Skip navigation

4. Respected Platform for discussion and debate


4.1 "Seamless integration with all partner engagement sites"

Not met



Links to partner engagement sites from the London Summit site were not conspicuously clear. Additionally, partner engagement sites did not conspicuously link back to the London Summit site, and did not link to each other at all.

This is evidenced by the lack of any significant referral traffic to the London Summit site from any of the partner sites, and the lack of awareness of partner sites amongst subscribers to the London Summit site: When asked in a survey about awareness of, and interaction with specific partner sites, an average of 65% of survey respondents stated that they had either not heard of the partner site, or that they were not aware that the FCO had partnered with the organisation for the London Summit.

Details

Referrals from partner sites did not figure at all in the top 500 referrers to the London Summit site. The 500th referrer in the report had referred 160 visitors to the site, and therefore no partner site could have referred more than this number.

To assess awareness of, and interaction with partner sites, survey respondents were asked to identify which statement applied to them from a series: (example: Flickr)

  • I don't know what Flickr is
  • I wasn't aware that the FCO posted London Summit photos on Flickr
  • I was aware, but didn't visit the London Summit photos on Flickr
  • I visited the Flickr photos but they were not interesting
  • I visited the Flickr photos and they were interesting

Results (see fig. 4 below) show that for each partner other than YouTube a significant majority of visitors were either completely ignorant of the partner (red) or were unaware of the FCO’s partnership with the site (orange). YouTube does not prove to be a robust exception as a far higher proportion of respondents stated that they were aware, but did not visit the site.

Figure 4: For these partner sites, which applies to you?


Table 3: Visitors’ awareness of and interaction with partner sites

 

Flickr

YouTube

Twitter

Yoosk

Vox EU

I don't know what [partner site] is

37.5%

3.3%

20.2%

77.6%

64.6%

I wasn't aware the London Summit [had a content partnership with…]

26.5%

35.7%

35.7%

7.0%

17.0%

I was aware, but didn't [visit the partner site content]

27.2%

45.6%

38.2%

11.0%

12.9%

I visited the [partner content] but didn't find it interesting

0.7%

2.6%

1.5%

0.4%

0.0%

I visited the [partner content] and found it interesting

8.1%

12.9%

4.4%

n/a

n/a

I visited [Yoosk or Vox EU] but did not participate in debate

n/a

n/a

n/a

3.3%

4.8%

I visited [Yoosk or Vox EU] but and participated in debate

n/a

n/a

n/a

0.7%

0.7%

 


4.2 "Clear evidence of link between pre-summit web debate and post-summit outcomes"

Insuffcient data



A total of 4 survey respondents participated in debate on either Yoosk or VOX EU. Of these, only 1 stated that he or she could see a connection between their debate and the outcomes of the summit.
This is insufficient data for us to evaluate this KPI with any confidence, although the suggestion of a link between debate and outcomes is encouraging.

This participant gave the following information when asked to give details:

"There were many aspects that were shared as agreed ideas and agreed ways forward in terms of shaping policies and in terms of policy analysis."


4.3 "Visitors return to the site, go to other areas of our London Summit web presence or subscribe to feeds/emails"




More than 95% of survey respondents visited the site more than once. All partner sites had visitors (see fig. 4 and table 3 above). Nearly 2300 people subscribed to the site’s alerts by email and although no stats were collected on the site’s news RSS subscription, there were low numbers of subscribers to the site’s other RSS feeds.

Details

Only 6% of survey respondents stated that they had visited the site once only. The largest proportion, 42%, visited between 2 and 5 times; and over 25% visited more than 10 times. Large numbers of visitors clearly visited and returned to the site.

Visitors to the wider London Summit web presence are as follows:

  • Flickr: The London Summit’s photos were viewed over 1m times
  • Youtube: The 242 videos posted to the London Summit YouTube channel were viewed a total of 177,906 times (to May 1 2009). The London Summit YouTube channel had a total of 12,652 views and 157 subscribers
  • Twitter: whilst we are unable to measure readership of Tweets directly, the London Summit Twitter channel had 363 ‘followers’, which can be considered subscribers to the channel
  • Yoosk: 491 questions were asked on the London Summit’s public debate pages of which 53 were answered. The pages were visited a total of 7668 times
  • Vox EU: 215 commentaries (opinion articles by the site’s invited audience of economics academics and professionals) were made across Vox EU’s 6 debate forums. These commentaries were visited over 550k times.
  • RSS: Due to a technical oversight statistics for the site’s main news RSS feed were not tracked. Subscribers to the site’s subsidiary RSS feeds, likely to be significantly lower than the main feed, are detailed below:
             - London Summit editor's blog: 16
             - London Summit Flickr channel: 2
             - London Summit Delicious bookmarking: 0

4.4 "The site (and related wider web-presence) becomes a best-in-class example of digital engagement"

Insuffcient data




At this point it is not possible to assess definitively how the site will come to be regarded over time. In future, as evidence such as articles, invitations to speak about the project, and guidelines based on the site appear, we will be able to assess this indicator with more confidence.
Until that time, we can use participants’ answers to questions relating to the quality and usefulness of the site as a predictor for this KPI. These answers show that the site was thought of as informative, balanced, and trustworthy.

Details

As with KPI 2.2 we can assess this indicator with participants’ answers to questions on how informative, balanced, and trustworthy they thought the site to be, together with how useful they found it.

  • 92% agreed or strongly agreed that the information on the site was informative
  • 69% agreed or strongly agreed that the information on the site was balanced
  • 85% agreed or strongly agreed that the summit site was a trusted source of information
  • 95% of participants found the site to be fairly or very useful

Overall it is clear that the site was highly regarded by its visitors during the London Summit.


Back to KPI Index