Summarise the use of Wiki drafts of papers for public discussion and Twitter in Government.
The government has just as much right to use Web 2 tools as any teenager. It just needs to learn how. The writing on http://gov2.net.au/ is very informative and I like the way they have picked up the use of hyperlinking to the various wiki platforms to add information and credibility to the discussion. The blog posts were all very supportive and offered the possibility of real forward movement in this enormous topic. I found the ideas put forward by David Eaves at http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=167627754521&ref=mf and the piece on Inquiry 2.0 at http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=160433599521&ref=mf to be the most interesting.
Oddly, I found the Facebook version of the information more accessible and easy to use. The summaries of the pieces were better presented and it was easier to get around the various topics. Or it may have been the less officious tone of the site.....
Having the Twitter posts at http://gov2.net.au/ did not work at all. Obviously some very fashion conscious people picked up on the funkiness of "Gov 2.0" and inserted it into their Tweets with gay abandon. One of the Tweets somehow made the connection between Gov 2.0 and looking for an audio product to use for recording oral histories. Because they'd dropped the 'Gov 2.0' word, it ended up on the Gov 2.0 site.
I just hope Britany Spears does not mention Gov 2.0 in her Tweets otherwise she'll find herself on the site. I thought the Tweets completely devalued the discussion.
Did you see yourself as a supporter of Government 2.0? If so how did you benefit? If not then explain why. Consider the Gov 2.0 taskforce site at http://gov2.net.au/ and the conference at http://www.gov2.com.au/
This is very difficult question. Part of me says 'What are we paying them for?" I don't ask government to do my job - why should I do theirs. I can see how Web 2 could revolutionise the way the public service operates (God knows the various ministries need better ways to communicate) but I don't know whether I have the time to get too involved in contributing to a debate on anything - I'm too busy with my own life.
But putting my crippling prejudice aside for a minute, I would like shorter lines between the citizenry and the rulers. In some cases (those that impact on me directly) I would like to contribute to a debate. For instance: I'd like to know why my father was arrested by ASIO in 1968 and released a week later without a coherent explanation, I'd like to know why both state and federal governments routinely use IBM and Microsoft products and services instead of supporti
ng the AUSTRALIAN IT industry, I'd like to know roughly how much money it takes to keep soldiers in Iraq when we can't afford to provide enough beds for sick people in our hospitals - but if I could post my thoughts to the Gov 2.0 blog, would anyone care?
Wouldn't Gov 2.o just be a wailing wall for the disenfranchised IT literates?
No comments:
Post a Comment