CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 14years old!
Well done to ALL posters
It soon became useful and entertaining. There are regular posters, people who add useful info occasionally and plenty more who drop by to watch. That's fine. If you want to add news/comments it's easy to register and become a member.
RULES No personal insults. No swearing.
For about the umpteenth time a lunch companion raised the issue of Spokes newsletter and website being not very user friendly. We've discussed this here before too, although not recently.
I do think that the FB page is a great innovation, and the twitter account has been easier to make sense of recently (I used to think it was written in code). also the occasional targeted emails are great.
I'm sure a huge amount of work goes into producing the bulletin and website...
thoughts?
So many. Meeting starting here but I shall return!
I've said it before and I'll say it again; I have, in a professional capacity, used the Spokes leaflet and website as prime examples of how not to present the written word on page and screen.
It's clear that enormous effort goes into compiling both and distributing the leaflet, but short of adopting the palimpsest format they could not be any harder to read.
Neither is a good way to get sympathy for active travel.
“thoughts?”
“
I've had a few
But then again, too few to mention
I did what I had to do
And saw it through without exemption
I planned each charted course
Each careful step along the byway
And more, much more than this
I did it my way
“
“It's clear that enormous effort goes into compiling both”
Before the internet (some of you won’t remember) there was only the leaflet.
Then there was the colour leaflet.
Much continuity, too much, too small text. That’s the way it is.
I did the first Spokes web site for about 4 years, then didn’t have time to continue and a committee/interest group was formed. This was hijacked by someone who managed to turn it something that looked like a bad bulletin board and so on it drifted for a while.
I think there have been at least a couple of version since then.
In the past I spent a small amount of time trying to persuade them that links should go directly to (things like) actual documents rather than a page with a list (CEC does this too!)
As the originator of this forum which has all sorts of ‘issues’ and things that could/should be different I’ll just say - ‘it’s the content that counts’...
The thing is, amazing content that no-one reads because it's a wall of small text is not really any better than terrible content no-one reads.
Key difference re: "issues": this is a members forum for (mostly) fun; Spokes is a campaigning organization: and they do indeed do a lot, but it's frustrating to think how much more traction they might get for the same effort if some of that effort was just presented/communicated differently! (No reason not to have the detail still there for those who want it but as an opt-in section.)
Barriers to people with visual issues, dyslexia etc. too I'd say?
I'm content with the content but less than composed with regards the composition.
“Neither is a good way to get sympathy for active travel.”
I think that’s a whole other discussion.
Perhaps more about campaigning and opinion forming/changing.
Very occasionally someone comes along (nowadays usually on Twitter!) and says things like ‘Spokes is a waste of time, we need something better’.
I’m happy to defend Spokes as a body of work, as having effected change, as (usually) a positive influencer, but that’s not the same as ‘defending it right or wrong’ or ‘the status quo is just fine’.
But, imagine Edinburgh without Spokes, or the Newsletter, or the public meetings which are a ‘must attend’ for senior politicians.
PoP was a necessary new way of doing things, NOT because of any failure of Spokes or any sense of oppositionalism. The time was right, it worked. I suspect it had a beneficial effect on “Spokes” - that amorphous collection of known and lesser known people (like PoP and many other organisations and movements that try to do things with modest resources and, not, unlimited personal energies).
Walk, Cycle, Vote is another entity that has emerged with notable results.
Other groups of people form (usually for relatively short times) to ‘get things done’ - Gogar Station Road and Roseburn come to mind.
There ought to be some ‘umbrella’ for Picardy Place, is there?
In a world of large and small organisations with funding and staff - SG, Transport Scotland, CEC, Sustrans, Living Streets, Cycling Scotland etc. Spokes does not bad.
I have been critical of Spokes’ habit of making supportive comments about things that really aren’t very good - eg QBiC - but it’s a fine line between always complaining and being supportive of small improvements that may have happened in spite of corporate/political indifference/hostility.
Discuss!
“this is a members forum for (mostly) fun”
Ah, I see.
Wait. I should have said "for usefulness and interestingness" shouldn't I?
Just as proof of concept Spokes should do a leaflet in Estonian and see if anyone notices. I bet they wouldn't.
“The thing is, amazing content that no-one reads because it's a wall of small text is not really any better than terrible content no-one reads.”
That of course makes various assumptions.
It’s all a balance - and I agree, Spokes needs to think about how to change the balance.
I suspect more people read bits of a Spokes leaflet than visit its web site (but have no idea if any research has been done).
There was a time when I would read every word every three months, not sure when I last did - not just about the print size. There was a time when I read LOTS of words in multi-section Sunday newspapers.
Now it’s a bit of this and that, here and there (mostly online). If there is a new report I find the PDF and start with a wordsearch!
I have had some involvement in print publishing and a lapsed interest in typefaces, point size and justified text etc. I’ve done lots of websites, mostly using WordPress for the past few years.
But, I’m not going to pretend I have any real ideas about what Spokes’ communications strategy could/should be if it started now.
“I should have said "for usefulness and interestingness" shouldn't I?”
Personal choice.
I'm pretty sure everyone who's posted in here already knows this but if anyone else is reading, and can help fix these (or other) issues, get in touch with spokes[at]spokes.org.uk
The Spokes website is a great resource for research and has a terrific archive.
I agree that it looks awful. Even having a less off-putting front page would be a start.
However as with folk telling Spokes, why don't you do or that on other issues, we don't have the money and/or the staff.
So it really needs some volunteers who would take on the task and see it through.
it's a bit chicken and egg.
If spokes is to identify volunteers who can do some of this work, it needs to attract a different demographic. but in order to do that. it needs to change how it operates, at least a bit.
but really, there are lots of people who could design and maintain a decent, attractive website - which LINKS TO DOCUMENTS. even community councils manage to do this. what is it that spokes finds so difficult about it in terms of either volunteer or financial resources?
Is 'spokes' (whatever that means) willing to consider a newsletter redesign?
Everytime i've mentioned it, or even volunteered to contribute, it's been made pretty clear to me that it's not an option.
“
SPOKES has been around for over twenty years and this website has been up for a couple - which in web terms is quite old! We know that thousands of people log in each year and we know which pages are the most commonly looked at. But we are not sure whether people find it easy to use or useful.
We are planning a few changes and would appreciate it if you could fill in our ONLINE QUESTIONNAIRE
“
https://web.archive.org/web/20000411205202fw_/http://www.spokes.org.uk:80/index.htm
Unfortunately I have no recollection about whether anyone filled the questionaire in, and (if so) anything was done with the answers.
“
“
https://web.archive.org/web/19991113035424fw_/http://www.spokes.org.uk:80/involved.htm
Spokes has had a couple of offers of help with Comms recently but not managed to get to talk in detail. They really do need some "doers" to volunteer. Dave does the bulletin and updates the website single-handed. It has been agreed that a more user-friendly "front-end" to the website would be good so long as the archive was still accessible.
If anyone wants to meet to discuss then drop them a line spokes@spokes.org.uk
@chdot I am interested in setting up an "East End" "Umbrella".
Tram extension and Picardy to name but 2. Mentioned in a Tram post that is not getting much feedback. Anybody else interested? - can have a meetup whenever.
I might not have bandwidth to volunteer for anything else right now, but still interested in the idea...
@McD it's good to know that there is willingness to consider the website redesign if not the newsletter.
why the tremendous reluctance to link to actual docs, rather than to pages of docs?
As far as I am aware, the Spokes bulletin is unique. No other entirely voluntary organisation produces a regular paper newsletter that lands on the desks of politicians, civil servants and council staff. This gives it an impact that email and social media will never have for a small, single-issue campaign group.
Could the layout be improved? Possibly - I'm no expert on design. The fact that it exists at all is its most powerful attribute. That it also includes robust evidence not collected by anyone else (particularly financial information) means it is in a class of its own.
Hopefully this thread spurs a few people into helping DdF with what must be a mammoth ongoing task.
"The fact that it exists at all is its most powerful attribute."
That is most definitely true.
"That it also includes robust evidence not collected by anyone else (particularly financial information) means it is in a class of its own."
Indeed.
Here comes the problem/opportunity.
Précis in newsletter, detail elsewhere.
That would be good for obvious reasons and also because a lot of stuff can't keep for three months - responses to consultations, planning apps etc.
Such stuff is already put on the web site and this news is also made public via Twitter, FB and email.
So it's about various improvements rather than a whole rethink.
For a variety of reasons I couldn't volunteer to help with readability, but I would make these points;
1) White space.
2) No, really. White space.
3) Remove about 75% of the content.
4) Write as if speaking to a non-cyclist in the office.
5) Big friendly sans serif font.
The rationale behind the size of the bulletin is that it has to be small so it can be delivered in bulk by bike.
As Morningsider says it is important to have a paper copy landing on decision makers' desks rather than something deletable in the in-box.
However for the paperless and already committed something with headings, synopsis and links could be emailed.
it has to be small so it can be delivered in bulk by bike
And also so it can be attached to the frame of bikes (leafleting)
Having been a Spokes newsletter delivery person in north east Edinburgh for a number of years (until recently), I can confirm that the format is perfect for the following reasons:
- fits into a C5 envelope
- relatively light/compact to fit into panniers
- can be stashed in a pocket after dismounting if weather is wet, prior to delivery
- big piles of newsletters for delivery can be stacked in hall without blocking it
- fits in even small letterboxes (and some are very small)
Anecdata would suggest many of the folk I delivered to were either:
- older than me (though not all)
- working for an organisation
Therefore the newsletter works well for these groups of people.
I usually read it as soon as it arrives, but I'm a creature of habit. Other topical updates arrive bu e-mail or Twitter.
The web site may not be very dynamic but it does work, and holds a treasure trove of information.
Q: are there any figures / evidence-driven guestimates for how many non Spokes members who aren't local politicians read the bulletin? Genuine question: if 99% of the ones attached to bikes are put straight in the bin because it's a wall of text, is it working as it could/should?
I have once, in three years, seen someone in a café reading a Spokes bulletin; I have seen plenty in piles in café "leaflet gathering points"; but this is particularly anecdotal anecdata!
I quite enjoy the newsletter. It's like a village church newsletter, aimed at updating already-interested, well-informed parties, quite a good read. I've no opinion on spokes, but the newsletter format, if indeed intended to be aimed at campaigners and others similarly interested, gets top marks from me.
Criticism of the newsletter seems to be complaining that it's not what it doesn't try to be. It's not aimed at the general public - it's for people who are already interested in cycling advocacy. Maybe there's a niche for a different type of newsletter, aimed more at a general audience, but I have my doubts. Most of us - and especially politicians - receive a lot of newsletters from worthy causes, that are full of feel-good stories but short on detail, and we mostly skim them out of a sense of duty before binning them minutes after receiving them. Another newsletter of that type would likely suffer the same fate.
Now, the website - that's another matter. It's the public face of Spokes, and an appearance more appealing to the general public would be beneficial - as long as the sort of detailed analysis that gives Spokes advocacy its strength is still readily available in a couple of clicks.
You must log in to post.
Cycling in Edinburgh Flickr group
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin
posts