Web sites of both presidential candidates fail to connect with users

The 2008 presidential election is the most Internet-reliant in history, but the Web sites of both candidates were found lacking, according to two new studies evaluating usability.

The sites of Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama failed basic navigation tests by potential voters, according to a report released last week by Forrester Research Inc., a Cambridge, Mass.-based market research company. The report's authors evaluated each Web site while trying to perform two basic tasks: donating $50 to the campaign and finding the candidate's energy policy.

Forrester used five criteria in its evaluation: clear labels and menus; legible text; easy-to-read format; priority of content on the homepage; and accessible privacy and security policies. McCain's site passed two of those benchmarks: clear and unique category names and legible text. Obama's site succeeded in one area: straightforward layout making it easy to scan content on the homepage.

Neither site gave priority to the most important information on the homepage, or posted clear privacy and security policies, Forrester concluded.

A separate, similar study released in August found that Obama's site made a stronger first impression on users than McCain's, but the Arizona senator's site was easier to navigate.

"The initial impressions of the Obama site were much stronger, it was more polished and more professional from a Web design standpoint," said Nick Gould, the report's author and the CEO of Catalyst Group, a usability and interface design firm based in New York City.

Gould said various users described McCain's site as cluttered, boxy and old-fashioned. Those respondents nevertheless judged it more presidential than Obama's. "They equated a site looking presidential or political with stodgy and old. Obama's was considered not traditionally political, more impressive, contemporary and more positive on the first impression," he said.

Catalyst asked individuals to perform seven tasks while evaluating each campaign site, including donating money, reading the candidates' biographies and finding their positions on specific policy issues. Obama's site stood out for its design and navigation, but users were confused about certain labels on the homepage, such as "Learn," which contained links to information about the Illinois senator's background and policy positions.

"We found that by and large folks found the McCain site easier to use, with better labeling and nomenclature," Gould said. While McCain's site was deemed more user-friendly, users gravitated to Obama's site because of its modern, professional look, said Gould.

"If I had to come down on one side or other, I'd say the problems on McCain's site are more severe," he said. "McCain's [site] was really disliked initially. …It's not good to have a site that works much better once you get into it, but turns them off and they leave before they get a chance to use it."

Gould said the main problem with Obama's site was the inability to easily locate information on the candidate and his positions. He said the streamlined design of the site helped direct users to a few key areas on the homepage and a specific set of activities, including two areas where the campaign has received a great deal of attention for its online success: fundraising and organization.

Both Catalyst and Forrester recommended that Obama's site make it easier to locate information about the candidate and his policies. The McCain campaign should reduce the clutter on its Web site and highlight only the most important information, both reports suggested.