> and have seen how they gain traffic to that site. And how has that been? > but I'm genuinely curious how this would be an improvement over the current situ

> and have seen how they gain traffic to that site. And how has that been? > but I'm genuinely curious how this would be an improvement over the current situation where SSA publishes to their various web sites. I didn't claim it would be an improvement. I claimed that it wouldn't actually make much difference. In particular invoking the "age" of the audience and imputing an inability to read anything other than these blogs is a red herring. > Perhaps you can explain why they should post stuff to X instead of either the CMS tied to the www site or the blog? So that they can downsize the communication staff from 700 people down to 50. > After all "Literally anyone can copy that to whatever platform they want" so putting pushing things like that to various social media platforms has already been going on for a while. Precisely. So why is defending the previous mechanism so important? Is the goal to inform the public or to have a nice CMS with tons of blogs in it? It's a nice feather in your cap but as a tax payer you can understand questioning it's ultimate value, can you not? > What advantage are you seeing to have them switch from their current CMSs to x? Less staff. It's hard for me to understand why 700 people were needed to maintain a blog that gets updated once a week. If you want to be concerned with something you should have really paid more attention to how they're changing phone support and engaging in "anti-fraud" there. I think the lede has been intentionally buried with this outrage bait. These are _press releases_. It's the smallest part of the change and one that's likely to have minimal impact to outcomes.