Technology for Opening Up Government

by on December 12, 2008 · 6 comments

can_openerToday’s event on “open” and “participatory” government at Google’s DC office was interesting, if inconclusive. We all agreed that making government more transparent and ready for participation by the citizenry was good. But I left not knowing what it all really means. Tech reporter Grant Gross has a good report, and here’s what I got out of it:

  • Disclosure — At a minimum, opening up government requires more disclosure. Any and all data, transcripts, reports, etc. should be put up on the web.
  • Format — Don’t just disclose, but make sure the information is formatted for ease of access and finding information. Funneling information will be really important. The spigot could pour out information, but if there’s no ability for citizens to find and understand issues that affect them, there’s only a partial benefit to being open. Opportunities for private sector here.
  • Participation — what this means, I’m still not entirely sure, but seems to be the notion that “we the people” should be more involved in government and tech can help us. It could mean regular comments from affected parties on agency and committee websites, not just the occasional responses to proposed rulemakings. However, flooding the process with “white noise” could be a problem, as could be self-selection for those who post comments (so there should be caution when gauging public opinion writ-large).

Someone on the panel mentioned mySociety, which is a nonprofit org in the UK that designed a website service called FixMyStreet. The site acts as a middleman between residents that want to report potholes and the proper authorities to fix them. This is an interesting private sector approach for using technology to help us participate at the local government level. Likewise, Jim Harper’s WashingtonWatch helps track legislation in Congress, and provides opportunities for comments.

Ultimately, no matter what technologies exist and how many private sector initiatives there are, we need buy-in from government. Technology will help, but it’ll take behavioral changes by the powers-that-be to really use and implement web 2.0 tools.  Government 2.0 will hopefully result in better decision-making and increased accountability.

SHARE: 6 comments

Braden Cox / Braden Cox formerly wrote for the TLF.

  • http://www.rentecdirect.com Mr Landlord

    Wasn't there a “google for government” post a while back. Transparency is they key word here, and I have to agree with this article, that a way to find the information is important too. Endless pages of babble doesn't do me much good when I'm siphoning through political stuff. A googlish friendly search and display engine would be nice.

  • Pingback: Posts about Web 2.0 as of December 13, 2008 | The Lessnau Lounge

  • http://enigmafoundry.wordpress.com eee_eff

    How can this subject be discussed while not mentioning wikileaks? It is a transformative idea, and levels the playingfield against both the corporate and government oppressors…

    http://wikileaks.org

  • http://blog.swarmin.com scoobee

    We need to think of ways we can participate with tech and do a better job with the task than is presently done by our governments. It doesn't have to be a more direct democracy.. but we could be looking for greater involvement to improve the effectiveness of some departments or jobs.

  • Vanessa J Gordon

    Excellent, entertaining, useful reading, Thanks !!

  • Nancy Brockington

    best article ive read today

Previous post:

Next post: