The Gov 2.0 space is full of evangelists trumpeting the ability of social-media technology to make government more responsive, efficient and collaborative. But you can’t guard against the potential dangers that can come from combining social media and the business of government unless you’re willing to acknowledge the risks involved.
“Things like access and transparency sound really great, until someone’s found the location of nuclear materials, TSA manuals or a lot of Social Security numbers, thanks to your government website,” said Elizabeth Losh of the University of California, Irvine, during her presentation at this year’s Gov 2.0 Expo. During her talk, Losh explored some of the biggest mistakes government programs make when they try to put Web 2.0 strategies to work.
Here are some of the biggest mistakes Losh cautioned government employees against during her talk:
- Making promises you can’t keep. Before you respond to a user’s request, make sure you actually have the authority to follow through on everything you say. Losh cited the case of a State Department worker who said they would look into a situation involving a Chinese blogger at a Twitter user’s request — which turned out to be a sensitive matter that had to be quietly ignored.
- Losing track of what your users really care about. Government websites don’t need to provide entertainment. They don’t need to mindlessly kowtow to the latest technology trends. They just have to serve users’ needs — and what most users need from government sites is information. The best way to keep your site relevant is by designing it with your current users’ needs in mind, Losh said, instead of something you think they might want down the road.
- Soliciting user content — and then forgetting about it. If you’re going to ask people to share information, you have to put it to work. Otherwise, “it encourages people to becomes cynical about user-generated content and the government’s relationship to it,” she said.
- Assuming everyone is going to be friendly. Hackers are going to be a problem, but so are trolls who just want attention and conspiracy theorists who are going to see hidden messages in everything you post online. You need to prepared to handle all of those eventualities, she said. At the same time, you can’t let those concerns make you deaf to citizen complaints — even if don’t like the way those complaints are being made.
- Confusing .gov with .com. The social-media sphere is dominated by corporate branding, but its worth remembering that social networks are striking up relationships with their users — and those users’ information — that may not be appropriate in a government space, she said. Don’t get caught up in trying to craft an elaborate brand experience that gets away from your agency’s mission. “This is the government. It’s not a brand,” she said.
Do you agree with Losh’s concerns? What other Gov 2.0 pitfalls do government institutions face? How can government agencies address these challenges?
Image credit: alengo, via iStockphoto
Twitter
Facebook
Linkedin
RSS
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by youredgeonline, Lis Duarte, RT17, Santi Chacon, Ana Hoffman and others. Ana Hoffman said: Are you prepared for the pitfalls of Gov 2.0?: The Gov 2.0 space is full of evangelists trumpeting the ability of … http://bit.ly/cNYYsq [...]
I don't agree with this statement, “This is the government. It’s not a brand,” Losh overly generalizes with her comparison to the Gap and Calvin Klein, she should have instead cited "messaging" rather than "branding". You don't want to push across that your Gov/Mil org is sexy or teeny-bopper.
I think the bullet is correct in stating there are very significant differences in the focus of a .com versus a .gov/.mil but each agency and organization definitely should build a valuable brand for working with their customers. A brand is just as important and as effective in the government space for communicating effectively, the quantifiable metrics on investment return are different but how brands are leveraged and applied are the same. Gov/Mil orgs have complex missions, diverse audiences and branding is useful to motivating action and change.
I think you're making some very important distinctions there, esp. about the Gap comparison being too broad — but I liked that she took the time to remind people that the government is different that the commercial sector. I've seen way too many snake oil salesmen try to convince .gov/.mil types that they need to be emulating some flavor of the month Web 2.0 campaign, instead of blazing their own trail. Government is different. And that's OK.
Why was my comment deleted??
Sorry Anthony–I didn't mean to delete your comment…I am having some trouble with WordPress this morning. We appreciate your comments!
Thanks!
Hello – great article -Hello – great article -
I would mention though that this covers only one dimension of Gov 2.0, and I would argue one of the most complicated, which is collaborative Government (Gov to Citizen). There are plenty of examples of agencies around the work doing this poorly – largely driven by the fact that citizens come up with ideas all the time and Government is an institution that takes a long time to change.
When thinking Gov 2.0, there are plenty of interesting examples of Open Data, Collaborative Government (Gov to Gov and Gov to Employee), and others. We have a few great case studies on this page: http://www.newsgator.com/industries/government-mi… -
Thank you again for the article – I love "Soliciting user content — and then forgetting about it"
A good article on potential pitfalls that also provides a distinction between two camps of Gov 20: Data and Dialog. Ms. Losh addresses mostly the flow and process of information a/k/a content, and in this case data. If you remove the online references, this is a good "how to" for govt employees interacting with the public in an offline experience as well Yes, online does take it to a new level, but the basics remain the same. We focus a lot on data, e.g., "… what most users need from government sites is information."
Hi.
I agree with Losh (for the most part). I might add one other mistake project managers make when pushing their 'social' project through government bureaucracy is over estimating potential use. There are only a limited number of use cases for social in African democracies. In Africa, Internet penetration is high in cities and dismal in rural areas where the majority of the people still live. It is likely that only a small number of connected people who have social media profiles would reach out to government via these channels. I am of course only looking at the Gov2Citizen side of Gov 2.0 that is service oriented. There are crowdsourcing use cases that are easy to deploy and invaluable (check out ushahidi.com).
Should governments then spend tons of cash on these social 'outposts' and collab environments?
I wonder…
[...] http://smartblogs.com/socialmedia/2010/08/09/are-you-prepared-for-the-pitfalls-of-gov-2-0/ useful tips esp for local gov (tags: government gov20 tips problems) [...]
Meet your new fashion staple: theherve leger dress. If you’ve been craving flowy summer dresses during the hot vacation, but your place of fashion has a strict dress code – go for aherve leger dress. The style is buttoned-up from the waist up, but still comfortable and cool below the belt. Try herve leger dress or any of the other great styles from our hand-picked guide.Check out more of our expert-picked, reader approved guides for summer must-haves, such as the best sweat fighters, one-piece swimsuits, and summer dresses.MOre and more herve leger dress is waitting for you on our herve leger sale online shop.Just come and searching foe something you may like!