Hearsay ... the Journal of the Bar Association of Queensland
OOPS. Your Flash player is missing or outdated.Click here to update your player so you can see this content.
Issue 15: December 2006
Online Survey Results Print E-mail

online_results.jpgA total of 60 readers participated in the Online Survey that was conducted following the publication of the last Issue. In the process, Hearsay was provided with useful feedback about the format, content, frequency and ease of use of the publication. The results are summarised below:

 



Question 1: Are you a:
Barrister?
55
91.70%
Judge?
0
0.00%
Other?
4
6.70%
Magistrate?
1
1.70%
Total
60
100%

Question 2: How important to you is a publication such as Hearsay?
Extremely
12
20.00%
Very
34
56.70%
Not very
11
18.30%
Not at all
3
5.00%
Total
60
100%

online_Q2.jpg


Question 3: What do you see as Hearsay’s proper role?

As a common link between members
0
0.00
As a source of bar news
9
15.00%
As an aid to continuing professional development
8
13.30%
As a source of occasional amusement
2
3.30%
All of the above
41
68.30%
Total
60
100%

online_Q3.jpg


 Question 4: When you download Hearsay, do you:
Read the whole issue?
27
45.00%
Read only what interests you?
33
55.00%
Total
60
100%

 Question 5: After you have read Hearsay, do you save a copy of it for future reference?
Yes
24
40.00%
Sometimes
20
33.30%
No
16
26.70%
Total
60
100%

 Question 6: How often do you use the interactive features of Hearsay (e.g., web links)?
Often
14
23.30%
Sometimes
40
66.70%
Never
6
10.00%
Total
60
100%

 Question 7: Which feature area/s of Hearsay do you find to be of the most assistance to you professionally?
In Brief - current affairs
35
13.80%
Reports of events
27
10.60%
Articles - legal
47
18.50%
Articles - lifestyle
12
4.70%
Opinion pieces
24
9.40%
Case notes
42
16.50%
CPD News
30
11.80%
Ct of Appeal summary notes
30
11.80%
The Prism
7
2.80%
Total
254
100%

online_Q7.jpg


 Question 8: Which feature area/s of Hearsay do you find to be of the most enjoyable?
In Brief - current affairs
34
21.50%
Reports of events
29
18.40%
Articles - legal
16
10.10%
Articles - lifestyle
13
8.20%
Opinion pieces
22
13.90%
Case notes
12
7.60%
CPD News
8
5.10%
Ct of Appeal summary notes
11
7.00%
The Prism
13
8.20%
Total
158
100%

 Question 9: Which feature area/s of Hearsay do you always read?
In Brief - current affairs
40
15.40%
Reports of events
38
14.60%
Articles - legal
38
14.60%
Articles - lifestyle
18
6.90%
Opinion pieces
26
10.00%
Case notes
34
13.10%
CPD News
22
8.50%
Ct of Appeal summary notes
27
10.40%
The Prism
17
6.50%
Total
260
100%

 Question 10: Which feature area/s of Hearsay do you never read?
In Brief - current affairs
3
3.80%
Reports of events
9
11.50%
Articles - legal
0
0.00%
Articles - lifestyle
21
26.90%
Opinion pieces
7
9.00%
Case notes
0
0.00%
CPD News
6
7.70%
Ct of Appeal summary notes
7
9.00%
The Prism
25
32.10%
Total
78
100%

 Question 11: Which feature area/s of Hearsay would you like to find more of in each issue?
In Brief - current affairs
22
15.10%
Reports of events
15
10.30%
Articles - legal
40
27.40%
Articles - lifestyle
6
4.10%
Opinion pieces
21
14.40%
Case notes
21
14.40%
CPD News
7
4.80%
Ct of Appeal summary notes
12
8.20%
The Prism
2
1.40%
Total
146
100%

online_Q11.jpg


 Question 12: Which feature area/s of Hearsay would you like to find less of in each issue?
In Brief - current affairs
4
5.50%
Reports of events
8
11.00%
Articles - legal
1
1.40%
Articles - lifestyle
23
31.50%
Opinion pieces
4
5.50%
Case notes
1
1.40%
CPD News
6
8.20%
Ct of Appeal summary notes
9
12.30%
The Prism
17
23.30%
Total
73
100%

 Question 13: Is it easy for you to navigate through each issue?
Yes
49
81.70%
No
11
18.30%
Total
60
100%

 Question 14: Is the size of the text easy for you to read?
Yes
50
83.30%
No - could be larger
10
16.70%
No - could be smaller
0
0.00%
Total
60
100%

 Question 15: Are you satisfied with the clarity/resolution of the images?
Yes
57
95.00%
No
3
5.00%
Total
60
100%

 Question 16: Are you satisfied with how frequently each issue is released?
Yes
57
95.00%
No - should be released monthly
2
3.30%
No - should be released quarterly
1
1.70%
Total
60
100%

 Question 17: How likely is it that you would contribute an article for publication?
Very likely
6
10.00%
Maybe
33
55.00%
Unlikely
21
35.00%
Never
0
0.00%
Total
60
100%

 Question 18: Given the regular publication of Hearsay, do you see the need for a hard copy journal similar to Queensland Bar News?
Yes
19
31.70%
No
29
48.30%
Undecided
12
20.00%
Total
60
100%

 Question 19: If a hard copy journal is published in addition to Hearsay, how often should that occur?
Yes - quarterly
31
51.70%
Yes - biannually
17
28.30%
Yes - annually
12
20.00%
Total
60
100%

 Question 20: If a hard copy journal is published in addition to Hearsay, would you like to see a selection of some of the articles that appeared in Hearsay re-published in that format?
Yes
32
53.30%
No
21
35.00%
Undecided
7
11.70%
Total
60
100%

A number of readers also took the opportunity to provide some additional comments.

Most were complimentary …

“Hearsay is an excellent publication providing just the right quantity and type of information. The links are great for further reading if necessary. Thank you”

“Overall, I think Hearsay is excellent, and well balanced. Well done. “

“I was initially sceptical of Hearsay but I now look forward to receiving my copy. The format was initially unusual, but now I am used to it, I like it. There was a survey question re “what do you NEVER read” didn’t allow for a non-selection answer = there is not a piece of Hearsay that I NEVER read.”

“Excellent journal - electronic version is extremely useful.”

“I enjoy Hearsay. The distribution by e-mail is, I believe, the most efficient means of distributing such information quickly, state-wide.”

“Excellent work. I appreciate that time and effort is put into a publication such as this and express my thanks to those involved.”

“You are all doing a sensational job in putting it together, it is an excellent publication. I wish I had more time to read it. Keep up the good work!”

Some were not …

“The bar has become increasingly regulated over the past 10 years with the ridiculous introduction of compulsory CLE. Now members are having to pay for the cost of a magazine which really serves no purpose. All of the information is readily available via the internet. The photos of social functions are of interest to those who like to look at themselves. Why don’t you cut the publication and just maintain important notices to members via email. This way there may be a reduction in annual fees.”

“Bad points: It runs too slowly on even fast links (5-6 minutes to download on even the fast link I’m using now, don’t ask me about dial up). I have on a number of occasions had to cancel trying to open it and then delete it from my email because it is taking too much space. I wish you kept at least 4-6 back copies on the bar association website. [All back issues are available for downloading from www.barweb.com.au . Ed.] You need to take into account that people are accessing this from a variety of links (especially those who work in regional areas or are travelling to regional courts) and cut down the graphics content or at least have a graphics free version. There are times when I would like to download the file and read it off-line on the laptop or print it out and read it when I am travelling or sitting at the back of a courtroom, I can’t do either at the moment. I think the screens are too small, if I want to quickly scan all the articles I can’t, I have to step through each small screen at a time. In busy periods it just means that reading Hearsay is too time inefficient.” 

Others also criticised the format in which Hearsay is published and delivered …

“Whenever I try to read Hearsay, it causes much grief to my computer. It does not crash, but it is far from a seamless process. Therefore I have not read the last 5 issues. The only way I could see that changing is for Hearsay to be offered in HTML format as well as its present PDF format. Otherwise I simply won’t be able to read it. Hence the reason why I only became aware of this survey when (an) email arrived reminding people of it. In my case, not a reminder but the first notification.”

“Good points: runs on several platforms. Interesting reports on recent appeals. Generally engaging articles. Smart use of technology in terms of content (which should supplement paper journals) however use of technology with respect to form is another matter. I think you are onto a great idea that deserves nurturing and for which you deserve our great thanks, but I think the format is wrong and strangling a potentially wonderful e-journal at birth.”

“I think it should be published online rather than by having to download it in PDF and then opening the file.”

“I am a Mac user. I would prefer not to have the Adobe file open in full screen format. In addition, the “exit” button at the end of the document doesn’t work once I am in the document, and I always have to “force quit” to close the file once I have read it.”

“The advice on the link for Windows users doesn’t seem to work in my system (Outlook & XP Pro) ~ unable to save as (doesn’t even appear as text which it is possible to select (and I’ve been using computers etc since 1980) .. so I don’t think its me!”

“Very time consuming to download at times.”

On the format of the Online Survey …

“There should have been an option to click showing there were no parts of Hearsay I did not read since that is the case. The clicking of that which I did was only done because without choosing one option I was unable to complete the survey. Your results might wish to reflect that the questions could have been worded better in the survey. For example I did not want to see less of any area but here was no option.”

“You asked questions about things I never read and things I would like to see less of. I would have preferred to answer ‘none’ but that was not an option.“

“The survey required a response to each ‘dot point’, whereas, for example, there is nothing I don’t read in Hearsay, but had to select something in order to move through the survey... just passing that on as comment, in case it has some bearing on the statistics...thanks.”

So far as the current mix of content is concerned …

“I do not think any particular part should be diminished …”

 “One thing which it does not deal with and which I would like to see included in future, is reports of Bar Council meetings and Sub-Committee reports.”

“Case notes on federal jurisdiction cases would be of value.”

“I would like to see more criminal law content.”

As to the frequency of publication …

“It’s almost too frequently delivered, so no more frequently please.”

On the topic of whether a hard copy journal should be published in addition to, or in substitution for, Hearsay …

“The survey did not let me say that I do not think a hard copy should be published at all. No need for it. It is costly and produces much less than the electronic journal. I think Hearsay is a great innovation and should only be expanded.”

“I like Hearsay, but I love the Bar News in magazine format.”

“I don’t read Hearsay as much as I would like as it gets lost in all my other emails; I hope to go back to it, but often don’t. If it was a magazine, I could take it with me somewhere. I do struggle with the fact of having to read it on a screen at some point in chambers.”

Hearsay is grateful to each of the readers who took the time to participate in the Survey. All feedback will be taken into account in the planning of the publication’s future.

Martin Burns
Editor

Discuss this article on the forums. (1 posts)


| | | | | |