Municipalist

Non-profits and social media: Learning the basics

Very smart tutorials on social media use by non-profits, produced by the Case Foundation.

Why NASA Tweets

The most-viewed channel on YouTube this week is NASA Television, as a shuttle launch together with events marking the 40th anniversary of the first moon landing turn out to be very good for business. For NASA, though, the Internet has been both a blessing and a pain. Online critics are ever-present. But NASA's work lately to move out among the tweeting and blogging masses has certainly found success. Among its recent online ventures: remodeling its Web site, tweeting from space, and even hosting a tweetup last night here in Washington with shuttle astronauts.

We sought to learn more about all this, and tracked down Bob Jacobs, who has worked for NASA for a little more than nine years. He began his career as news chief and is now deputy assistant administrator for Public Affairs. "It's about closing the distance between you and your audience and getting direct feedback about your organization's work," Jacobs told Municipalist. Follow him on Twitter: @bnjacobs.

How long have you been on Twitter, and is that an official part of your job? If so, how so? What has your experience been with Twitter? NASA's involvement with Twitter really began in mid 2008 with the Mars Phoenix mission and @MarsPhoenix, which attracted much more attention than many of us who had been working to with social media expected. NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory took a somewhat unique approach by having the lander tweet in the first person. JPL's Veronica McGregor, who developed this approach, deserves a lot of the credit for demonstrating that Twitter could be a powerful communications tool. Today, NASA has one of the largest and most effective use of Twitter in the federal government, with nearly 50 different Twitter sites sharing a variety of information, including @NASA and the agency's first astronaut to send tweets from space, astronaut Mike Massimino, @Astro_Mike.

Can you briefly describe NASA's use of Twitter, what got NASA started, etc.? And what has been NASA's experience with Twitter, positive and negative? I can't speak on behalf of every NASA Twitter user but we use @NASA as a way to share agency news and information in ways that extend beyond traditional approaches, such as news releases. We use a dual approach to the service. First, it gives us an opportunity to point interested people to images, video, and additional information about different topics. Second, it helps us create a conversation by answering questions and engaging in a dialogue with people who are interested in what we do -- and that interest is considerable.

What are NASA's plans going forward for Twitter, Facebook, blogging, etc.? The answer is really buried in the premise of your question. I don't focus on any specific service. Social sites come and go. The real value in YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and other social sites is that they force us to think about doing our jobs differently. The old communications model of simply issuing news releases and holding news conferences is dying.

With the initial iteration of the Web, organizations learned that a traditional media filter was no longer required. We could speak directly to our stakeholders. But the technology was "transmit only." With the evolution and implementation of Web 2.0, we had the opportunity to engage in two-way communication. However, we also learned that there was a significant audience that didn't want to come to us -- they expected us to come to them, and that's the real value of these sites. We want to be where they want us to be, and we want to be able to engage them in a conversation that allows us to listen and learn as well as educate and inform.

What has NASA learned by venturing into the social media space? By seeing the power of viral networking and communications. Sharing an interesting story and a link to additional information can spread very quickly. I spend a lot of time watching what happens to our information and I am constantly amazed at the speed with which news spreads.

Also, we can get a story out faster using sites like Twitter. Having only 140 characters forces you to be both creative and direct. If you want the information to resonate you have to think about what you write. Agencies who simply "feed" their news releases into these sites miss the value of being in the social universe. It's about closing the distance between you and your audience and getting direct feedback about your organization's work. I've never felt it was my job to "sell" anything. I believe my job is to "clean off the windows" and give people a better view of their space program. Social media can be a valuable tool in achieving that goal.

[Report from NASA Tweetup is from Frank Gruber. Live stream of that event is here.]

[Off topic, but interesting anyway: Good piece here on how a mission to Mars would actually work.]

GovLoop rocks on

GovLoop, the Steve Ressler-created "Facebook for feds" now has 10,000 users, in just one year. "The premier social network for government employees" has attracted plenty of media attention and taken off like a rocket.

Details here.

Here is our Q & A with Ressler from August 2008.

State-run 529 college investment plans: Your Web sites make zero effort to engage your customers

As what's left of the American mainstream media looks out over the country's shattered financial landscape, among the big questions for plenty of families: How to pay for college during these Crisis Years? Many, including yours truly, have invested in 529 plans, run by states. We are promised responsible allocations, sensible fees, the money grows tax free, no federal taxes are due when withdrawing the money if using it to pay for college, and some states often a deduction along the way on state tax returns.

529's have taken huge hits in recent months, not surprisingly, along with every other type of investment that has stock market exposure. One big problem: operators of these plans don't understand accountability.

The Wall Street Journal points to several ugly examples of plans in some states that are way too aggressive. One expert quoted in the piece nails the problem: " ... the asset allocation for the 16- to 18-year-olds looks as if it was designed by the 5-year-olds." Meaning too often way, way too much in stocks, so close to the time-certain when families will need to withdraw the money to pay for college. And not only do these states ignore any Web-based engagement with users, they blow off the Wall Street Journal when it hunts for a basic explanation:

Assets in 529s, which peaked at $112 billion at year-end 2007, totaled $88.5 billion as of this December. Sadly, the public's faith in 529s appears to be based partly on a false premise: that state bureaucrats are good at managing other people's money.

Officials in several states, including Maine, New Mexico and North Carolina, declined or didn't respond to requests for comment; nor did J.&W. Seligman & Co., which ran the riskiest portion of the North Carolina plan.

Talk about low-hanging fruit: Here is a corner of government that could very quickly benefit in big ways from engaging customers and potential customers by turning their Web presences into discussion and listening channels. That's not just because of the demand for more information on the type of content they deal with, meaning ways to save and pay for college over time. But also obviously because of the the type of highly-engaged, hyper-aware consumer who would be very willing to participate and share and activate around an energized effort here: parents.

To say nothing of course of such obviously horrendous media relations. A field in which it seems to me would offer this bit of basic tactical advice on day one: Call back the reporter from the Wall Street Journal, so you don't end up looking like a crook to the world.

Then learn about turning your staid, dull Web sites into something alive and active and interactive. Your customers and potential customers are getting wise.

Q & A: The story behind the first Twitter 'citizen's press conference'

The Consulate General of Israel in New York City took a big step forward into the social media universe on Dec. 30,  2008, the day it hosted a 'citizen's press conference' on Twitter. War in Gaza was of course the topic at hand. [See our post on that day for more details and examples of some tweeted questions and answers.] The live event attracted attention from around the world, creating quite a buzz across the Internet as well as throughout mainstream press.

David Saranga, Consul for Media and Public Affairs, and his team answered our questions. Text in brackets are my adds:

What actually inspired the idea for your Citizen's Press Conference on Twitter? When we logged on to Twitter at the start of the recent operation, we found a spirited debate, often, but not always, on the issues. Some of these conversations were promoting anonymous and distorting information. We decided the best thing we could do as part of the government of Israel would be to join the discussion and provide an official, credible and informed voice.

We have been working for some time with the new media, through outlets such as our blogs, IsRealli (the first governmental blog) and IsraelPolitik [ " ... as a platform for the Consulate General of Israel in New York to directly address audiences throughout the world and to serve as a vehicle to better communicate the State of Israel’s message of hope and peace"], Facebook, and MYSpace. We have noticed the growing popularity of Twitter, especially during the recent American Presidential campaign, and, since we already had similar platforms, began thinking of ways in which communicating via Twitter could help us in our work.

NASA supporters: Will showing up at Change.gov help your cause?

NASA Watch says so. We wonder just how all the thousands of questions and "votes" there about whatever will be turned into plans or policy. To find more NASA-based questions at the Obama transition site, a NASA Watch commenter suggests searching for "Constellation," NASA's program to get back to the moon and beyond.

Also recently tweeted from @NASA: The Mars Rovers continue to rock and roll across the red planet, five years later.

What Obama can learn from a tweeting Shaquille O'Neal

So the Obama transition team is gaining plenty of praise for putting out a video of ... itself. As one obviously brilliant thinker put it in a comment following a post about this by Politico's Ben Smith: "What makes this transparent? This is a one-way bit of propaganda. It is self-aggrandizing. It is self-conscious. Those Clintons: They are leaving their mark already!"

I have it on good authority that NBA star Shaquille O'Neill's Twitter identity is @THE_REAL_SHAQ. The guy is hilarious. I have watched this guy for almost 20 years, and have always viewed him as smart and authentic and real. [And caring. Read this.] Reading the guy's tweets confirms for me much of this perspective, as his voice is clear and believable.

Note this one from tonight: "Theres a tear in my eye rt now, thinking about the great pete newell. What a tremendous person." Newell was a great college coach who worked with O'Neal at Newell's famous camp. O'Neal also notes that he and his wife recently started a Web site for parents to upload videos of their children's performances to share with family, called Mykidzastar.com; his diet commitment gets a challenge every time he drives by a McDonald's; that he was on Oprah this week; his thoughts about a favorite reporter; and: "At the barber shop, gotta b sexy for the game tomorro. Us supermodels always have to stay fine, lol" 

Ya' gotta love that guy! 

Could Obama do this? Is it even possible? Certainly it is. We have to make it possible. What kind of democracy is this if the president is literally afraid to ... tweet?

The world could listen in. On history. Tell me a better way to build what I say would be an enormous, deep connection with your country and the world. All those Clintonistas the guy is hiring now I am sure are likely steering him away from such ideas. They are perpetuators of the old politics and they are not good for you, Sir. Those who elected you -- and even those who didn't -- want to stay in touch. Listen to us. At your inauguration, hold up that Blackberry, tell the world that email is dead, that you will be tweeting your life for the next four years, and no political opponent needs to spend a dime to sue for your emails, because you won't be sending out any. You will be tweeting, and your tweets are immediately public and accessible and let the world and your opponents and the media and the lawyers make of all that whatever they wish.

The crowd would erupt. The noise would be deafening. The smiles on the faces of your team will be bright. The confusion on the faces of the Clintons and McCains will be entertaining to watch. The world would be stunned.

Shaq the world!

[Thanks for the Shaq tweet @paullyoung.]

Welcome to Politics 3.0

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.

So good luck with that. [And it has begun already: Here is video of Ralph Nader on election night doing just that.]

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: Here is McClatchy Newspapers on "How Obama will deploy his Internet army". And here is the New York Times on "Campaigns in a Web 2.0 World."

[By the way, here is our favorite Municipalist post from the presidential campaign. Nutty, too long, but somehow great fun to read, though with a premise that is likely implausible. Exactly our kind of post!]

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."

Twitter reveals an honest Congressman

Michigan Republican Congressman Pete Hoekstra just a few minutes ago from Twitter:

petehoekstra Deciding what to do on bailout bill.What a disappointment that Ds put junk into the bill and that Rs leadership supported it.Pathetic.

First, the guy is NOT tweeting to show the world what a smart guy he is. Instead, he is actually admitting that, you know what, I don't know what direction I am going to go here. Then, he rips both parties.

The value to Hoekstra by tweeting his frustrations instead of just to advocate his views? Plenty. This humanizes him, and brings him down with the rest of us, frustrated, angry, worried, tired of partisanship for its own sake. A terrific example of how elected officials should use social media to join the debate, to listen, to be honest.

Update: Later in the day, this tweet from Hoekstra speaks for itself:

petehoekstra Troubling intell info.Classified.Nothing dangerous just a disappointing insight into intell community.Stay tuned!

Yeah. We will.

[ TechPresident links.]
 

House members stay busy on Twitter and YouTube during bailout vote

Scanning Tweets by House members during the vote on the bailout, which went down minutes ago by a vote of 228 to 205, we came across this from Michigan Congressman Pete Hoekstra:

They didn't have votes when they started. What poor leadership.They need to announce we're back here Wednesday to continue working.

Lots of info in those 140 characters, eh?

Also tweeting is Arizona Congressman Jeff Flake, who noted during the floor debate that he was just moments away from speaking. Immediately after the vote, his staff tweeted that they had Flake's floor speech already up on YouTube.

Update: Twitter users in Congress missing in action during the debate: formerly busy tweeters Tim Ryan and Roy Blunt. Staying active: John Culberson, with plenty of direct replies to fellow tweeters. But perhaps the least engaging use of Twitter we have seen by a politician yet is here.

And here is a list of all Twittering members of Congress, via Congresspedia. Hat tip: David All.

Update II: Here is All on how some enthusiastic use of Twitter could help the McCain campaign.

Does the rush to Twitter necessarily mean bashing blogging?

AP reports: "In Utah government, blogging is becoming so 2007." The piece points to use of Twitter by Utah.gov as well as the Utah Senate Republicans. State government enthusiastic about finding ways to share with, talk to and listen to constitutents: A trend we like to see. But let's not get carried away with the idea of Twitter stamping out blogging. Most power tweeters blog and tweet. The larger point is the rush to the new platform of course, meaning the cellphone. We still love long blog posts. Writing them and reading them. And we are jazzed about new projects [like this one] aimed at aggregating tweets, creating a new way to think about both Twitter and blogging. The lines between the two definitions are blurring.

The Sunday Read: Twitter and the 'isolation obsession equals socialization' argument

Here is an intriguing New York Times magazine piece seeking to define/defend Twitter. The piece's key concept: Twitter feeds our need for "ambient awareness." It's a smart piece, but in the end, a huge stretch. But it did add to my understanding of some key concepts here, concerning the values and world views of the power Twitterers out there. As well as of the constant and often tortured defenses of such a weird tool.

The defenders say this: Twitter, which so easily allows you and even encourages you to briefly but constantly inform your online 'followers' of what you are doing at any given moment, from each sandwich made to every light bulb replaced, has tremendous value simply because by 'tweeting' details of so many inanities, you are actually reaching out to the world, and providing so many people many more ways to get to know you. By adding up all the tiny moments. And by doing so you thereby create community.

Does this make any damn sense to anbody?

So what this argument comes down to is: Total and complete navel-gazing self-focus is a positive value. The most narcissist generation in American history has created a tool the entire existence of which is predicated on narcissism, of course, but touted as a way to inspire the opposite of narcissism: community.  And the defenders of this tool claim that said narcissism now deserves to be included under the now ever-larger term: "social media."

Obsessional self-focus equals community creation.

Isolation equals socialization.

Where have we seen this linquistic trend before?

The McCain plagiarism tale and the Palin faux pregnancy rumors: How anonymous partisans exploit established Web brands for political ends

[See multiple updates at end of this post.]

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.

On Sept. 2, Howard Kurtz, media reporter for the Washington Post, laid out the most recent example:

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:

Fear of social media: a teachable moment

Here is Will Richardson, the godfather of blogging in the classroom, on how NOT to show high school students how to protect themselves from online predators in social networking environments. Summation: A cop shows up at an assembly of students and makes a graphic case that a MySpace profile of a student in the audience has too much personal info, and could certainly lead to danger, etc. The student is humiliated in front of her fellow students. Great comments follow Richardson's post.

Examples of "scare-tech" meetings, especially to youth, are ever increasing, it seems. My congressman recently held a "community forum" on the same topic for kids and their parents. I was not present but the fear tactic seems to have been employed there too. The local news media covered it, and no congressman is going to give a hoot about such "issues" unless there are votes to be harvested from seeming caring and in touch.

Quantifying the value to kids of online social environments, when it occurs at all, is often done just as awkwardly. Richardson and a tiny few are great at making the education case, that making use of social media tools can not only be positive for kids, but can actually aid their learning. Parents and communities should seek out the Will Richardsons of the world to show up and talk to them and to their students before calling in the terror team. Education beats scare tech every day.

[Update: One of Richardson's commenters points to this follow-up article on the situation in the Denver Post .]

[We would like to take this moment to point out our blog's K-12 category here. Since the subject Municipalist focuses on is public sector blogging at large -- and not just blogging by those engaged in governance -- then the [public] K-12 world is a fertile locale that we try not ignore. We have found plenty of intriguing big issues to write about involving social media and the education world. One of our favorite posts in the K-12 category is here. We invite ed-tech followers to stop by and check us out.]

Q & A: Jeremy Gould, U.K. Ministry of Justice

Praised recently in the Economist, Jeremy Gould oversees an important U.K. government Web site, but he also blogs. A lot, and he also seeks opportunities to "agitate" for increased use of social media in government. To be clear: Jeremy's blog focuses on social media use in government and related issues, but it is not a government blog. He answered Municipalist's questions about how that is working out, details on the British government rules for civil service bloggers, as well as why Jeremy is not nearly as passionate about David Beckham as many Americans.

Describe your current job. I do four things - two I'm paid to do and two (what I'm most well known for) I don't.

1. I oversee the running of my department's corporate website - www.justice.gov.uk

2. I lead on digital strategy for the department. Which technically gives me oversight of all our external web activity, but this varies from site to site and owner to owner. This basically means providing consultancy advice on developing web activity, ensuring that all the department's web assets meet government standards etc  etc

3. I agitate (rather than evangelize) for the use of social media in government - to improve our current web delivery and for engagement purposes.

4. I try to support / lead the community of government web people to self organise themselves as a recognised group of specialists. For example, I organised a barcamp for government web people last January and run a regular series of informal networking events.

What is the history of your blogging? About 18 months ago I was working with the central strategic government communications team on a project to assess the opportunities for government in social media. One of the big questions knocking around was "Can civil servants blog?" So I thought I'd start and see if anyone stopped me. So far, no one has. I'm not not the most prolific blogger but it bubbles along with a post every week or so.

What are the goals of your blog? The real goals of my blog were to be able to: test some ideas about civil servants blogging reach out to other civil servants, and those interested in government online generally Generally participate in the conversations taking place across the web around government, democracy and the web.

American readers see that your blog links to various laws that seem to limit or at least carefully define how much anybody in government in Britain can blog. Can you describe those, and what they mean? I think you're referring to the recently published principles for participation online? Civil servants' activities are governed by the civil service code. The principles merely contextualize that for the online world. They're not draconian by any means and the principle is "You can" rather than "you can't".

Your blog has gotten a fair amount of attention. Has that helped or hindered what you are trying to do? Both, in equal measure. Helped in that it has raised my personal profile considerably. I've been able to meet people, invited to meetings social gatherings etc that I probably wouldn't have got access to before. On the other hand, some people certainly regard my profile with nervousness if not resentment. As its opened doors and given me a voice, it has clearly rattled some people.

What is the state of blogging by those anywhere in government in the UK? And: Why should government blog? Blogging in government at the moment is still pretty much confined to the geeks. The real opportunity for government in my opinion is using social media and social networking to engage at the policy level - helping officials to listen and participate in conversations about subjects they have direct responsibility for at the policy level. Helping them to learn and share before they even reach the point of developing options and making recommendations to politicians.

And, finally, for my American readers -- David Beckham: What the hell is the big deal!? You tell me :-) Beckham used to play for Manchester United, arch rivals of my team Liverpool. So I'm afraid you're asking the wrong person!

The Sunday Read: Mark Drapeau on the imperative of government 2.0

Mark Drapeau is a Fellow at the Center for Technology and National Security Policy of the National Defense University in Washington. Lately, he has been doing quite a lot of thinking about the uses of Web 2.0 in government. Two posts recently at Mashable.com lay out his views.

From part I:

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.

And from part II:

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.

The battle of the instant Web communities

The Republican National Committee launched ObamaRezkoShadyDeal.com this afternoon, aimed at providing "videos and the latest news pertaining to Barack Obama's lack of judgment and questionable dealings with campaign fundraiser and convicted felon Tony Rezko." Also on the instant community-creation beat: Regardless of whom Barack Obama chooses as his running mate, some in the "netroots" world -- meaning various lefty Web communities who since 2004 have developed plenty of clout in the Democratic Party -- have announced it better not be Indiana Senator Birch Bayh.  They have set up a Facebook page titled "100,000 strong against Evan Bayh for VP," reports the Huffington Post. But the group, as of Monday, had not hit 4,000 members.

Regardless, some members are claiming to have influenced the choice anyway, just by all the attention the effort received. Just what direct or even indirect impact that will have on Obama remains to be seen. But the fact that such single-issue communities can be created in such lightning speed is a huge change in politics. And there is no going back.

Update: Of course, calling the RNC site a "community" could be a stretch. It is not a community by itself, but rather a package of stuff, useful to plenty of individuals, media, advocacy groups, partisans, bloggers, etc., as a source for content on the issue at hand. The Facebook site, however, obviously is a more traditional "community." The contrast in strategies here is clear.

Q & A: Sunlight Foundation's Gabriela Schneider

Did you know: When a member of Congress embeds a YouTube video (even if it’s of a committee hearing) on the member's site, the member is violating current rules? One organization doing its best to not only oppose but change such restrictions is Sunlight Foundation. "Until Sunlight’s founding, there was no organization fully committed to enhancing the electronic disclosure of congressional activity on the Internet, and thus, engage citizens in an effective dialog with their members of Congress," says Sunlight spokeswoman Gabriela Schneider. Municipalist tracked down Gabriela to learn more about a Sunlight initiative called Let Our Congress Tweet. But we asked about the organization's other initiatives and its history too:

What is Let Our Congress Tweet? What has been its impact? We launched the first Twitter-based petition to Congress (about Twitter, no less) — Let Our Congress Tweet — to galvanize burgeoning support for updating congressional rules that affect how lawmakers can use the Internet to interact with citizens. Since early 2007, we had been actively advocating Congress to update those esoteric “franking rules” through our Open House Project, but as you can imagine, that wasn’t exactly a hot issue that Congress was advancing at full speed. (See our initial recommendations, delivered to Congress on May 8, 2007.)

However, once a new proposal started being circulated to update the franking [mail] rules that stirred some controversy (in part because of a proposal to create a ‘white list’ of pre-approved sites that members of Congress could use), we jumped at the opportunity of such an educational moment and created Let Our Congress Tweet.

We want to draw attention to the need to modernize the rules and give staffers and lawmakers clear guidance as to what they can and cannot do — the current rules are vague and definitely need updating. For instance, when a member of Congress embeds a YouTube video (even if it’s of a committee hearing) on her Web site, she is violating current rules. We thought, a) that’s pretty ridiculous; b) Congress is in the process of reconsidering the restrictions placed on their Internet use; c) people are paying attention and care about updating these outmoded rules, so let’s give them a fun new platform to tell Congress to "embrace the communication technologies that we already use" like Twitter, YouTube, Facebook and MySpace.

What is the brief history of Sunlight Foundation? When Sunlight co-founder and chairman Michael Klein, a retired Washington lawyer and business entrepreneur, was planning his post-retirement, ‘giving back’ years, he knew he wanted to support work to catalyze the cause of government transparency to clean up Washington. (This was in the wake of the Abramoff scandal.) He began researching how to support more investigative work that would probe more into congressional activities, which connected him with Sunlight co-founder and executive director Ellen Miller, a longtime advocate for disclosure of campaign finances who founded two prominent Washington-based organizations in the field of money and politics -- the Center for Responsive Politics and Public Campaign.

The social media rush is on

Here are 35 examples of corporate use of social media.

Hat tip: Debbie Weil, who recently linked to Municipalist from her bookmarks at del.icio.us.

Q & A: GovLoop founder Steve Ressler

GovLoop calls itself "the premiere social network connecting the government community." We first noticed GovLoop here. The community was founded a couple months ago by Steve Ressler, whose day job is IT specialist in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Ressler is also co-founder of Young Government Leaders, a professional organization of more than 2,000 government employees across the U.S. Ressler said YGL's mission "is to educate, inspire, and transform the next generation of government leaders, offering professional development, networking, and leadership opportunities for its members."

Ressler has published articles on generational issues and Web 2.0 in various publications including Federal Times, The Public Managers, and as part of the Government 2.0: Wikinomics, Government, and Democracy series. He has also presented on these topics at a range of venues including Harvard's Kennedy School, Brookings Intitute, and the Government CIO Summit.

Mr. Ressler received the 2006 Rising Star Award and the 2007 Federal 100 Award for his service in the government IT community. He is a 2004 master's graduate of the University of Pennsylvania and a past recipient of the DHS Graduate Fellowship.

What is the brief history of GovLoop? In 2003, I co-founded Young Government Leaders (YGL). While with YGL, I began to meet a range of interesting people in the government community that had great ideas and wouldn't qualify as young feds. These ranged from more experienced feds, state and local govies, professors and students, good gov't organization, and even the occasional well-meaning contractor. So I decided it would be great to have an online social network connecting all these great people and start sharing ideas. It took a few months to turn the idea into the actual GovLoop.com site and I launched the site by word of month starting at the beginning of June (2008).

How does the site work? Who can participate? The site is basically a social network for the government community. You create a profile, connect with friends, and join groups. Additionally, a range of people post interesting content in the blogs and forums from government career advice, best practice, and even our very own government sports blogger. Finally, there are a range of resource from a calendar of events to links to important government career resource material.

Pretty much anyone in the government community can participate. It only takes a few minutes. Members range from fed/state/local employees to public policy students/professors to those good government groups (i.e. ICMA, AFCEA, YGL, etc). Finally, I do allow contractors to join although I explicitly ask them not to participate in business development or marketing. Governments employ a large amount of contractors and we need to partner with them and share ideas, however be careful around procurement laws and refrain from marketing and business development.

What are you goals for the site and how have they been met to date? The goal was pretty simple - I wanted to begin to connect the government community. And I've been blown away by the response - over 700 members in a few months from all sectors of government in the U.S. and located across the world (lots of Department of State people stationed all over the world). While numbers matter, more importantly we have the right types of people on the site - the people passionate about government and innovation - which I find exciting. Personally, I've met a number of really interesting people through your site including great bloggers (such as yourself), thought leaders (Mark Drapeau who is writing about Gov 2.0 for Mashable), and really smart govies trying to make government a better place.

What reaction have you gotten so far? What do participants say about the site? I've gotten nothing but great reaction. Usually people respond and say they wonder why a site like this hasn't been created before. I see a lot of spontaneous connections being made as well as sharing of information and ideas. As a government, our agencies can often see like black holes without a personal face so it's great to have a state employee of Iowa connect with a Department of Defense employee over a common interest in new technology.

Why join an online community, anyway? I think it's a great way to stay in touch with colleagues and potential colleagues. It's exciting to connect with others passionate about government and I get great career advice that I use in my day job constantly. I believe that it is important to have another safe place outside of your day job to share your ideas and collaborate without the politics and hierarchies inherent in an office. Plus, it's quick, easy, fun, and you can do it while watching the Olympics.

Wikimedia Foundation replies to Municipalist questions on McCain plagiarism charges

[Update: We develop this further here.]

D.C.-based Wikimedia Foundation spokesman Dan Rosenthal responds to questions from Municipalist about the suggestion that John McCain's speech writers may have "plagiarized" from Wikipedia some material about Georgia and its history. "A Wikipedia editor" makes the charge.

The comments following the initial post at CQ's Political Insider blog are worthy reading. One asks: Can anybody plagiarize facts? And here is a follow-up post, with links to responses from the blogosphere and some mainstream media. Here is the speech. Rosenthal addressed our emailed questions in one reply, but we break them up here:

Municipalist: What is Wikipedia policy on use of its content?

Rosenthal: Wikimedia's policy on use of its content is one of freedom. First, let me note that the Wikimedia Foundation does not own the article content on our projects; the individual authors who write it do. All of their contributions are licensed under the GFDL (GNU Free Documentation License), which to summarize allows free reuse, commercially or otherwise, as long as the reuser attributes the preceding authors. It's slightly more complicated than that, but that's the gist of what's important to this question.

So, Sen. McCain, or Sen. Obama, or any other person is more than welcome to use content found on our projects, as long as it is properly attributed. Now, obviously when giving a speech that quotes a line or two from an article, or using a word or two from another source, there's a different story, and there is potentially a fair use argument to be made. That being said, however, in the vast majority of instances we require attribution to the authors of the content.

Keep in mind that we have been saying repeatedly that Wikipedia should not be used as a primary source of information, and people using Wikipedia for research should always verify their information elsewhere.

Municipalist: Apparently a Wikipedia editor emailed this charge to a member of the media. How does Wikipedia feel about this behavior of one of its own?

Rosenthal: There's very little to say. What people do outside of the project is their own business.

Municipalist: If journalists are free to "use" Wikipedia content, why not campaigns?

Rosenthal: Journalists and campaigns are free to use Wikipedia content. Advertisement campaigns have been using our content; why wouldn't a presidential campaign? Now, with that being said, just because they are free to use our content does not mean that it is necessarily a good idea. A presidential candidate and his campaign have significant amounts of staffer time and money invested into research and briefing, and I would sincerely hope that they are able to use Wikipedia responsibly and verify their sources and citations, rather than citing directly to Wikipedia (which is something that we discourage in grade school students, let alone campaigns).

Municipalist: Does Wikipedia care about this?

Rosenthal: Again it is hard to say because the term "Wikipedia" can have different meaning. If you mean the project itself, obviously the answer is no because software cannot care. If you mean the contributors and editors to the project, there has been some discussion about it, but the general response has been pretty apathetic. If you mean the Wikimedia Foundation, there has been very little internal discussion regarding the issue.

In closing, I hope the McCain campaign learns from this, as well as any campaign, organization or person who wants to use content from Wikipedia. Please do so responsibly, make sure your sources are cited, provide proper attribution, and try to use Wikipedia to dig deeper for content beyond just our articles. Doing so will go a long way toward preventing issues like this in the future.

Update: After the initial post, we emailed Rosenthal a follow-up: How does Wikimedia Foundation feel about the overall charge here? Meaning, plagiarism or rights infringement or whatever -- whenever it actually occurs. Regardless of whether it occurred here. Is use of Wikipedia content minus proper attribution a concern for you at all, and do you plan any response to it, educating users, suing, etc.?

Rosenthal: I don't think the Foundation actually has any real feelings about the charge, since there's not a whole lot of solid information at this point. We obviously do not at all support plagiarism when it does in fact occur. Attribution is one of the major keys to our encyclopedia, both for licensing reasons, and because it helps tell the story of the development of an article, as well as gives our contributors a sense of real authorship, so they can say "look what I have helped create." When attribution is taken away, it generally hurts our contributors. So while use of our content minus attribution is a concern for us, and it has been something that has been internally discussed, and sometimes is discussed at outreach events such as Wikimeetups, and Wikimedia Academies, I am not aware of any planned responses at this point in time.

[Calling Internet lawyers: Creative Commons License ruling handing down yesterday.]

[Hat tip: Politico blogger Ben Smith's essential daily remainders.]

Twittering Congress and L.A. Fire Department

FCW.com here on Twittering members of Congress. FCW links to a piece at PC World.com on how the Los Angeles Fire Department uses Twitter. It is intriguing stuff. Lots of links to read more. Municipalist linked to coverage of these developments in November 2007.

Obama: When I know, you'll know

Barack Obama wants to text you the name of his VP selection, the moment it occurs. We like this for what is says symbolically about the candidate's awareness of the increasing relevance of the new media world. Are there any state or local candidates or elected officials doing anything like this? They should be, no?

NASA Twitters away Mars rumor

NASA uses Twitter to shoot down a rumor that the White House was supposedly briefed on regarding a discovery of life on Mars.

The news came from a Twitter feed set up by NASA to be from, uh, the Mars Phoenix lander itself. But which is actually authored by NASA news services manager Veronica McGregor. Who does a fine job, by the way.

News media around the world are reporting about NASA's Twittering.

Municipalist loves blogging about NASA. This time, we must thank NASA Watch. One of the smartest and least angry NASA critics out there. Check out this post on how NASA responds with "a certain grumpiness" when asked "why it is, after a decade of having the Internet surprise NASA [public affairs office] again and again with news getting out ahead of NASA's planned release, that the agency has still not learned to adapt to this ever shifting fact of life in the 21st century." Nicely done.

GovLoop community takes off

View my page on GovLoop

Municipalist initially mentioned Govloop here. Even though I am not a government employee, I joined anyway, as GovLoop is open to all. It's focus is networking among federal government employees. Check it out.

Social networking for fed employees gains attention

A social networking site for federal government employees is attracting some attention. It is called GovLoop:

Aside from just being a pretty cool site, this is A Big Deal because it demonstrates the power of web 2.0 not only to tackle specific problems, but to bring together communities in ways that totally transcend individual agency walls. The challenges facing our nation are increasingly bigger than any one office, agency, or department. While more formal coordination wouldn't hurt, it still depends on traditional hierarchies. What GovLoop does is to go around that, and begin building the kind of informal, diverse, networked, socialized community that's going to be critical to maintaining the vitality of the federal government in the 21st century. While it's aimed at government, anyone can sign up and join this fascinating dialogue.

GovLoop was founded by 27-year-old Steve Ressler. More about him here.

The Sunday Read: The Web to the rescue

How social networking saved New Orleans, by John Fontana, Network World.

Russert and Wikipedia: The story that won't, er, die

'I killed Tim Russert (on Wikipedia)' is the headline on this Toronto Globe and Mail analysis piece that points out that the employee of an NBC contractor who updated Russert's Wikipedia page to announce his death, scooping much of American mainstream media, was fired this week. We have written in this space recently that this tale illustrates an important shift. The quaint notion of major network TV czars up on the 28th floor puffing away on their cigars as they order their sycophantic middle managers to prevent the Russert death news from getting on TV for 20 or 30 minutes, or whatever, just boggles the mind. That world doesn't exist anymore.

Keep puffing away, guys. Just keep puffing away.

This Congressman uses streaming video, live town hall meetings on the Web, and Twitter

All public sector bloggers take note. Republican Rep. John Culberson is cornering his colleagues in Congress and interviewing them using the video streaming service Qik. Techpresident has the details as well as video of Culbertson's first interview. Culberson hosted a town hall meeting on the Web on June 10. Culberson also uses Twitter from the House floor, and he has a fan at Sunlight Foundation, as well as a detractor here.

Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed by Social Technologies

Here is a new book government can certainly learn from. In "Groundswell: Winning in a World of Social Media Technologies," Charlene Li and Josh Bernoff describe how to turn a new challenge for business into opportunity. The book has its own blog. From the book's description:

Corporate executives are struggling with a new trend: people using online social technologies (blogs, social networking sites, YouTube, podcasts) to discuss products and companies, write their own news, and find their own deals. This groundswell is global, it is unstoppable, it affects every industry and it is utterly foreign to the powerful companies running things now ...