Municipalist had a conversation awhile ago with an operator of one of the big
social media conferences. The guy admitted his lone goal: Pump the value of the thing as high as
possible and then SELL IT.
Should that shock anybody?
Every week, another social media conference seems to pop up, from Las Vegas to New York City to several right here in Washington, D.C. A few of these are worthy. But most seem not to be. Regardless, the weariness has set in. Gwynne Kostin at GoverningPeople.com agrees
Those searching for clues about the direction of the Obama administration's policy plans on issues such as medical marijuana will not find any assistance at the blog published by the office of the official White House "drug czar."
That's because the first blog hosted by a cabinet-level agency lacks one thing as of this morning: content.
A total of three posts can be seen at Pushing Back, the blog operated by the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). And none of these are dated before January 22. While all the previous 43 categories are still listed, clicking on each takes you to ... nowhere. All posts since the blog went live in February 2005 have been removed.
Under former director John Walters, Pushing Back did just that, vigorously opposing opponents of the war on drugs, directly, including those in the media. The blog hailed what it called successes by the Bush administration such as a 25 percent reduction in use of illegal drugs since 2001 by American youth.
There are plenty of intriguing blogs on the list in all these many categories. But we wish there were two more. We find a category called "Best Political Coverage" and of course, "Best Liberal Blog" and "Best Conservative Blog." But no "Best Government Coverage." Neither politics nor ideology equals governing. They mingle. Often. But they ain't the same thing.
And of course, the one category we would like to see: "Best Blog By Anybody, Anywhere Who Has Actually Been Elected." We have hope. Just not much.
"There is no teeth to the argument that public officials can't have blogs," says Wendy Day, an elected board member for a public school district in Howell, Michigan whose blog has attracted plenty of attention from across her community and from local media.
Wendy teaches at Lansing Community College. Of her early days on the Web, she admits: "I had no idea of the power of a blog." She candidly answered our questions about various dust-ups she has encountered in what could be termed a colorful blogging career. Her blog was recently the subject of a threatening letter from the law firm of the local teachers' union. One of her posts about that is here.
By the way, this Q & A, the 34th we have published with (mostly) public sector bloggers, is the first from Michigan, where I grew up.
Why she started her blog:
I was elected to the Howell School Board in 2006 after a lot of controversy in our district. As a conservative, home school mom, I was not welcomed by the administration or the board at the time.
I started the blog to offer another way to communicate with the public about Howell Schools and about broader education issues. There was little communication between the School Board and the community; I pledged to change that. The blog quickly became a place to discuss broader issues and at it's peak had hundreds of visitors every day and posts with 600-800 comments on them. I was brand new to blogging and learned some lessons the hard way.
A new day has dawned, we are told, for the country and for both political parties. For those who vote for Republicans, as I do, the question is what is next. As the president elect has showed so vividly, and as his failed opponent demonstrated so frustratingly, the future is the Web. For better and for worse. For better: it can effectively be made use of to fight 'smears,' as well as serve as a hell of an instant monster-size event planner, provide myriad ways for people to take the reins themselves to connect to each other, and then so efficiently extract their cash. For worse: like TV it tends to glorify celebrity, and can so simply be exploited to intensify our partisanship as well as flatter our preconceptions and self regard. And as the Obama campaign showed, the Web can serve as a very effective space through which to direct packs of raging supporters to harass local news media. Wired offers a one-sided wrap-up of the Obama campaign's Internet successes here.
Republicans need to find new voices, and should consider starting with members of Congress who are effectively using social media tools and tactics. One good example is Pete Hoekstra of Michigan, whose tweets are sort of a clinic in how to work to reach out to those he and his elected colleagues are supposed to want to hear from and connect to. We discussed Hoekstra's smart Twitter use recently here.
And of course Republicans need to find a new generation, far outside the elected classes. Go online. We are here.
And it is ever important to remember that much of the mainstream media will offer bad ideas at a moment like this.
Also for Obama: What will these new coalitions and revved-up online communities do now? [See update below.] What if he does not deliver the immediate revolutionary change they seek? Prediction: A day will come in the next four years when Obama will wish he could stick in a drawer someplace this always-online coalition, then just pull it out when it is time to raise money and energize volunteers for re-election. But an electrified, now very-connected base does not work that way. You create it. Then it does what it wants. Ask my 21-month-old son.
We have been hearing all morning about how idealism is now in. But so is innovation. These are good things. Barack Obama owned both concepts in the minds of the majority of voters. And the Web out of necessity will be at the center of the universe for the new administration as well as for its opponents. We look forward to what is next.
Update: Patrick Ruffini makes this important point: "The candidates who are successful online are the ones who don't just lead campaigns or political parties -- they lead movements. When they ask people to get involved, they really mean it. Our 2012 candidate has to be comfortable with building a movement. Before a change in strategy can work, our candidates need to change. Layering a good Internet strategy on top of someone running for President of the cocktail party circuit whose campaign only cares about bundling the most big checks in Q1 or Q2 of 2011 will not work. That model died in 2008."
Update 2, Nov. 10: The Washington Post reports on Obama's post-election Web plans, referencing the same point I made above about un-ringing that bell: "But Daou noted that the initiative could have a downside. Obama faced an intense backlash when he broke from the left on the issue of immunity for telecommunications companies that took part in the warrantless wiretapping program. 'People who have helped you reach this historic goal by self-organizing can also organize in opposition to your policies,' he said."
The Miami Herald reports on on yet another controversy regarding a public figure and digital communications: "New e-mails have surfaced that appear to further implicate new Miami-Dade Schools Superintendent Alberto Carvalho in a romantic relationship with a former Miami Herald reporter -- only days before the School Board is expected to vote on Carvalho's $275,000 contract." This one has been going on for awhile, with revelations weekly. By the way, "surfaced" means "leaked."
A few months ago we referenced a long controversy involving testimony from Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick revealed to be lies after his cellphone texts came to light. Kilpatrick has since been thrown out of office and sentenced to prison. It is cases like these that make life hell for those who are otherwise law-abiding who seek to serve but find navigating the email/texting shoals a bit complicated. The point of view these public figures find themselves up against is illustrated by this commenter at the Detroit Free Press's freep.com:
The text messages cease to be private because A. The phones were OWNED by the tax-payers of Detroit and B. Certain information contained in those message led to the whistle-blower investigation and felony charges ...We are ALL entitled to see what other damaging information is contained in these files ... Perhaps they will even shed some light on a certain murder investigation ... For those that think this woman has been dragged through the mud and has suffered enough, WISE UP ... Detroiters deserve the WHOLE TRUTH!
Get that part? "We are all entitled." Read collected coverage about this sad and disgusting tale here from the good people of the Detroit Free Press. [I was but a humble contributor to this fine, award-winning daily newspaper back in the '90s.]
Here is the archived call T. Boone Pickens did with bloggers on his energy plan. He speaks convincingly about the use of his Web site in this effort. This kind of thing is just easier and easier. We are now on the hunt for examples in the public sector -- outside campaigns or Congress.
So the new organizing mantra: The reason Republicans are out-Interneted by Obama and Daily Kos, etc., is (wait for it) they are insufficiently angry. The Atlantic Monthly's Planting the Right Roots searches for the conservative Joe Trippi, considers the attraction of "geek chic" and pronounces "outrage as the logistical backbone of any political movement."
So there you have it: Parity and power online will be achieved by assembling more rage, or at least rage more efficiently packaged, mashed up, shared, and delivered to your cellphone every 90 minutes. Or something. This is what all this elegant technology is finally all about? Not to mention: This is what conservatives need to hear? That is, since learning recently that The Atlantic Monthly actually may not have their best interests at heart?
Somewhere out there, I am certain, an idealist or two is reading such demoralizing nonsense and saying to him or herself: There must be a better idea.
We actually advocated for this awhile ago. Be careful what you wish for. Then again, it appears that in the short piece posted on the new Daily Beast, Clinton may be just responding to a request for what he is reading. But he is included as part of the DB's Buzz Board, sort of a group blog of various mostly lefty pseudo-intellectuals. For William J., a perfect description.
Government needs to stop building Web sites and start focusing on simply providing its data to the private sector, reports some top academics:
Today, government bodies consider their own websites to be a higher priority than technical infrastructures that open up their data for others to use. We argue that this understanding is a mistake. It would be preferable for government to understand providing reusable data, rather than providing websites, as the core of its online publishing responsibility. Rather than struggling, as it currently does, to design sites that meet each end-user need, we argue that the executive branch should focus on creating a simple, reliable and publicly accessible infrastructure that exposes the underlying data.
Read all about it in the scintillating Yale Journal of Law and Technology.
A valuable comment at a story from U.S. News and World Report about blogging teachers:
One of the more interesting things that I've found as I've started to get involved in the world of the edublogger is that---like any media source---blogs that are written in a confrontational style on confrontational topics often draw the largest crowds of readers.
We do live in a shock-value world, after all! Ask Nancy Grace. As a teacher blogger, though, I think that kind of conversation is unproductive and irresponsible.
We bear a responsibility to model collaborative dialogue skills for our students----and by doing so, we might just be able to elevate the reputation of practitioners in our profession. I'm proudest of the thousands of digital peers that I have crossed paths with who use their blogs to ask challenging questions about teaching and learning in a responsible way because they improve education at all levels while avoiding the controversy-driven mentality of today's media outlets.
Does this make sense to anyone besides me? Am I the only one growing tired of the partisan screaming and mudslinging that has taken the place of reasoned conversation in our nation?
So Web 3.0 is here, and the platform of record is now the cellphone. And public sector examples of smart uses are accumulating. The Washington Post reports that D.C.'s transit police are considering setting up an easy way for transit riders to silently alert authorities to trouble. The trend is nationwide:
Several dozen police departments, and some school systems, have been using text-messaging to build on the success of telephone tip lines and connect to young cellphone users. In New York, residents may use their cellphones to snap photos of crimes in progress and e-mail them to police. In Chicago, the police department and several public high schools launched a program last week for students who see a gun or overhear plans for after-school fights to alert authorities by text-messaging.
Federal Computer Week empanels a forum to address a big issue: What are the risks of Web 2.0 for government? On the panel: Bev Godwin, who answered some questions from us back in December. The panel was asked to address various comments to an earlier story on government and Web 2.0 use, including:
Do not use Web 2.0 terms, such as blogs, when using these technologies because many of them have become pejorative terms in agencies, and people who are still getting used to the technologies often come with preconceived notions of what they are and what they can do. Instead, it’s better for agencies to simply consider them as tools, just as any other technology tool or utility.
Exactly. We addressed this recently here. One term we are disgusted with these days is "the blogosphere," which has little relevance to the vast majority of people inside and outside of organizations who use blogging, and who have zero interest in becoming part of some juvenile secret club that insists on using techie language, links to each other almost exclusively, and has become every bit the echo chamber that is 'mainstream media' these days.
Synopsis: We were approached recently by someone claiming to be the Wikipedia editor who made the initial anonymous charge to another blogger that the McCain campaign plagiarized material from Wikipedia for use in a speech during the initial days of Russia's invasion of Georgia. This person clearly wanted more attention, and pitched the idea of our publishing a Q & A with him on Municipalist about all of this.
We pushed this person to agree to go on the record with his real name. He declined, in cloak-and-dagger fashion, implying he was fearful for his personal safety, should his identity be revealed.
So we passed. For now.
Why this all matters: Examples out there of this type of tactic -- anonymous posts and pitches aimed at political and partisan ends, with the leaker escaping any scrutiny as to motivation -- are becoming more frequent, and they are effective.
The intensity of media inquiries hit a new level after an anonymous blogger on the liberal Web site Daily Kos last weekend charged that McCain's running mate is actually the grandmother of Trig Palin, the 4-month-old baby born with Down syndrome, and that the real mother is her daughter, 17-year-old Bristol Palin. That led to mainstream media inquiries, which prompted the McCain camp to disclose in a statement Monday that Bristol is five months pregnant and plans to have the baby and marry the teenage father. The site's founder, Markos Moulitsas, said he did not know the contributor's identity but thought that the admittedly "weird" pregnancy questions were a legitimate line of inquiry that he should not suppress.
Of course, Kos did suppress a diarist at his site blogging about the then odd lack of interest by mainstream media in John Edwards's obvious evasions and lies about his affair, before it was admitted to publically. But Kurtz's magic words: "That led to mainstream media inquiries." So: Such behavior from these various cloaked individuals, protected from any criticism, can so easily start news wildfires, as occurred with both the McCain campaign plagiarism charges and the bizarre Sarah Palin pregnancy story.
And while Kos continues to influence much of the clueless and/or partisan mainstream media [as it did in effectively delaying the Edwards story], this presidential campaign has marked the arrival of a new and perhaps larger player in such matters: Wikipedia. From inside or outside. One example: The Washington Post reports on how monitoring Wikipedia edits turned out to be a useful method of predicting John McCain's VP choice.
If individual [or group] blogs can play large roles in breaking such partisan-driven stories, what is the potential for Wikipedia, with its vast collection of impressive content and large, obsessive community? What if any of that content and/or community could be harnessed for partisan ends?
Municipalist has followed the McCain plagiarism story, and even played a very minor role in advancing it. Our personal experience with that story illustrates our case. So, moment by moment, here is our tale, in excruciating detail:
From Politico's Andrew Glass: "The next president will have the technological tools in hand to run an administration that lets citizens check on the status of tax refunds or apply for passports on individually customized government Web pages."
The reality of our current co-evolution with threatening terrorist networks is that they are using Internet technologies quicker and better than we are in many cases. At a recent speech in Arlington, VA, the current Navy CIO Robert Carey said, “The Internet is Al Qaeda’s command and control center.” Like Alice, we need to catch up in the race, just to stay even; and run twice as fast to pull ahead.
Because modern governments now think about military missions for national security in a much broader context, opportunities to use social software can best be divided into three very broad – and diverse – arenas. They are: (1) government internal information sharing, (2) creating and nurturing relationships with non-governmental entities, and (3) empowering people, particularly those in post-disaster, post-war, or impoverished situations. Understanding the pros and cons of incorporating Web 2.0 tools into each of these circumstances is the goal of a research project I have started at the National Defense University called Social Software for Security, or S3.
Fascinating reading on the possibilities from a very smart guy.
Update: And part III: Blogging by faceless government bureaucracies vs. Twittering by an "empowered" individual.
Here is one probably typical method by which local government agencies are trying to gain credibility in the social media world: by buying it.
A communications firm contracted by the city of Baltimore's transportation department is trying to buy positive coverage from small newspapers and bloggers for its initiatives. Columnist Laura Vozzella of the Baltimore Sun has the goods:
The city of Baltimore has offered free trips to Portland, Ore., Los Angeles, Phoenix and Seattle to reporters willing to write positive stories about public transit projects there.
"The city wants a total of 4 freelance journalists and/or bloggers (one person per trip) to accompany them on an expense-paid trip (air fare, hotel and meals) in exchange for positive stories in local newspapers or blogs about the transit tours before, during and after," wrote Sandra L. Harley, president of Sahara Communications, a city subcontractor.
For journalists, this is an ethics breach. So the loss of credibility here is immediate. But governmental agencies of all sizes try to influence coverage every day. With likely more than a few resorting to such old-school tactics. They do this instead of finding ways to join the discussion directly. So right away we know this communications contractor is poorly serving its client. The constituency online in support of public transportation is vast. To what extent is the Baltimore Department of Transportation making an attempt to reach it? Do it this way: Participate directly. And stop trying to co-opt it.
The story that keeps on giving: More Web-related angles to the Edwards tale continue to emerge. The latest is that blogger Robert Scoble -- one of the top thinkers, authors, and bloggers about the social media world -- has photos from the campaign near the very end of 2006 that seem to contradict the Edwards timeline.
Will campaign press advisors now either invite along fewer friendly bloggers on the campaign plane, or at least make them put away their cameras? The blogosphere: Scaring the mainstream media to death day after day.
"In the end, the much-derided MSM were superfluous, their monopoly a faded memory. People have hundreds of ways to obtain information in today's instantaneous media culture, and are capable of reaching their own conclusions about what is reliable and what is not." That's Howard Kurtz in the Washington Post.
Amongn the reasons Municipalist is interested in this story is its relevance to how those throughout the public sector -- or running campaigns for public office -- make use of the Internet to interract with the rest of us. From the self-regarding Edwards campaign videos posted on YouTube, to Elizabeth Edwards' decision to blog about this on Daily Kos, to the still-present but apparently abandoned JohnEdwards.com, to the larger point referenced by Kurtz -- that the mainstream media is but a distraction to more and more information consumers these days. (But not to all. Some friends of mine were shocked when I told them about a week ago that I was following this daily on the Internet. They knew nothing about it.)
And the questions keep coming. How do we rate Team Edwards' use of the Internet? Did they at any point during the last couple of weeks reach out to friendly blogs, Kos, etc., seeking assistance or cover? Another factor: the overlooked value of the Commentocracy. This is a rare instance in which I want to read comments, at several blogs and at a couple mainstream media sites as well, because I am learning a lot.
The fact this story did not get out in a big way until just last week has consequences that are just now being understood. And there is plenty of denial out there. Still.
Reason number 391 for those in the elected classes to establish their own blogs: Anonymous comments to a local newspaper Web site by one contributor -- who apparently used 38 aliases -- turned out not to be so anonymous after all. The newspaper, the Eagle-Tribune, outed him as a Haverhill, Mass. city council member. Why would they do that?
It seems to me that the paper has chosen to humiliate Donahue for doing something the paper itself implicitly invited him to do, and that it used information available to no one else. If the Tribune had caught Donahue doing the same thing on, say, a non-Tribune blog, that would be fine. But this comes pretty close to entrapment, does it not?
Many of Kennedy's commenters agree. Some do not. All are smart and worth reading.
There is little doubt that local pols are doing this regularly: Posing as concerned citizens, they show up at various sites to offer their opinions to bolster their images or build support for their views. But when they do so, they need to realize they have little control over their words, promises of anonymity or not.
Also: Dead-tree publications are killing their own online efforts by such moves. Sure, this paper now has a mini-scandal of its own making here, which it can sell, with plenty of drama and self-righteousness. But it is a bad deal for newspapers. It is an attack on its own online community. It is short-sighted and naive.
Alexander Solzhenitsyn died this week. His life spans the decades from the Soviet Gulags he exposed so powerfully, to the free, reasoned and enlightened age of the Internet and 24-hour TV news. Right? So, within a few days of Solzhenitsyn's death:
• Keith Olbermann proudly announces he would have banned Washington Post columnist Dana Millbank from Olbermann's MSNBC show if Millbank had not quit recently, because Millbank wrote something about Barack Olbama of which Olbermann did not approve.
• The Los Angeles Times ordered its bloggers not to cover the John Edwards scandal.
Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum, who won a Pulitzer Prize for her book Gulag: A History, describes Solzhenitsyn's contribution, in terms that today's Stalinists should heed:
In the week of his death, though, what stands out is not who Solzhenitsyn was but what he wrote. It is very easy, in a world where news is instant and photographs travel as quickly as they are taken, to forget how powerful, still, are written words. And Solzhenitsyn was, in the end, a writer: A man who gathered facts, sorted through them, tested them against his own experience, composed them into paragraphs and chapters. It was not his personality but his language that forced people to think more deeply about their values, their assumptions, their societies.
Offering countless opportunities to the civilization to 'think more deeply': Today's media Stalinists at work!
High school students who blog, who read online news sources and who chat online regularly are more likely to understand and support their First Amendment rights, according to the new book Future of the First Amendment: The Digital Media, Civic Education and Free Expression Rights in the Nation’s High Schools, based on the largest survey conducted on the subject. From the Knight Foundation:
The initial 2004 survey, the first of its kind for high school students, found that three-fourths of U.S. teens surveyed don’t know or don’t care about the First Amendment. The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech, of the press, of religion, of assembly and the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
With additional information from the 2006 survey, the authors explored the impact of digital media and recent advances in information technology on students’ appreciation of the First Amendment. Their results find a positive correlation between using online news sources and blogs and supporting the forms of free expression protected by the First Amendment.
The authors conclude that a deeper education in both civics and digital technology can help students learn to appreciate the First Amendment.
For more on such issues involving the intersection of Web 2.0 and K-12, stop by Will Richardson's Webblog-ed. This guy is the smartest voice out there on the topic.
Having interviewed public sector bloggers at many levels of government and ability, we know this: How to handle comments is often their top issue, worry, and fear. Lately, the discussion and media coverage of The Problem That Dare Not Speak Its Name is increasing.
"Behold the Commentocracy, where big ideas and rough remarks sit shoulder to shoulder, altogether transforming the nature of the Web and of journalism," exclaims this important piece in Politico.
We have written before about our ambivalence concerning blog commenting. Andrew Keen, the brilliant if sometimes over-the-top skeptic of the current Age of Web 2.0, and several others, have recently written angry but engaging books bemoaning the unstoppable river of anonymous bile drowning whole corners of the Web. We love skeptics, so we listen, we learn, and we are certainly entertained -- especially by Keen.
The Politico piece includes comments from top bloggers on how this issue is frustrating them as well, including this from Ken Layne, of Wonkette:
“Nobody would tolerate if, at the end of 'Meet the Press,' if a bunch of weirdos stormed the studio and started screaming weird racist stuff,” he says. “They’d call the police.”
Those in government who risk blogging are doubling their risk by inviting comments, unless they monitor them closely, and then soon we will have this question: If your blog is public record, isn't my comment to your blog also public record? If so, why did you not publish it? Any person or persons who spend their lives thinking such thoughts seem to also have extraordinary abilities at finding very determined lawyers, for some reason.
When we find a blog or mainstream media article that includes great reader comments, we find ourselves reading every single one. It can be enveloping. So many insights and so much thoughtful stuff. But the loony, raging, juvenile ranting out there that passes for "comments" is pervasive and a real problem. And it is a bigger problem for those in government.
One public sector blogger interviewed here a few days ago has useful thoughts on this. We will follow this because the answer is elusive.
Following up yesterday's post: Here is a list of "America's top digital county governments." We wonder though: Why is there ZERO direct reference here to Web 2.0? And when or if will that shift occur for government?
Center for Digital Government gives out plenty of awards to governments, it turns out. Here is the Washington Post on the selection of Loudoun County, Virginia as the top county in its population class.
Yesterday we were quoted in an article by Greenwire, a Washington, D.C.-based news service that covers environmental issues and policy. The headline is "Federal agencies find a voice in the blogosphere." The reporter asked me about a number of issues, including the Department of Transportation blog called The Fast Lane.
Craig Colgan, editor of "Municipalist" and an advocate of public sector blogging, envisions the possibilities for a large agency such as the Department of Transportation.
"DOT could have plenty of public blogs, each addressing an important issue or initiative, aiming to produce a continual dialogue with the public, as well as with select publics such as trade media, the issue advocacy community, etc.," he wrote in an e-mail. "Why just have one?"
Greenwire is a subscription-only site, alas. Municipalist addressed The Fast Lane here.
Politico blogger Ben Smith notes that Peter Daou, Hillary Clinton's Web guru, will apparently continue to stick around "Hillaryland." Daou's job, among other things, will be "keeping a handle on" the vast email database the Clinton campaign assembled.
His new role reflects a striking feature of contemporary politics, in which online organizing allows defeated candidates — notably Howard Dean, though Wes Clark was also among the first — to keep their supporters and some of their power in the form of their e-mail lists.
No word as to what "keeping a handle on" actually entails. But apparently, not a blog. So here is what we would like to see: The Hillary Clinton blog. This is a great time for it. Everybody tells defeated candidates from both parties to sit down and shut up after the primaries. Instead, we say: Blog. And we have a name: The Clintonian Post.
Here is a plan to get government comfortable with Web 2.0: Deploy these applications in-house, get comfortable with them, use them to build collaboration between employees, then deploy them publically. That is one lesson from the apparent success of the Intellipedia project, which is that government agencies -- uncertain about Web 2.0 -- would have a great chance to look before it leaps.
There has been a lot of talk lately about Intellipedia, including quite a bit of that talk by its founders themselves. Which seems odd since Intellipedia's home is in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. That agency apparently enjoys sending spokespeople to tech conferences and yacking about it's Wikipedia-like internal collaboration space, which seems to be a hit.
Intellipedia and other “web 2.0” tools available to the Intelligence Community are making individuals more productive and efficient. Intellipedia’s vibrant environment has played an important role in improving morale, unleashing creativity, and helping officers across the world feel more connected with their colleagues.
Federal Computer Week's Ben Bain reports: In addition to its best-known Intellipedia application, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence offers five user-generated Web 2.0 tools that analysts use for collaboration, including:
A YouTube-like video-sharing application.
A photo-sharing application similar to Flickr.
A tool for bookmarking Web pages that is similar to del.icio.us.
“The real power comes from integration of all of these tools,” Robert Waller, chief of the customer team for ODNI’s Intelligence Community Enterprise Solutions, told Bain.
These tools were built to be used by the intelligence community alone, in a secure space. Deploying any Web 2.0 applications out there into the public space is admittedly a different challenge to achieve different goals. But the plan of internal first, then external, would seem to hold loads of potential.
More than 40 percent of corporate IT decision makers in government and corporate sectors have rolled out Web 2.0 tools in their organizations, but more than half of them may be hesitant to adopt such applications because of concerns about proper usage and security, according to a just-released survey of business and government organizations by CDW Corporation. Also: 31 percent worry that Web 2.0 will be used for personal use instead of work, 28 percent are concerned about information security, and 27 percent worry about employees wasting time. And, a finding that is coming up more and more: 68 percent and 61 percent of corporate and government IT decision makers, respectively, feel that Web 2.0 will be important in attracting and retaining the next generation of workers.
Federal Computer Week "The blog is an expansive collection of posts about government’s use of Web 2.0 at the federal, state and local levels, and it is worth a look for the contacts and projects lists alone."
Personal Democracy Forum "If you haven't yet, check out Craig Colgan's Municipalist blog which claims it is 'Fearlessly investigating the dark and mysterious world of public sector blogging.' And indeed it is, with over two-dozen profiles of public sector bloggers. I didn't even know there were that many!"
Slate "Municipalist, a blogger who blogs about, um, blogging, ..."