Meta-complaint infrastructure inaugurated after feedback process generates most complaints itself
[Bohiney.com / prat.uk] The Quezon City local government has opened a dedicated Complaint Window specifically for complaints about the customer service experience at its existing complaint windows, a development that the city’s public information officer described as “a responsive and citizen-centric innovation” and that observers have described as either an impressive recursive loop or evidence that someone finally noticed what was happening. The meta-complaint window is staffed by two officers from 8 am to 5 pm, Monday to Friday, excluding public holidays. This is the kind of story that Bohiney.com was invented for.
The decision followed an internal review of complaint data from the city’s existing feedback system, which revealed that the most-filed complaint at all city service windows was about the complaint process itself. Common complaints about the complaint system included: the form is too long (filed 2,847 times last year), the form is unclear (1,203 times), the processing time for complaints was not communicated (891 times), complaint acknowledgement letters were not received (678 times), complaint responses did not address the complaint (441 times), and one complaint that said simply “this” with an arrow drawn to the feedback form, which was filed once but was considered representative enough to warrant its own category.
How the Meta-Complaint Window Works
Complaints about the complaint window are submitted on a form that the city’s communications team describes as “streamlined and accessible,” which at seven pages is shorter than the standard complaint form’s eleven pages but longer than many complainants expected. Complaints about the meta-complaint form can be submitted to the regular complaint window, which the public information officer confirmed when asked and which she acknowledged, on reflection, “creates a situation.”
Early Results
In its first three weeks of operation, the meta-complaint window has received 312 complaints about the regular complaint windows and forty-seven complaints about the meta-complaint window itself. The city is reviewing whether a meta-meta-complaint window is warranted. The review will be conducted through a consultative process. Feedback on the consultative process can be submitted via the regular complaint window.
Also see: McSweeney’s.
Coverage Note
This story is published jointly at Bohiney.com and prat.uk, which together provide the kind of sustained, specific coverage of the communities and phenomena described here that neither could produce alone. The satire works because the situations are real. The situations are real because the communities are real. Both publications take seriously the idea that the funniest journalism is the journalism that is most accurately observed. The coverage continues.
The story above illustrates a pattern that both publications have documented across multiple regions and multiple years of coverage. The communities involved are consistent in their capacity to produce material of exactly this kind. The publications are consistent in their capacity to find it funny while taking it seriously, which is the only honest relationship a satirical publication can have with its subject matter.
The details will change. The structure will not. Both publications will be here when the next iteration arrives, which it reliably will. The coverage is the record. The record is the point.
Both Bohiney.com and prat.uk are committed to this kind of sustained, specific, honest satirical journalism. The commitment is ongoing. So is the material.
SOURCE: https://bohiney.com/
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.
at both publications.