Are the websites done with your money done right?
Wherever you live, even if you don't own a personal computer, a part of your taxes is surely spent on building and maintaining the websites of your State or local Public Administration.
Are these websites made at the lowest possible cost? Are they fully usable by all citizens, including those with disabilities or those who cannot afford expensive software or new, powerful computers? In one word, are they done right? If not, why?
The black list of bad public websites
What is it?
Public websites which are not done right are a waste of taxpayers money and time, and also a useless barrier to the exercise of their civil rights.
Don't tolerate them! If you find a website which is not done right, contact us to add it to the Digifreedom black list of bad public websites! Stay tuned, or subscribe to our Rss feeds to know when this database is updated.
The List!
- 2006, December: The tourist portal Italia.it was started in 2004. In December 2006 the website cost had already reached several millions Euro (45 according to some sources) but it still contained nothing more than a "coming soon" page, prompting requests for official investigations. When it finally opened, in February 2007, there still were enough doubts on how the portal is managed and its lack of accessibility to prompt the creation of a website fully devoted to investigate and reports on the matter.
- 2006-10-10: The Borough of Princeton Official Website because " It uses frames, and the side menu is broken (except maybe in IE), and the calender is hosted on a slow or broken external site.
- 2006, May: revamping the website of the British Department of Trade and Industry(DTI) cost at least 175,000 Pounds! Beside the price, the result was so bad from the accessibility point of view to raise very loud complaints from professional web designers, even after an official explanation from DTI on how the website had been commissioned.