techPresident - e-govt - Comments

So very early in the going

Nancy Scola — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 12:50:35 -0500

I heartily second the thinking that there's a real risk that these efforts to pull people into the governing process are all for show. But I think we have to remember that as much as Barack Obama has been planning his presidency since grade school, we're still incredibly early in the very tough process of getting a presidential administration up and running. I suspect that one hand of the transition doesn't always know what the other hand is doing, so that one cell of staffers might be pushing for participation, and only then using the resulting avalanche of interest to push internally for making use of it. It certainly wouldn't be the first time politics (or corporate politics, for that matter) worked that way. In short, signs that participation is being ignored are learning opportunities, for sure, but I think it's a mistake to react to them as if they're some sort of decision from on high.

Manual trackback

tbonnemann — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 12:34:08 -0500

Manual trackback: "Change.gov launches online discussion around healthcare" -- http://bit.ly/qJRzE

--
Web: htp://www.plansphere.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/planspark

change.com

Ennar — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 05:48:50 -0500

One of the first things that the Obama administration need doing is to expedite amendment to the Paperwork Reduction Act. Clearance from the OMB is an impediment that should be removed unceremoniously.

The provisions in The Right to Information Act(India)could be used as a rough guide.

Good step, but...

Joshua Levy — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 19:52:09 -0500

Like everyone else, I think this a great step toward transparency and the opening up of government. But for me, the real test will be whether these comments (there are now more than 3,300 on the post Micah mentioned) actually influence the Obama team's decision-making process. And without a specific reference to how comments have been taken into account, it will be hard to know what kind of influence they've had.

What worries me is that this kind of forum can be simply used to create the impression of participation, rather than foster the real thing.

Forum Federation

derektut — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 09:14:46 -0500

This is a commendable first step and a great example that can encourage the unfamiliar to embrace the power of participant media, but I just wanted to weigh in with my concern about these discussions being carried out in one centralized location. Rather, shouldn't we be promoting the inclusion of the many highly knowledgeable and influential communities that have already been gathering online and vetting these specific ideas (e.g. Slashdot)? Why reinvent the wheel? On the other hand, I'd love to see Congress itself open up in this way.

The success of Obama's campaign was in acting as a hub from which campaign workers could launch, not function as the network.

-twitter.com/derektut

thank you

monkfish — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 08:55:16 -0500

thanks for this great post. justin tv

Please do watch this

TheAri7 — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 09:23:12 -0500

I'd be most interested to see if the input of the community changes any policy.

That's the way to really show that Obama is going to go in a new direction, rather than placate us with tools that allow us to mouth off and impact nothing.

I couldn't agree more!

JonPincus — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 20:02:17 -0500

You make an excellent point about the importance of dissent. This is something that needs to be considered in the technology, the institutional structures, as well as the culture. The reaction to Get FISA Right from people on the Obama campaign is exactly what needs to be instilled: dissent should not only be tolerated but encouraged.

One thing I'd add is an explicit focus on diversity. Many forms of online communications tend to introduce biases (see for example Herring et. al.'s Women and children last: the discursive construction of the blogosphere) as well as reflect existing dimensions of oppressions. Of course it's possible to counter this, as long as people are aware of it an focus on it ... too often, nobody pays attention. This is especially critical for a site representing the Presidency and trying to get all Americans involved.

At the very least, it seems to me, some of the site’s staffers should have journalistic rather than PR backgrounds.

Activists, community organizers and online community managers will also be important to involve -- preferably at the staff level.

jon -- http://talesfromthe.net/jon

A strange design decision by change.org

JonPincus — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:57:03 -0500

Since yesterday, change.org got rid the list of top 10 user-rated ideas from their site, leaving the "featured ideas" (presumably chosen by change.org). Yesterday we could see that Get FISA Right, repeal the PATRIOT Act, and restore our civil liberties was up to #8; today there's no indication.

I must be missing something here. The whole point of the site is user feedback. Why not recognize it? And many of change.org's partners on this understand the value of transparency in other contexts ... why not here?

jon -- http://talesfromthe.net/jon

Thanks, Micah!

Allison Fine — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 16:41:14 -0400

Thanks to you and Andrew, Micah! I've always enjoyed my PDF and TechPresident interactions and exchanges and am thrilled that we'll be working more closely together in the future. Now, about that company car . . .

Allison