Apparently I offended the social media gods last night at Social Media Club DC when I made the audacious statement expressing my sincere hope that every Tom, Dick and Harry in the federal government didn’t start a blog to become more “Gov 2.0”
Some in attendance expressed disagreement. Others called me elitist.
For the record, I’m not elitist. I’m just smarter than everyone else. (Bad joke.)
But I do stand by my statement. And here is why.
Social media isn’t about technology; it is about using technology as a platform to change the way that people use media to interact with one another. Similarly, Gov 2.0 isn’t about technology; it is about sharing information and empowering the people to help government help them.
However, those uninitiated with social media, seeing the “trend” of participatory communication, all too often suffer from GMOOT — “Get Me One of Those.”
“I hear viral videos are big. Lets make one.”
“Blogging is the new pink. Build me one.”
“Everybody’s doing this Twitter thing. I want to too.”
Government takes time to change. A massive bureaucracy doesn’t shift overnight. My fear is that any mandate for government to adopt Web 2.0 communications efforts will turn into a series of GMOOTs. From every director of the division of the under-secretariat of the department of whatever.
And when that happens, and there is no PURPOSE behind the use of the technology, all you get is noise. Or, just as bad, a lot of blogs that are abandoned after a few weeks.
Participatory democracy isn’t easy. You’ve got to work for it. Reducing Gov 2.0 to “let’s build a blog!” is simplistic and naive.
I am all for government officials engaging in social media literacy. And yes, the best way to learn about the tools and the technology is to use them. But that doesn’t mean that the use should be devoid of purpose and strategy — especially if you are a government employee playing with these toys on the taxpayer’s dime.
So what is the solution? Resist the urge to create a blog just because you can. Consult with people who have experience with social media. Talk about organizational goals and objectives and then decide if/how/what kind of social media is right for your communications program. And, just as important, talk about how you will measure the Gov 2.0 program’s effectiveness and identify benchmarks for determining success.
And last, be leery of anyone whose knee-jerk reaction to implemting a social media program in government is “let’s do a blog!”
Great post! I agree. A blog should be a means to an end, not an end in and of itself.
That said, sometimes creating a blog/twitter/etc because the boss’s daughter told him it would be a good idea can be an effective way to move your organization/dept into the social media world.
Thanks, Noah.
True. Doing is a great way to learn. But social media can’t just be about doing — it must also be about listening.
I’d recommend people start by finding blogs that interest them and following the conversations there. It is a great way to begin to immerse yourself in the way social media operate.
Is there any folly in observing/listening first?
Amen, brother. People seem to rush to lump nuanced concepts like risk and responsibility in with pejoratives like fear and luddite, without really considering the steps needed to move an organization – especially if a new tool is to be used effectively (for the public and the organization)
Steve,
First off… good meeting you.
Secondly, I think I was the one who disagreed the most — and I just think you are at a different place then most of government. Most agencies are at a place where a blog is an enormous step in moving toward collaboration — in the step toward sharing of information — in the step toward understand that, in fact, information is powerful, but that it is more powerful when it is shared… and, in fact, that the people who share information are more powerful then the people who don’t.
This is a revolutionary change for government, which has traditionally operated in the mind set that information is power and that therefore you DON’T share it.
And I agree — listening is essential. But it seem to me that one of the really wonderful part of the tools out there these days is that you can try things that have potential benefit — yet carry almost no cost.
Again — I think you’re at a different place in the adoption curve — you get it. My guess is that you don’t get people who don’t get it. Sharing information is part of your DNA. That is not the case for agencies. They need to learn — and many are learning by watching others, but, in the end, they will only truly learn by doing.
My two cents.
Good to be there with you last night.
cjd
Thanks, Chris, and likewise great to meet you. Definitely walked away that evening impressed. The really thoughtful and insightful responses you gave yesterday are definitely what is needed to move the conversation forward. (Also love the lowercase monogram signature).
You are right: I am at a different place in the adoption curve than most in government. And yes, I probably benefited from being able to explore and play with social media at a time when the word “blog” wasn’t part of common vocabulary.
But I have two challenges to your argument:
First, what do you mean by “cost”? Yes, government can use open source platforms to blog, share video, disseminate photos, etc., and these carry almost no financial cost. But the blogosphere can be an unforgiving place that carries significant opportunity costs, namely in terms of depreciated trust. Online voices are quick to tear others down, especially when the targets are large/powerful/influential (eg: Wal-Mart, Dell and Microsoft to name a few). Jumping head first into the blogosphere to make very public mistakes may either decrease trust in our public institutions, as if government wasn’t already facing a deficit of trust. Or, it may cause government to retreat, setting back the cause of social media adoption.
Second, the can ought never be confused with the should. Just because every government can create a blog doesn’t mean that that blog helps support the organizational strategy, the communications approach or the needs of the principals in government.
Starting a blog is a tactic. And making the decision to launch one without considering its place amongst the goals and strategies of an organization is myopic.
Thanks for your thoughts.
I just keep thinking about the woman who gets the security clearances in order for our contracting team. She never answers her phone, generally talks down to us (I’ve been called an intern to my face and told I needed to be baby-sat behind my back), and takes a month before our new hires can come on-site (to be fair, I don’t think that’s all her fault, and she is generally a funny person, but still).
I could never picture her having a blog. It really wouldn’t make her job any easier. Unless us commenting and helping link her around gets us building passes faster, heh.
I think your point is correct, Steve, but was just put in a snarky way 😉 Strategy should always be first. There’s no doubt that there are a zillion new tools out there – many are social in nature – that could help many GS peeps do their job speedier. But picking “blog” out of thin air as that tool is definitely not the answer.
How can we help everyone find the tools that are best for them?
Steve,
First, I love your blog. I’ve been reading it since I joined the Army.mil team in October and it was so great meeting you in person and connecting the two.
Regarding my tweet, “@fieldsteven doesn’t think every single gov head should have blogs. Ok, but WHY not? #smcdc,” it wasn’t out of disagreement, it was out of curiosity. The panel was very lively and you never actually explained (or didn’t get the chance to) why you thought it was a bad idea for every government employee to have a blog (which I heard/interpreted as “government official or leader”).
That being said, I wholeheartedly agree with your statement:
“I am all for government officials engaging in social media literacy. And yes, the best way to learn about the tools and the technology is to use them. But that doesn’t mean that the use should be devoid of purpose and strategy.”
If there is no value in their blog and they’re suffering from GMOOT, then by all means, please refrain from adding to the already massive cyber clutter.
What I’d like to see:
Leaders (not the lady who processes contracts) blogging to keep the the public informed and connected with their goals and or mission. A good example of this is the Coast Guard’s Commandant. He blogs very frequently and the topics are relevant and current (he even blogs from his Treo (signified by post signed: ADM A).
By doing this, he’s keeping the public and his sailors informed of the leaderships’ goals and vision. Personally, I believe this flattens the hierarchy of communication. Sailors don’t have to read an official memo to know what the Commandant is thinking, they can read his blog and engage in conversation with him by leaving comments, etc. Check out his blog here: http://www.uscg.mil/comdt/blog/
It is my hope that more government leaders will embrace social media like this. Anyways, I thought you were great on the panel and I look forward to seeing you at more events around town.
Meghan 🙂
twitter.com/MeghanKathleen
Blogs are really not the most effective way to engage anymore. I think folks on the frontline know this. It’s about engaging people. That often means joining social networks, listening, talking, reading top voices. Only then can you get strategy… A blog is a tactic underneath a strategy…
As you said it, “that doesn’t mean that the use should be devoid of purpose and strategy — especially if you are a government employee playing with these toys on the taxpayer’s dime.”
Steve, it was great to participate in SMC-DC the other night and hear the great ideas you, Chris, and Mark had to offer.
I tend to fall into the “disagree” camp regarding this issue…sort of. I think it’s an essential first step to identify whether we’re talking about “web 2.0” or “enterprise 2.0” environment for launching a blog. If W2.0, then yes, I couldn’t agree more. The decisions made during the strategy process – how will the blog be used? how often it will be updated? what do you want to accomplish through it? – would probably kill the idea of a W2.0 blog. Get those leaders started on reading blogs (like yours) and subscribing via RSS. That will help them “get their feet wet” to understand this new media.
Blogging within an enterprise 2.0 platform, however, is fundamentally different. You’re not communicating with the public, but with “your people” – the folks supporting you, your vision; it’s that leader’s responsibility to continually connect with them and stoke the fire. In this environment, starting a blog to experiment with this new form of communication – even if it doesn’t last – is fine. As a social software instructor for the government, I encourage all of my students – which sometimes includes managers and other senior-level individuals – to “launch” their blog during class. Often, this results in one to two posts of forgettable content. Occasionally, it results in a fantastic new blogger. In my opinion, it’s worth this latter result to filter past all of the abandoned attempts since the natural technological filters will effectively obscure the chaff.
@meghankathleen: Thanks for the clarification! I wasn’t picking on you; I saw your tweet during the event, and figured it was an easy link to make in my blog post. I love your analysis, and I think you (and @Adam Roades as well) make a good argument — Blogs CAN be a good internal communications tool, to help leaders get out the message to their people.
But in both of your thoughtful comments, you actually prove my point — you shouldn’t create a blog just because you can. There should be a reason. Employee communications is a great reason. There are others as well.
But “everyone in government is doing it” is not.
Piling on to what Adam states above. In order for a blog to be effective, it needs to be regular and contain messages that others need to read. That means that when a leader blogs once in a blue moon, that’s not a very effective way to drive traffic to his/her site.
Your digital exhaust needs to have a longer tail in order to really reach your people.
If your point, Steve, is government EMPLOYEES should not necessarily have blogs, I agree with you. But to Chris’ point, government AGENCIES and OFFICES should have blogs.
I also disagree with Geoff that blogs ineffective in engagement, for if that was true, he wouldn’t be blogging anymore.
Ari, why should they have blogs? My point is that a creating a blog devoid of communication strategy is a problem. Blogs aren’t a catch-all solution.
Should every agency have a blog? And how far down in an agency do you drill? Take the DOJ for example. The department has 59 agencies and offices. And that i just at the top level. And that doesn’t include the offices of each of the U.S. attorneys in each state.
Or the USDA for example. That department alone has seventeen agencies.
Gov 2.0 is supposed to make government more connected to and meaningful for people. And it is supposed to help people understand government too.
I don’t think an avalanche of 10,000 blogs (simply because they can create them) is the best way to bring about those ends.
Of course every agency shouldn’t have a blog.
But let me ask you this: Out of those 59 DOJ agencies, how many publish a newsletter or distribute an email listserv to non-DOJ employees? How many non-blog forms of online/offline media do the agencies manage?
If any of them write anything constructive, then why not have a blog, too? If Google (or any other search engine) is viewed as “the machine,” then where’s the harm in adding fuel so if I go looking for lubricating ideas, I can find it?
Ari, I think we just have a philosophical disagreement.
You are approaching government communications from the “why not” standpoint. The default is to do because you can, unless you can prove that you shouldn’t.
My position is to always ask “why” before doing it. You should only take action if there is purpose behind it. This makes communication more strategic and supportive of organizational objectives, rather than haphazard.
It is ESPECIALLY important to consider the communications “why” rather than the “why not” when taxpayers are funding that communication.
We’re on the same philosophy, Steve, just a different way to go about it.
Two of the DOJ agencies are the FBI and the BOP. Let’s look at those.
Starting with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, look at this press release at http://littlerock.fbi.gov/pressrel/2009/lr010409.htm and then look at the Coast Guard Journal at http://www.uscg.mil/cgjournal. Wouldn’t you agree with me that the Coast Guard’s “blog” (albeit without comments, though including links for Youtube, etc., as applicable) is more engaging than the FBI’s press releases? What if the releases were in the form of a blog and what if the content was less matter-of-fact and more personable?
That’s a why not for the FBI.
Next, switch to the federal Bureau of Prisons at http://bop.gov and see how quote-unquote Government 1.0 that site is. Wouldn’t you agree with me to want a blog that was either written from the HQ or rotated among the various facilities? For all we know, there may be BOP employees who have personal blogs and would be more than willing to be their facility’s liaison on a BOP blog.
Again, why not?
Steve, I think Ari IS addressing the “why”. Although he says “why not” in his statement, the next question addresses the “why”.
“Google (or any other search engine) is viewed as “the machine,” then where’s the harm in adding fuel so if I go looking for lubricating ideas, I can find it?”
Basically the method by which they distribute their existing information should be able to reach a wider more focussed audience, hence a blog would help achieve this.
Jon,
I disagree with your reading of Ari’s statement. A search engine indexing the pages of a blog is an outcome. Not a reason why to do it. The language “what’s the harm in” is the epitome of the “why not” mentality.
I also think that while SEO is important, justifying blog creation with “it will help our message in Google” is a bogus claim. Research has shown (and I am sure your personal experience will validate) that 99% of people conducting a search never go past the third page. That means that of the vast number of pages on the Web, no more than 30 are seen in a given search.
There is already a ubiquity of content on the Web; if every agency had a blog, that would make the odds of a person finding your content even smaller.
ESPECIALLY if the reason for creating a blog was “why not” — ’cause those blogs are more likely to have poor content.
If you have thoughtfully found a reason for having a blog, and you think a blog will help your organizational communications objective that are tied to the agency’s goals, and realistically consider what you want to say, and devote time to good, engaging content on the blog, I am all for an agency having one. Just don’t do it because “everyone else is.”
Steve,
I still disagree. I think having a blog so you can get your content indexed IS a reason to blog.
And the goal of having the information out there in a blog is to be found when being looked for. The goal isn’t to increase awareness of that specific department but rather to have the information more readily available when being sought after.
So basically my argument is this; If they already have a newsletter or something of the sort, would it not be a more efficient means to distribute the content via blog posts? Those that were previously subscribed to the newsletter could just subscribe via email to the posts. Furthermore, anyone looking for more information about the department would have an indexed wealth of information to browse through with ease.
visit us!
newsbox.cc
newsbox.us
nbstatus.wordpress.com
NOW!
Good points, I think I will definitely subscribe! I’ll go and read some more! What do you see the future of this being?
Great blog I love it! Just wanted to say that and share with you my free Image
Hey there,
I really love your blog. Google sent me to this blog. I found very much good imformation here.
Will surely visit it again.
I have a different point of view. I think every government employee needs to blog. Because they should be doing something like the rest of society too. 🙂
What a great website,the information on the topic is relevant and very on point. Navigating the site was real easy and I will bookmark your page for future visits.
Howdy. can I quote it in my blog?