How can we improve the new FCC.gov?

Site needs 2 front ends.. one for consumers and others for regular users/professionals

Those of us who live at this site prefer the old way with everything right there. This new site is too "consumerish" and is great for Mabel Brown from Squattingpigeon, MO who is visiting the website to complain about getting calls at 2 in the morning despite her insistence that she's on the "do not call" list.. This new site (IMHO) disenfranchises the professional user. Also, with budget cuts and a possible government shutdown, I would not exactly put candy coating the website at the top of the list. Perhaps staffing up the Audio Bureau would be more prudent.

216 votes
Vote
Sign in
Check!
(thinking…)
Reset
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    I agree to the terms of service
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Michiko Ota EyreMichiko Ota Eyre shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    AnonymousAnonymous shared a merged idea: Separate consumers and business  ·   · 

    We are looking into ways to provide a tailored experience for frequent users of FCC.gov based on feedback we have heard from users.

    Would love to hear suggestions on features you would be most interested in adding to a “professional user” interface as we begin to develop this.

    Daily Digest? Improved EDOCs search? Easy access to ECFS?

    Send us your ideas.

    -FCC New Media

    20 comments

    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      Submitting...
      • BarbieBarbie commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I agree with J. Eisenach that the new site cannot be fixed and that the best solution is to return to former fcc.gov as the front end and then set to work improving it to facilitate the research needs of the professional user.

      • Glenn CummingsGlenn Cummings commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        My main complaints could easily be addressed with this method. I have a few licenses that need to be maintained, and this is it for me. I really don't want to see how much money the FCC is wasting and how it hypes it's service when it is a government monopoly.

        Don't tell me what you are doing for me. DO IT ! I want my experience to be fast, easy, and inexpensive.

      • David PooleDavid Poole commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I agree with "two front ends." Since a user probably doesn't switch audiences, I suggest either offering a cookie allowing a user to automatically return to the consumer or professional site or links to separately bookmark one of the other.

      • JohnJohn commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        On the old site it was not eay to find relevent information, the new site is much worse! Examples -
        I want to access spectrum regulations IE parts 15 and 101
        I want to access current topics of interst to spectrum allocation and product licensing IE draft proposals for new rule making and comments on these

      • BillBill commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I don't want a "tailored experience" I want easy access to licensee databases, enforcement actions, ULS, ASR and OET information, just like the original website. Do not take down the transition website, it provides the only access to this information.

      • Benjamin BrinitzerBenjamin Brinitzer commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I completely agree with this. The professional / technical data is too difficult to find with the new interface. The different divisions should be readily accessible. There is a very quick fix for this. Put a front end that asks whether you want consumer or profession/technical access. Build the consumer access first and point the technical access to the old site. Then use the old site as an outline for the professional technical access once built. Instead of listing the features in the new site make the links active!! (Radio tools is an example of how NOT to do it in the new site)
        Remeber that Broadcast (media ) is still a huge part of the FCC. put a direct link to each divion (broadband, media, engineering, Ect.) on the front page of the professional/technical.

        The new site in it's current form does not serve the public interest and is too difficult to use.

      • AnonymousAnonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I totally agree with this comment. I can't find anything that I normally use. I'm on the site multiple times a day and it is very difficult to navigate now. Easy access to CDBS, CORES, EDOCS and the rules would be at the top of my list.

      • bluesingincatbluesingincat commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        My idea is that you really don't care what "frequent users" of this site think, but maybe you could add your mission statement? You know, let people in on what your vision for communication in America is, and how you'll institute regulation to silence certain groups, say, like talk radio for example. There's a good one. We could all vote on it. What'd you think about that?

      • MJMarcusMJMarcus commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I think both pros and general users want to be able to find docket files when they don't know the docket number - presently rather difficult. Important since docket number is key to finding documents on both EDOCS and ECFS.

        Also finding when comments are actually due is difficult in most cases.

      • AnonymousAnonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I agree. I work within the agency and I am having trouble finding things. I can't locate the headlines very easily, if I even find them.

      • Telecom AttorneyTelecom Attorney commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        We need easier access to applications, licenses, ECFS, FCC documents, and other research materials. It's obvious that the new site was designed simply to promote the FCC from a PR standpoint and without regard to whether the site will be useful for people who have to access this site every day, multiple times a day. What was wrong with the old site?

      • FCC EmployeeFCC Employee commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        EDOCS, ECFS, ULS, Forms, Recent Orders, PN's, NPRMs, FNPRMs, etc. organized at least by Bureau (by Docket might also be helpful), Court Opinions, Chairman and Cmsr Stmts

      • marylagomarylago commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Good idea; I was just thinking about something similar after visiting another site that offered it.

      • Function Over FormFunction Over Form commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I think this is a worthwhile consideration. Definitely old links should not be broken, as fgoodwin recommends. Also, maintaining the ability to reach the legacy frontpage would satisfy industry users while letting the FCC pursue its outreach efforts.

        If you support this proposal, you might also agree with these other postings
        Site prioritizes style over substance: http://fccdotgov.uservoice.com/forums/105541-a-new-fcc-gov-feedback/suggestions/1678675-new-site-emphasizes-style-over-substance
        Make bureaus more easily accessible: http://fccdotgov.uservoice.com/forums/105541-a-new-fcc-gov-feedback/suggestions/1678107-put-the-bureaus-and-offices-closer-to-the-top-of-t
        "Offical Documents" suggestions: http://fccdotgov.uservoice.com/forums/105541-a-new-fcc-gov-feedback/suggestions/1679543-official-documents-suggestions

      • fgoodwindwinfgoodwindwin commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Agreed -- I have many bookmarks to things like the ECFS search page, Daily Digest, etc.

        Will those links "break" when the redesign goes "live"? I hope not.

      • G HarrisonG Harrison commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Ditto.........two front ends. Beta site gets you nowhere fast if you're a regular industry user.

      Feedback and Knowledge Base