Publishers are considered to be content contributors with subject matter expertise.
Publishers have the same CMS permissions as authors, plus the privileges to publish pages.
Publishers are required to promptly approve publication requests from their authors. (see Publishing content for more information on the process)
When a publishers edits content, they do not require approval. A publishers content updates go live immediately (pending the once hourly sync).
The main difference between the author role and the publisher role is the level of responsibility. As a publisher, if there is an issue with the accuracy of the content on your site, or the content does not adhere to Web Content Guidelines, the publisher is ultimately responsible.
Publishers (generally) have the final say on what content is appropriate for their site. They are also responsible for making sure their site is well maintained. A well maintained site is one delivers relevant, up to date and non-conflicting information. You should periodically (at least every six months) review all pages on your site to make sure they are up to date. This also applies to all files in the library.
Note: the WebTeam are not involved in the publishing process because:
- the WebTeam does not have the resources to publish every page, and
- the WebTeam are not the content experts, particularly for clinical or health advice.
How many publishers can a site have?
Most sites will have one publisher.
In certain situations there can be more than one publisher. Applications for multiple publishers require approval by the webmaster (on a case-by-case basis) in addition to the relevant Executive Director.
The total number of publishers for a site is strategically kept to a minimum to ensure there is robust coordination and accountability in place.
If there is more that one publisher, any publisher can approve author changes to go live.
Publishers cannot create new pages directly, but can request a new page via a streamlined process.
Publishers enforce the Web Content Guidelines
Publishers are required to enforce to the Web Content Guidelines. The Web Content Guidelines follow best-practice for writing and formatting effective web content - please ensure you are familiar with the guidelines.
Publisher approval process
As publishers have the ability to autonomously publish directly to the RCH website, they are intrinsically part of a delegation chain that flows from the CEO, to the Executive Team, and then to the publisher. As such, to become a publisher, staff will require approval from the Executive Team member responsible for their Division for each site they require publishing rights for.
The steps to become a publisher are:
- Participate the CMS training and become an author.
- Have a competent understanding of the Web Content Guidelines.
- Apply to be the publisher of a site.
- If more than 1 publisher is required, apply for multiple publishers.
- If approved, the WebTeam will grant the privileges in the CMS.
Notes: Publishing privileges for multiple site can be applied for per application.
What tasks are not available to publishers?
Publishers cannot perform the following tasks:
- Create new pages
Publishers can request a new page is added to an existing site. See Create new page.
- Upload files
If you need to add a file such as a Word document or PDF to your site, please forward your request to the WebTeam. Please take a moment to read the Using PDF Format guideline before investing time creating PDFs.
- Alter navigation
Only the WebTeam can alter the "In this section" navigation.
- Delete pages
If you need a page deleted, instruct the WebTeam and we'll look after it. We'll also do a link check in the process and archive the page to ensure that the history of the page is left in place.
Content review and escalation process of clinical or health advice
If any piece of clinical or health advice is considered to require attention due any of the following issues, then it should be brought to the attention of the sites publisher:
- out of date,
- incorrect or inaccurate,
- unnecessarily replicated, or
- contradictory to, or conflicting with, another page.
If the issue is not rectified in a timely manner, then the issue should be escalated to the appropriate Clinical Chief (see the Organisational Chart).