As part of a task I am currently involved with, I spent a little time today trawling around church websites. I was left hoping that people don't judge God or Jesus by what they find, because if I was looking, I'd give up on most pretty quickly.
In principle, I think that church websites are a good idea - they are an excellent way of making available exactly the type of information people might want to know - where you are, what you do, when you do it. Sadly, too many try to be too clever and, frankly, fail miserably - sometimes on a page last updated three years ago it says 'coming soon' - in eschatological terms maybe, but not much use here and now... Others are careless and post information that is confidential or sensitive - pastoral news or prayer requests really ought not to be published or, if it is, should be confined to a password protected area. A few are even quite scary - one sent me to a "fun" 'how good are you' quiz which basically told me I deserved eternal punishment because I wasn't good enough: well intentioned, I'm sure, but not exactly encouraging people to consider a relationship with God through Jesus.
Periodically I have wondered about setting up a website for our church, but always conclude against. The truth is there is no one else who would (or probably, could) take this on - if the church cannot suggest or fulfil this then it is better not to start it. More pertinently, I wonder how carefully churches think about the purpose of their websites - who is it for? what is it trying to achieve? how easy is it to use? how much work is needed to keep it up to date? In my view, a single page with location (and maybe a link to a map site), service times, main midweek activities and contact details is what people want to find. Photos are nice - the outside of where you meet can be helpful if someone is looking for it, the face of the contact person is a bonus. A little bit of extra information can be helpful - so long as it is honest. What is not good is to read about the upcoming exciting mission event that happened last autumn, the sermon series from January or the letter from the minister who retired six months back. And just occasionally the lack of proof reading is so evident that it makes my, usually unchecked, blog entries look good.
Blogs that never get updated but are left to clutter cyberspace are a nusiance; dare I suggest that bad church websites are an insult.