It's coming to something when the editorial policy of a single page on a government department's website is the subject of a parliamentary question.
Naturally, the Tories' shadow secretary of state for Work & Pensions has a particularly keen interest in new additions to the DWP site's What's New page. The top of said page says it 'lists all the latest additions to the site.'
Except that's not quite the case, as the answer to Grayling's PQ reveals: 'The Department does not include every new addition to the website as this would make the "What's new" section too long and unusable.' So it's not all the latest additions, then.
It's a perfectly good idea to apply some kind of editorial criteria to what does or doesn't get included on the list. But don't then say 'all' at the top of the page. Call it a 'highlights' list or something.
But in fact, is there an audience for a page - or more likely, a feed - of all new content? In the last few days, marketing guru Seth Godin referenced a Robert Scoble point about the pointlessness of popularity, noting: "how many" is not nearly as valuable as "who".
So sure, only a total pensions geek might be interested in knowing everything added to your site. But if you can find a way to automate it, isn't that pensions geek precisely who you should be talking to? Or indeed, concentrating on?
