Posts
To kick-off this week, I thought it might be useful to link to an excellent video from the US's Sunlight Foundation providing a glimpse into why there's growing interest in making public information collected and managed by governments public.
It doubles as an introduction to the Public = Online campaign, which is being used in the US to bring greater awareness to the need to make public data public, in real-time online.
Bor those with a deeper interest, below is the campaign launch, filmed at Google's DC offices. Be warned it is over an hour long.
Showing posts with label internet. Show all posts
Showing posts with label internet. Show all posts
Monday, June 28, 2010
Why public data should be public - a US view | Tweet |
Friday, June 25, 2010
With a change of leadership, what's next for Gov 2.0 in Australia? | Tweet |
Four years ago Government 2.0 was a barely known concept in Australia and social media was regarded by many in Canberra as a youth fad.
President Obama made social media 'cool' for politicians by using it as a key plank in his run for office. Since his election he has spearheaded a Gov 2.0 agenda of increased transparency and engagement which is in the process of transforming the US government.
In Australia, we saw social media used in a basic manner in the 2007 election, with senior politicians starring in their own Youtube videos, beginning them with "good morning" and MPs were proud of their garish MySpace pages and email lists.
The public service also began using social media more widely around the same time, although a few early adopters were already blogging or using other social networking tools.
Gradually, through 2008 and 2009, more government agencies began adopting new media approaches to communicate with their audiences. In particular state governments such as Victoria's led this charge, engaging their citizens in online consultations and competitions.
Agencies such as Geoscience Australia and the ABS began adopting Creative Commons licensing, making much of their data available for public reuse - free.
The Gov 2.0 Taskforce, launched in July 2009, brought active Federal Ministerial support and increased awareness to the area, culminating in the Taskforce's widely read Final Report which provided a set of recommendations to advance Gov 2.0 adoption, the majority of which have been adopted by government.
This was followed by the APS Reform report, Public Sector Innovation Report and the Freedom of Information Amendment legislation, each playing its part in encouraging government to be more open, engaging and interactive online.
Today there's over 200 Australian Twitter accounts from government agencies, well over 50 blogs and at least 30 Facebook pages, not to mention various forums, competitions, open data feeds and other Gov 2.0 initiatives and activities that are underway.
Much of the Federal activity was actively support by Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner, who initiated the Gov 2.0 Taskforce and whose portfolio includes AGIMO (the Australian Government Information Management Office). Prime Minister Kevin Rudd was also a supporter and set an example for his Ministers with his blogs and online chats.
We've now seen the first Australian transfer of power in the Gov 2.0 age, with Prime Minister Julia Gillard taking over the reins of the Australian Government and Minister Tanner indicating he will retire at the next election.
The roots of Government 2.0 have been growing in the public service, however experienced talent is still few and far between and budgets are tight - Gov 2.0 still requires nurturing and support to thrive, particularly if the soil became less accommodating.
This raises a serious question for Government 2.0 advocates and practitioners both inside and outside government. With new political leadership, how deep is the commitment to Gov 2.0 approaches to openness and engagement? Who will drive the momentum at a Federal Ministerial level into the future?
This question is compounded by an impending election which may see the present government change its shape a second time, or potentially be replaced by one of another persuasion.
This will make the next year an interesting one for Gov 2.0 in Australia - we may see it thrive or die back.
What do you expect to happen?
Friday, June 11, 2010
Reinventing website perfection | Tweet |
Traditionally, in my experience both in the private and public sector, the way to build a 'perfect' website has been considered to be;
invest a large quantity of resources, personnel and time at the start of the development process,
use this investment to build all the functionality that the developers can dream up, write all the content the communicators can think of and test it with audiences,
launch the 'perfect' website and hope it works, and then
replace the website (fixing most of the bits that failed) after 3-5 years by repeating the process again.
Personally I've never liked this approach. It places a lot of reliance on using past knowledge to guess future (organisational and audience) needs, involves investing a lot of resources upfront with limited ability to terminate or redirect projects until after they have failed and it also results in websites that degrade in effectiveness over time which can lead to progressively greater reputation and legal risks.
I'd like to see the process for developing a 'perfect' website reinvented. The new process must involve a low upfront cost, the ability to be flexible and agile to meet changing needs quickly and be capable of making a website more and more effective over time, improving reputation and reducing legal risks.
But how is it possible to achieve all these goals at once?
The answer is actually quite simple and well understood by successful entrepreneurs.
Rather than aiming for a perfect site on release day after an extended development period, the goal is to quickly build and launch a site that meets at least one critical audience need.
Once the site has been launched, ensure there are tools for monitoring how it is used and identifying user needs. Then progressively build extra functionality and write more content, guided primarily by the needs of your audience.
This approach ensures the site has enough value at launch to be successful, albeit in a more limited fashion than a 'kitchen sink' website (with more functionality at launch). It also ensures that the website grows progressively more useful and relevant to the audience you aim to serve.
In this way the site becomes increasingly perfect in a more realistic way - perfect for the audience who use it, rather than 'perfect' for the stakeholders who think they know what different audiences want.
We see this approach taken with all kinds of websites and products - from Apple's iPhones through to online services such as Gmail.
It's time to see more of this approach used with government websites as well.
After all - don't we want to create the 'perfect' website for our audiences' needs?
Monday, May 24, 2010
Infallability, government and Web 2.0 | Tweet |
Many rulers, from the Pharaohs of ancient Egypt to the Czars of Russia, were seen as almost infallible leaders - divinely selected and empowered to lead their people. To question their wisdom, strength or decisions was often an offence that could be punished by imprisonment or death.
Most modern states are more lenient, however governments still place a high value on being seen to be authoritative, knowledgeable and, on occasion, infallible.
So what is the impact of new media on a government's aura of infallibility?
For a long time traditional media has been keeping governments honest. However it has relied on a relative few number of reporters providing information through an even smaller number of distribution channels. Commercial interests, limited access to information and various other restrictions have, on occasion, left many government decisions and policies with little scrutiny.
Now, with Web 2.0, almost every citizen is also a journalist and publisher. This makes it possible for almost the entire population of a modern state to keep its government under constant 24-hour scrutiny and analysis, covering almost every decision and policy.
How have governments responded to this?
Some have taken a censorship and imprisonment route, attempting to limit debate and scrutiny by imprisoning, or worse, the most vocal citizen critics.
However this isn't a route that many democratic states could (or would) choose.
Instead democratically elected governments can choose to embrace public scrutiny and, rather than attempting to maintain an illusion of infallibility, become learning organisations who acknowledge that they can continually improve their performance.
This is a huge mindset change for those in governments used to the limited scrutiny of traditional media. The change can take some time to embrace.
At the moment while some governments and their agencies have embraced scrutiny as an opportunity to improve their service delivery, policy and operations, others are still conflicted. There are still situations where some individuals in various governments attempt to control and close down public discussions or limit internal transparency through self-censorship and restricted internal communications channels.
These conflicted agencies are, in many cases, doing more harm to themselves than good. When it is publicly visible that the Emperor has no clothes, that a particular topic is of community interest or facts about a situation (potentially including videos, financial analysis and/or expert opinions) are freely distributed online, attempts to limit statements to an agency line can backfire.
In other words, attempts to protect an agency or Minister through controlling information can, instead, create greater risks to them. This activity can damage reputations, expose them as out-of-step or, in extreme cases, result in rolling heads.
Government agencies increasingly need to resist the need to control all flows of information and focus on ensuring that accurate information is available wherever people are having a discussion. They need to ensure that the community has access to the facts - both when government is right and when they are wrong.
This limits the damage of false claims and myths - when government has indeed made the most correct decisions. Equally it limits the damage and distress when government has made mistakes. This approach allows government to retain the respect and trust of the community, particularly when errors are quickly detected and corrected.
Possibly the greatest challenge for public servants related to this shift to open disclosure and less massaging of messages is that it is happening right now.
The Australian Government's Freedom of Information reform law was passed on 13 May this year, Victoria has begun adopting Creative Commons licensing in a proactive disclosure approach for public sector data and NSW's government recently appointed an Information Commissioner and the NSW Premier has directed Ministers and Departments to set "an example of unprecedented openness".
This makes it imperative for agencies to recognise that their environment has changed and adjust their internal processes as quickly as possible.
Monday, May 03, 2010
The many styles of blogging - selecting the right approach for your goals and audience | Tweet |
A blog is a blog is a blog in the same way that a TV show is a TV show is a TV show.
That is to say, there are many kinds of blogs in the same way there are many different kinds of TV shows, depending on their goals, audience, subject matter and format.
So when a government department, commercial organisations or individual tells me they are starting a blog often my first question is generally - what type of blog?
Around four years ago Rohit Bhargava defined 25 different types of blog and when to use them (see his presentation embedded below).
Wikipedia also discusses the many different types of blogs, differentiating them by genre, content, authorship, goal and approach.
In both cases there is sage advice for anyone considering setting up a blog to consider, preferably before you establish the blog.
Have you thought about the goals for the blog - to communicate, educate, evangelise, attract or sell (amongst other potential goals); have you consider who you see as your audience and their particular needs and approaches - are they experts or novices, do they prefer short snippets or in-depth analysis; have you considered your available resources - can you blog daily, weekly or sporadically, what technologies you are using and their benefits or limitations.
Finally have you considered your subject matter and the degree of interactivity you seek to include. Can - and will - people respond to your blog by commenting. Will they discuss and share your posts on Twitter or Facebook?
Whether you're proposing a blog as a communications or engagement tactic for your organisation, you're being told to establish a departmental blog or you're considering blogging personally or on topics of professional interest, it is well worth considering the appropriate style and approach to improve your changes of success.
And remember, you can blend a few styles together, create your own and evolve your blog over time in response to how your audience is engaging. Don't be limited by lists!
The 25 Basic Styles of Blogging ... And When To Use Each One
View more presentations from Rohit Bhargava.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Crowdsourcing at the National Library | Tweet |
I've spoken before about the fantastic Historic Australian Newspapers archive program at the National Library to digitalise old newspapers, coupling OCR scanning with a online crowdsourcing tool that allows the public to fix mistakes in scanned text.
One of the key people behind the program, Rose Holley, recently presented at Mosman Library about the initiative. Thanks to B3rn, the presentation was filmed, and I have embedded it below.
Using social media to drive government policy - President Obama vs Goldman Sachs | Tweet |
Using the media to build public opinion pressure against an opponent is one of the oldest tactics in the political playbook.
However in the modern world politicians and organisations can go one better - marshalling their social networking followers and using social media avenues to directly build and channel public opinion.
While we've not seen much of this in Australia (though perhaps the Prime Minister's National Health and Hospitals Network Facebook Cause page is an example of early steps), the President's office in the USA is becoming quite mature and strategically effective at this type of pressure.
A short time ago President Obama used his social media platforms, including 8 million Facebook followers and millions of supporters via the MyBarackObama site (now referred to as Organising for America) to successfully lobby for the US Health Reform bill.
More recently the President has used his online muscle to launch a campaign against Goldman Sachs - a campaign that seems to have left the company off-balance and reeling.
Covered last week in the Forbes magazine article Obama Fights Goldman With Social Media, the President has used search engine marketing directed to Organising for America combined with a coordinated campaign via Facebook and Twitter (where the President has 3 million followers) to build public support for changes to the US's financial systems, specifically focused at Goldman.
The campaign has been even more effective because Goldman has a negligible social media presence and is not able to respond effectively through social networking channels - a major warning for any organisation, or government department, facing a determined and highly coordinated attempt to shift public opinion online.
As the article states,
To date, Goldman's silence in the online space has been deafening--making it all the easier for regulators, legislators and the White House to paint a bull's eye on its back.I hope no Australian government department will allow itself to be in this position.
For those who are not fully across the social media strategy used by the US President in his election campaign, a good piece to read is Viralblog's The Full Barack Obama Social Media Strategy!. I've embedded the presentation linked to that article below.
Monday, April 12, 2010
What value should government place on online expertise? | Tweet |
On Sunday I was made aware of a Seek advertisement for a 'web and social media expert' position in a 'VERY high-profile government client' in the ACT.
The ad (which is here), seeks someone with,
a strong understanding of how the web and social media operate, the ability to contextualise that within the Government’s needs and find creative solutions; and have the technical skills to transform those solutions into product within tight deadlines!This is a wide range of complex skills, so let's do some unpacking.
You will need excellent communication skills, and experience in website design and development and in project and database management. You will be proficient in using a range of web design applications including Adobe Photoshop, have a sound knowledge of HTML, and a strong understanding of web publishing principles and techniques.? Knowledge of relevant web standards and guidelines and community engagement practices are essential! Experience in multimedia authoring and video production would be a strong advantage.
Being a 'social media expert' - if such actually exist in Australia - would require years of experience, not just book-learning and seminars, in employing social media techniques and technologies across diverse audiences.
Being a web designer is itself a profession, as is web development, project manager and multimedia and video production. All require years of experience to gain proficiency.
Together these skills would take upwards of fifteen years to gain - possibly twenty or more for a true expert.
In fact this role could easily be split into many separate career roles, each with a professional skillset, including online communications/social media professional, web designer, web developer, database administrator, project manager, multimedia producer)
So at what level does this ad indicate the government client will reward this combined skillset?
At the APS6 level - circa $70-80,000 salary per year.
I wish this agency all the best in finding the right person for this role, however I do feel that the compensation significantly under-values the formal skills they are seeking. The agency will probably have to choose someone without the level of expertise they want, simply because the person with the combined skills they are seeking either does not yet exist in Australia or would be seeking a much higher salary (and could get it simply by employing one of their skillsets).
This is a problem I have seen before in government. Often departments seek highly trained web designers or developers at salaries well below their commercial or digital agency equivalents.
Jobs asking for social media experts seem to hope that these people exist, whereas there has been limited opportunity for people to have gained these skills in Australia. The few professionals who have substantial experience in the social media field are generally freelancing, working in high paying (usually commercial sector) roles or have left Australia for greener fields overseas.
This isn't an issue just related to online skills. Government compensation packages sometime struggle to reward specialists and experts of all stripes, something highlighted in the recent APS reform report released by PM&C, Ahead of the Game: Blueprint for the Reform of Australian Government Administration.
I hope moving forward that Australian governments are in the position to acknowledge that there are many kinds of online professionals, that it is highly unlikely to get a full set of online skills in a single person and that these people need to be appropriately compensated for their expertise.
Otherwise we will remain caught in the trap of advertising for experts but being forced to employ 'learners'.
While these people are also needed (and will become more expert with time), they start out far more prone to error, require much greater training and external support and don't bring the same sized tool kit to the table to enable government to deliver the best possible outcomes for the community. In fact when placed in senior 'expert' positions these learners may cost the government much more over time in opportunity cost than the salary of a true expert.
Thursday, April 08, 2010
The meaning and value of Net Neutrality | Tweet |
Net Neutrality is a topic of considerable interest and discussion in the US, but rarely a topic in Australia.
However it could significantly impact how the internet operated in Australia, and all other countries around the world, if the US moved away from the principle.
The video below provides a definition and view in support of Net Neutrality and covers the issues of interest to those who oppose abandoning the principle.
Thursday, April 01, 2010
Growth of Twitter in Australian governments - 155 accounts | Tweet |
I've conducted a quick review of Australian government Twitter accounts this morning, national, state and local, drawing on lists that others and I have compiled.
With a margin for error (some may have been missed or not be official accounts), I've found that there are about 155 Australian government Twitter accounts registered, 26 Federal, 79 State and 50 Local.
UPDATE: I've added new accounts flagged by commenters, taking the total to 196 Twitter accounts from Australian governments.
Note that I've not screened these accounts for whether they are still live, or how actively they Tweet.
If you want to subscribe to some of these lists please see:
- http://twitter.com/fpcwa/lists - Federal, state and some area-specific lists
- http://twitter.com/b3rn/ozgovlocal - Local government list
I've provided a full list of the accounts I looked at online in Google docs as a spreadsheet, open for anyone to view, download and modify at: http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Ap1exl80wB8OdHNKVmQ5RVlvQWpibDAxNHkzcU1nV2c&hl=en
There's also a full list below.
National
- http://twitter.com/artsculturegov
- http://twitter.com/australiascreen
- http://twitter.com/Nat_Museum_Aust
- http://twitter.com/NatGalleryAus
- http://twitter.com/NFSAgov
- http://twitter.com/NFSAonline
- http://twitter.com/NPG_Canberra
- http://twitter.com/questacon
- http://twitter.com/YourHealthGovAu
- http://twitter.com/ozday
- http://twitter.com/Australian_Army
- http://twitter.com/Australian_Navy
- http://twitter.com/HankJongen
- http://twitter.com/gov2taskforce
- http://twitter.com/SeeAustralia
- http://twitter.com/StudyInAust
- http://twitter.com/ato_gov_au
- http://twitter.com/ausgovau
- http://twitter.com/AusLawReform
- http://twitter.com/Austrade
- http://twitter.com/AWMemorial
- http://twitter.com/business_gov_au
- http://twitter.com/CwealthOmb
- http://twitter.com/departmentbcde
- http://twitter.com/exportawards
- http://twitter.com/nlagovau
- http://twitter.com/nationaltrustau
- http://twitter.com/navytrident09
- http://twitter.com/ParlLibrary
- http://twitter.com/TrainingGovAu
- http://www.twitter.com/PSInnovate
- http://www.twitter.com/yourABS
NSW State
- http://twitter.com/ArtGalleryofNSW
- http://twitter.com/austmus
- http://twitter.com/MCASydney
- http://twitter.com/GosfordRFS
- http://twitter.com/nswrfs
- http://twitter.com/NSWHealth
- http://twitter.com/nswhealthjobs
- http://twitter.com/nswpolice
- http://twitter.com/sydney_holidays
- http://twitter.com/apps4nsw
- http://twitter.com/BusinessNSW
- http://twitter.com/datansw
- http://twitter.com/Myschoolkids
- http://twitter.com/NSW_IR
- http://twitter.com/nswdpi
- http://twitter.com/NSWFoodAuth
- http://twitter.com/staterecordsnsw
- http://twitter.com/WorkCoverNSW
QLD State
- http://twitter.com/QAGGoMA
- http://twitter.com/qldmuseum
- http://twitter.com/qldhealthnews
- http://twitter.com/slqld
- http://twitter.com/QPSmedia
- http://twitter.com/Queensland
- http://twitter.com/TransLinkSEQ
- http://twitter.com/MigrationMuseum
- http://twitter.com/NatMotorMuseum
- http://twitter.com/SAMaritimeMuseu
- http://twitter.com/SAMuseum
- http://twitter.com/StateTheatreSA
- http://twitter.com/SLSA
- http://twitter.com/SA_SES
- http://twitter.com/LimestoneCoast
- http://twitter.com/Murraylands
- http://twitter.com/tourismawards
- http://twitter.com/tourismsa
- http://twitter.com/ZoosSA
TAS State
VIC State
- http://twitter.com/acmionline
- http://twitter.com/AmbulanceVic
- http://twitter.com/appmystate
- http://twitter.com/AustraliaDayVic
- http://twitter.com/BarwonWater
- http://twitter.com/businessvic
- https://twitter.com/CancerVic
- http://twitter.com/CFA_CONNECT
- http://twitter.com/cfa_updates
- http://twitter.com/ChampMoves
- http://twitter.com/deecd
- http://twitter.com/deecdnews
- http://twitter.com/DesignVictoria
- http://twitter.com/discoverycentre
- http://twitter.com/egovrc
- http://twitter.com/fed_square
- http://twitter.com/FilmVictoria
- http://twitter.com/HeritageVic
- http://twitter.com/HvilleSanctuary
- http://twitter.com/IMAXMelbourne
- http://twitter.com/immigration_mv
- http://twitter.com/InfoVic
- http://twitter.com/InvestVictoria
- http://twitter.com/melbournemuseum
- http://twitter.com/MelbourneWater
- http://twitter.com/metrotrains
- http://twitter.com/MFB_NEWS
- http://twitter.com/museumvictoria
- http://twitter.com/NSMNews
- http://twitter.com/ngv_melbourne
- http://twitter.com/Library_Vic
- http://twitter.com/MelbTraffic
- http://twitter.com/MelbourneZoo
- http://twitter.com/mykimate
- http://twitter.com/scienceworks_mv
- http://twitter.com/TruthinArtAward
- http://twitter.com/VicGovHealth
- http://twitter.com/vicgovnews
- http://twitter.com/VictoriaPolice
- http://twitter.com/VicUrban
- http://twitter.com/VicVolunteers
- http://twitter.com/vlineinform
- http://twitter.com/justice_vic
- http://twitter.com/WerribeeZoo
- http://twitter.com/wheelercentre
- http://twitter.com/WorkSafe_Vic
- http://twitter.com/ZoosVictoria
- http://twitter.com/yarratrams
- http://twitter.com/ArtGalleryWA
- http://twitter.com/perththeatre
- http://twitter.com/ScreenWest
- http://twitter.com/statelibrarywa
- http://twitter.com/SwanRiverTrust
- http://twitter.com/FESAAlerts
- http://twitter.com/fpcwa
- http://twitter.com/DisabilityWA
- http://twitter.com/RottnestIsland
- http://twitter.com/WestAustralia
- http://twitter.com/fuelWatchWA
- http://twitter.com/Perth_Traffic
- http://twitter.com/Transperth
- http://twitter.com/TransportWAnews
- http://twitter.com/CommerceWA
- http://twitter.com/ConsumerWA
- http://twitter.com/dsrwa
- http://twitter.com/AlburyCity
- http://twitter.com/BizPortStephens
- http://twitter.com/Bwoodcouncil
- http://twitter.com/CanadaBay
- http://twitter.com/CanterburyCity
- http://twitter.com/CC_Council
- http://twitter.com/cityofsydney
- http://twitter.com/KACArtCentre
- http://twitter.com/lakemac
- http://twitter.com/LeetonNSW
- http://twitter.com/LivoCouncil
- http://twitter.com/Manly_Council
- http://twitter.com/mosmancouncil
- http://twitter.com/mosmanparktown
- http://twitter.com/Narromine
- http://twitter.com/parracity
- http://twitter.com/Penrith_Valley
- http://twitter.com/Pittwater2010
- http://twitter.com/ShellharbourCC
- http://twitter.com/ShoalhavenCC
- http://twitter.com/SuthShireCncl
- http://twitter.com/WakoolShire
- http://twitter.com/WyongCouncil
SA Local
- http://twitter.com/CampbelltownSA
- http://twitter.com/CityofAdelaide
- http://twitter.com/cityofmitcham
- http://twitter.com/UnleyCouncil
- http://twitter.com/BassCoast
- http://twitter.com/BaysideCouncil
- http://twitter.com/Boroondara
- http://twitter.com/BrunswickBaths
- http://twitter.com/CardiniaShire
- http://twitter.com/CityOfCasey
- http://twitter.com/cityportphillip
- http://twitter.com/egsc
- http://twitter.com/GreaterShepp
- http://twitter.com/KnoxCC
- http://twitter.com/latrobecity
- http://twitter.com/MaribyrnongCC
- http://twitter.com/thats_melbourne
- http://twitter.com/wodongacouncil
- http://twitter.com/yourcityspace
- http://twitter.com/cityofbayswater
- http://twitter.com/cityofcanning
- http://twitter.com/CityOfCockburn
- http://twitter.com/CityofFremantle
- http://twitter.com/cityofmelville
- http://twitter.com/CityOfPerth
- http://twitter.com/CityofStirling
- http://twitter.com/Mundaring
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Australian public servants told three times - open (reusable) government data is important. | Tweet |
The Australian Public Service (APS) has now been told three times by three different reports in the last year about the importance of releasing much of its information openly to the community.
This began with reforms to Freedom of Information which, once passed, will encourage a pro-disclosure environment within the APS and make it easier and cheaper for people to request information from government.
Second was the Gov 2.0 Taskforce Final Report: Engage, which recommended managing public sector information as a national resource, releasing most of it for free and in ways that promoted reuse in innovative ways.
Third is the report released yesterday by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, Ahead of the Game: Blueprint for the Reform of Australian Government Administration. The report recommended that Departments should create more open government, with one of the detailed sub-recommendations being,
Greater disclosure of public sector data and mechanisms to access the data so that citizens can use the data to create helpful information for all, in line with privacy and secrecy principles;The last two reports are yet to be responded to by the Australian Government, however I hope that Australian public servants at all levels are taking note.
Once is chance, twice is coincidence, but three times is a strategy.
Monday, March 29, 2010
Rating government performance online | Tweet |
Cheryl from the Victorian eGovernment Resource Centre recently brought to my attention the launch of the BrandKarma website.
The website aggregates information about top brands and allows the public to indicate whether they love, hate or want to watch them. It also allows comments and, in the best social networking style, the creation of personal profiles and 'friending' of others.
With a little more development the site will also probably support communities around brands - people who hate them and people who love them, potentially becoming a source of information and influence for others.
How is this important for government? Substitute 'brand' with 'agency' and you get a very interesting approach to rating government agencies and collecting user feedback.
It would be interesting to see how many people, for example, loved DIITR rather than hated them, and in comparison how many loved and hated DEEWR, DAFF, DHS or Defense - and why.
This type of site could make many public servants and politicians uncomfortable, just as BrandKarma is likely to make companies uncomfortable. However it also offers enormous opportunity for brands (or agencies) to engage, address their faults and, where necessary, turn community views around.
This type of internet-based public customer feedback is part of the new reality - just as PatientOpinion is now part of the UK's health landscape.
What is particularly interesting to me is whether governments will take the step of making it possible to publicly laud or complain about their agencies, or whether it will be left to the private sector - leaving government with less ability to influence.
Time will tell - but maybe not much time. It wouldn't require much modification to BrandKarma to launch GovernmentKarma.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Is internet access a human right or a privilege? | Tweet |
There is considerable international discussion at the moment over whether internet access should be recognised as a fundamental human right.
The ability of the internet to allow people to communicate, access education, jobs, participate in democratic processes and to create businesses makes it a powerful force for opportunity. It helps the poor to help themselves out of poverty and the disenfranchised to have a voice.
A growing number of countries around the world have recognised the internet as a fundamental human right. France did so in July 2009 and Finland followed in October, making access to a 1Mb connection a right as an interim step towards making 100Mb access (the proposed speed of the Australian National Broadband Network) a right by 2015. Estonia, known for its forays into internet voting, and Greece have also made internet access a right.
A recent BBC survey of 27,000 people across 26 countries found that 79% of people agreed that internet access should be a human right. An even higher 85% of Australian respondents believed that internet access should be a right and 87% of Chinese respondents held the same view.
The United Nations is also moving slowly towards have internet access declared a universal human right.
Australia hasn't yet made any formal declaration about internet access, but has enshrined in law phone access as a legal right, through the Universal Service Obligation. I've not yet found indications of discussions by Australian governments or courts over whether internet access should also be singled out as a legal right.
So with all these steps occurring internationally, where is the opposition to declaring internet access as a human right?
A number of states around the world are already or are considering restricting internet access through universal censorship or means such as licensing individual internet users. Some states have even shut-down access to entire internet services or arrested bloggers and online commentators in attempts to control access to information and debate.
Commercial interests in a number of countries are pushing for laws that would allow them to require ISPs to cut internet access from households they suspect of information piracy without recourse to existing legal processes.
These approaches could oppose the concept of internet access as a fundamental human right as they may lead to situations where people are denied access to some legitimate online information (mistakenly or deliberately censored) - or could be permanently denied access to the internet altogether.
Both stem from a view of the internet as being primarily a news and entertainment medium without considering the broader uses of the internet as a communications and service delivery medium.
Telephone access is considered a fundamental right in many countries and few filter or block phone conversations based on content (though they may monitor conversations as a law enforcement activity). Telecommunications providers are not generally held responsible for the conversations of their customers and are not usually required to cut access to subscribers if they discuss or conduct illegal activities by phone.
Cutting people off from internet access permanently in response to illegal activity could easily become a life sentence to poverty. These people would be unable to enjoy the same access to services, information and communication as the rest of society, potentially leading to further criminal activity or permanent underprivilege.
The challenge for countries is how to successfully walk the path between open internet access and regulation of illegal material. Making internet access some form of legal or fundamental human right, while still ensuring that copyright owners' rights are respected and illegal online activity can be addressed and contained. Punishing wrong doers, without establishing an underprivileged class.
It will be interesting to see how different nations attempt to solve this over time.
Wednesday, March 03, 2010
Where's the payoff? Convincing citizens to engage with government | Tweet |
Governments regularly hold consultations with their public - asking them for their views on matters as widespread as tax reform, copyright, health, culture and city planning.
Whether these consultations are held through public events, print notices, online via email or social media engagement there's one constant that governments rely on - that people are willing to provide their views freely to government.
In some ways this might seem a no-brainer. A government is making a decision that will affect you - therefore you have an interest in responding.
However it is never as simple as that. It takes time (our scarcest resource) to respond to a Government consultation. Often, when there are specific forms to complete, processes to follow and events to attend, it can take a LOT of time.
Also the audience needs to feel that they will be listened to. One of the more interesting consultations I participated in last year was by the ACT government who asked a question around how they consulted. A frequently expressed view was that many people felt no incentive to participate in government consultations because their views would be ignored. Why waste time responding if you don't feel your views will make any difference.
Even harder to justify are peoples' participation in engagements where the public is providing a service to government (or other organisations) for no direct payment. An example is the National Library's Historic Newspaper Archive, where people are able to make corrections to the text of newspapers where the scanning process didn't capture the words correctly.
Another example would be Wikipedia. While it is not government, it would not exist without the dedication of tens of thousands of volunteers.
So what's the secret to encouraging greater engagement by citizens in consultations and similar 'you tell us' initiatives by government?
The answer is simple. Value given for value received.
Most people want feedback to tell them that they have been heard. This doesn't need to be (and preferably isn't) a form letter from a Minister's office or Department - or even a personal note. It can simply be notifying them when their input is published and giving them the tools to watch their contribution travel through set stages during a consultation process - received, moderated, published, considered - just as they can now watch their parcels travel from a foreign country to their doorstep.
What could also be done is to provide public recognition (a leader board) for top contributors - people who consistently provide good input on multiple consultations, or spend the time to do the work in services like the National Library's Historic Newspaper Archive does.
Finally, a consideration that is worthwhile considering when a community is providing a substitute for a valuable service (such as the design of a website, development of a mash-up application or the translation of a document) is dollars. Cold hard cash in compensation for someone's hours of hard work. This can be hard to organise in government due to procurement procedures and other practices designed to promote transparency and consistency but not designed to provide flexibility around crowd sourcing goods or services.
As governments move to implement more digitally managed consultations and engagements it is increasingly easy to support front-end consultation sites with end-to-end consultation tracking and contribution leader boards. It even becomes possible to have departmental or cross-government leader boards, which would also provide interesting insights regarding which individuals and organisations respond to many consultations.
However to cost-effectively put these mechanisms in place organisations need to look beyond the immediate needs of a single consultation and consider their overall consultation and engagement needs over three years or more.
When we begin to see governments taking this step we'll be on the verge of seeing some very innovative Gov 2.0 processes for community engagement - and increasing engagement levels as the community feels more heard, valued and in control of their own contributions.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Digital outlook for 2010 | Tweet |
The Society for Digital Agencies (SODA) has released its Digital Outlook for 2010.
This is a great read and provides insight into the thinking and activity around the digital space from a global perspective.
Note that they are having an event in Sydney this Friday (Media 2010, Introducing the next media decade), which I am hoping will be extensively tweeted and liveblogged.
Wednesday, February 03, 2010
South Australian Premier vows to repeal internet censorship over election comments | Tweet |
As a follow-up from my post yesterday,South Australia bans anonymous election comments online, South Australia Premier Mike Rann has twittered that the South Australian government has decided to repeal the January 6 amendment to the state's Electoral Act which made it illegal to publish anonymous comments online during an election campaign.
Reported in a post in Ars Technica, Internet uprising overturns Australian censorship law (which is an excellent read), South Australian Attorney-General Michael Atkinson sent a statement yesterday to AdelaideNow, where many citizens were protesting the new law, stating that,
"From the feedback we've received through AdelaideNow, the blogging generation believes that the law supported by all MPs and all political parties is unduly restrictive. I have listened. I will immediately after the election move to repeal the law retrospectively... It may be humiliating for me, but that's politics in a democracy and I'll take my lumps."Note that I assume this statement is based on the assumption that the present South Australian government is re-elected. If another party wins power, the law may stand.
Australian online pundits are labelling this a victory for democracy over censorship and I expect to see the example of South Australian's decision used by opponents to the Australian federal government's planned mandatory internet filter.
I've included the key tweets from Premier Rann's validated twitter account below...
Google to end support for Internet Explorer 6 during 2010 | Tweet |
Google has announced that it will progressively end support for Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 during 2010 - beginning with Google Docs and Sites in March. Youtube, another Google company, is also phasing out support.
Announced in the Google Enterprise blog post last week, Modern browsers for modern applications, Google Apps Senior Product Manager, Rajen Sheth, said that the web had evolved in the last ten years from simple text pages to rich interactive applications and that very old web browsers cannot run these new features effectively.
This approach isn't limited to Google. A number of companies have already dropped support for Internet Explorer 6.0 in their online applications and more, including Facebook and Digg, plan to drop it in the near future.
Microsoft (up to CEO level) have also advocated dropping the IE6 web browser for their latest version, Internet Explorer 8.
Nick Hodge, a Microsoft staff member, has commented on this post that Microsoft is also progressively dropping IE6 support, saying that Microsoft has,
dropped support for IE6 in Sharepoint 2010 and the forthcoming web versions of Word, Excel, Powerpoint and OneNote 2010; plus live@edu and other web properties.END EDIT
However, to support its customers, as there are a number of major corporations still tied to the ageing browser, Microsoft recently extended support for IE6 until April 2014, when all support for Windows XP ends.
Given the recent severe security issues reported with IE6 and the increasing proportion of the internet unavailable to those using the 2001 vintage web browser, I hope to see the remaining organisations migrating away from the browser in the near future.
It is estimated that only 20% of web users - predominantly workers in large organisations - still use IE6, however up to 50% of Chinese internet users are still on the web browser.
Reportedly Microsoft's Internet Explorer web browser has been losing market share at least 2004, when it reached 90% of the market. According to Wikipedia's Usage share of web browsers article, it is now estimated (through tracking subsets of internet users) that only about 60% of internet users are on one of the Internet Explorer variants, with Firefox 3.5 having overtaken IE8 as the most popular browser by version.
Some commentators expect to see Microsoft's share of the web browser market fall below 50% by mid-2011.
Tuesday, February 02, 2010
South Australia bans anonymous election comments online | Tweet |
I've been alerted by CloCkWeRX in a comment in my post, Australian Labor Party launches social media website, that the South Australian government has passed a law banning anonymous online comments about the South Australian election.
According to the article South Australian Government gags internet debate in News.com.au,
The new law, which came into force on January 6, requires anyone making an online comment about next month's state election to publish their real name and postcode.Intended to force media outlets to police the publication of online comments in their sites in order to prevent anonymous comments or comments involving fake names, this revision to the South Australian Electoral Act potentially could be interpreted broadly across any websites hosting public comments.
This could mean the provision would apply across blogs, forums, social networks, Twitter and other online services that support public comments.
If this is the case, and the ACT is enforced across South Australian hosted sites containing public comments, this may encourage organisations to move their website hosting away from South Australia to other Australian states or overseas. It is also unclear whether or how the South Australian government would enforce the Act across other jurisdictions hosting social media websites containing public comments about the South Australian election.
It is also unclear how the law applies to online opinions posted by those aged under 18 years old, who might still have an interest or school assignment involving state politics. There could be privacy issues in having a state government government force minors to publicly publish their real full name and postcode when commenting on electoral issues during election periods.
Privacy and security issues may also apply for people in witness protection programs, who would avoid using their real name and postcode on online comments to avoid detection by criminals.
Whilst not a lawyer, it appears to me that this amendment will be very difficult to enforce - a view shared by the South Australian Attorney-General, Michael Atkinson, who is responsible for overseeing state laws.
Mr Atkinson is known for his opposition to a national 'R' rating for computer games, despite the average age of Australian gamers being over 30 and 'R' rated movies being legal in Australia. He was also involved in a recent South Australian law which prohibits the display of promotional material for 'R' rated movies in areas children may enter. My understanding is that this ban is despite whether the promotional material itself portrays 'R' rated images.
Quoting the AdelaideNow article, Outrage as Rann Government, Opposition unite to gag internet election debate,
In a press conference today, Mr Atkinson said the law was "all about honesty''.As none of the news articles actually quote the relevant section of the South Australian Electoral Act, you can find it at the Electoral Act page in the South Australian Legislation. Refer to Section 116.
He conceded it would be difficult to police but the most "egregious and outrageous'' breaches of the new laws would be identified.
I apologise for not published the relevant section of the Act here in my blog, I am currently unclear on whether this would be considered a breach of copyright.
Friday, January 29, 2010
Don't forget to complete Whirlpool's National Broadband Survey (by 31 January) | Tweet |
Whirlpool's survey is one of the few surveys that provides a comprehensive view of internet usage in Australia. I've used the results that are published (freely) from the survey for a number of years to develop strategies for audiences, both within the public and private sector.
However to keep its value, people have to complete it.
It's open until 31 January at: http://whirlpool.net.au/survey/
Results will be available sometime in February.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Get your entry ready for the Australian Excellence in e-Government Awards (from AGIMO) | Tweet |
AGIMO's Excellence in e-Government Awards are on again for 2010, with nominations opening on 1 February (and closing 1 March).
This year the categories have been revised. There are now five project specific Awards plus a team or individual Award for outstanding achievement in an Information Technology area within the Australian Federal Public Service.
Details of the e-Awards are available at AGIMO's section in the Department of Finance's website.
While nomination forms are not yet available, if you're considering entering the awards you may wish to get a head start in understand the project specific criteria.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
