking’ move underlines Labour’s commitment to
open government, as well as to the Internet and all things modern, we
are told.
The ’cybergrilling’ of Blair, as one national newspaper mockingly called
it, will be followed by similar interviews with other leading ministers
in what is apparently destined to become a historic series.
In addition, the site will deliver at least three items of news every
day, fed ’direct from Number 10’ - so they’ll be objective, then. Other
mouth-watering elements include: ’the latest information on the workings
of government’, a searchable database of the Prime Minister’s speeches,
key government publications and, for the less cerebral user, a virtual
tour of Number 10 and even a history of the building.
It will also feature a discussion forum where, quite apart from the
special interviews, everyday folk like you, me and the blokes at the
company that designed the site, can ask questions of our elected
representatives. And, when we don’t like the answers they give, we can
slag them off for all to see - albeit at the risk of receiving one of
Alastair Campbell’s infamous venomous phone calls. Or perhaps, in this
case, e-mails.
OK, so it’s easy to take the piss. But in a media savvy society, it’s
surely not only cynical journalists who will find all this starry-eyed
nonsense about ’accessibility’ to the ’people’s Government’ rather
difficult to swallow from a party whose most distinguishing feature is
its obsession with controlling the media.
Whether the initiative enhances Labour’s image is not really our concern
here. A more interesting question, from the advertising industry’s
perspective, is what effect such a public demonstration of the
Government’s belief in the Internet will have on its status as a
communications medium.
It’s a similar question to that posed in the US when the Clinton
Administration launched a White House Website in a blaze of publicity in
1994. Camilla Ballesteros, the director of interactive marketing at CDP,
worked at Poppe Tyson, the US new-media agency which developed the White
House site, and she is now suspicious of the long-term commitment of
governments to such projects.
’The White House site is now a very dated, dull and, I suspect,
unfrequented site,’ she says. ’It is inevitable that governments will
make gestures such as creating their own sites, but this is primarily to
demonstrate their own modernity, as well as their openness and
approachability.’
Robert Hamilton, a founder of the interactive communications specialist,
Indexfinger, is another sceptic. ’I don’t think that Blair’s use of the
Net will give it enhanced credibility,’ he says bluntly. ’The only
benefit for the consumer might be that he’ll be rather easier to avoid
on the Web than in traditional media.’
Unlike Hamilton, however, Ballesteros does not despair. She points to
the ’wonderful’ investment the Government is making in the so-called
’national grid for learning’, which involves putting all of Britain’s
libraries on the Net by the year 2000. This, added to Labour’s manifesto
commitment to putting schools on the Net, is what will make a real
difference to the medium’s status, she believes.
It would appear, on this occasion at least, that there’s some substance
to the spin.
According to Ross Sleight, a director at BMP InterAction, the BMP DDB
division in charge of strategy and project management for the Number 10
site, it’s just the start of a genuine commitment to using new media:
’The Government is firmly committed to using different channels to reach
individuals,’ he says. ’(The site) is an obvious forerunner to what we’d
like to see on digital TV.’
According to Sleight, 20 per cent of Web users currently look at
Government information on the Net. And he fundamentally rejects
Ballesteros’s views on the White House site: ’It has the largest Net
population in the US and the Government is very pro-active in using it,’
he claims.
The ’what’s new?’ part of Welcome to the White House is certainly
updated regularly. As for traffic, however, it had attracted two million
hits at 13,000 a day by 15 May 1995 when, seemingly, someone got bored
with renewing the ’status report’ section. The design, too, is in need
of a radical overhaul.
Most disappointing, there’s absolutely nothing about the only Clinton
stories of any interest to most people: the Lewinsky/Jones sex
scandals.
But then this is probably because there are no debate forums. You can
e-mail Clinton and Al Gore, but you can’t make your questions or views
public.
It is this element that makes the Downing Street site genuinely
interesting.
And the most valuable insight it will give into the status of the Net
will be the extent to which people can be bothered to use it.
In the first three days, an impressive 25,000 individual visitors posted
more than 500 questions. Now, will the member for Hartlepool please
respond?
This article was first published on Campaign
Share this story
Additional Information
Latest jobs Jobs web feed
-
Online PR Manager- Exciting Online Content Marketing Co- up to £45,000
Cedar Scott
Up to £45,000 per annum, Central London -
In-House Retail Brand - Internal Communication Manager
6 Degrees Talent Ltd
c£55k, Milton Keynes -
Property PR & marketing Account Manager
Halogen
£32,500 - £37,500, Central London -
Senior Account Director - Consumer Health
PR Futures
£55-£65k+package + bonus, London -
Director of Media Relations
British Bankers' Association
Competitive Salary + benefits, City of London
Most read
- PR agencies claw back digital business from specialist shops
- South Africa seeks digital help to combat 'negative perceptions'
- Westminster Advisers shakes up staff line-up following review
- Ad agency BMB enters PR with ex-Independent editor Simon Kelner
- Hope&Glory wins Ikea consumer press office duties
- Bell Pottinger joins APPC fold after years of opposition
Most commented





