Investigating social media and public policy
Some time ago, I started a dialog with some University of Ottawa Technology Law folks about social media and public policy. I’m curious why it is so hard for government departments and public servants to adopt social media to build bridges with the country, and for those who do, why they have so much trouble being able to speak freely. After all, people can say whatever they want at parties and social gatherings. Why is it such a stretch to overcome the perceptions and fears of the online community?
Do you have thoughts, information or experiences on social media and public policy? If so, please contact me. I’d like to have as much background information as possible before arranging a round table session with key players and legal experts on the subject.
April 23rd, 2007 at 9:48 am
I have worked for the Federal and Provincial governments. My last gig before retiring was with section servicing small business. Here it was our job to communicate with the public.
The actual front line work was done by a call centre franchise. The very thought of dealing person to person with the public was a cause for fear and consternation from the actual public servants. It was the governments job to tell people how and what to do. It was a one way street from us to them. Now the advice and information was usually good and that is to the government’s credit.
Now there is some sound reasoning here. No one wanted to go on record as having said this or that without its having gone through levels of approval.
A good example of this is the kind of letter in response to a query by a member of the public. These letters were called Ministerials. The approximate path of such a letter is this. Joe Public writes a letter to his Minister. It is received and read by his secretary/staff members. They decide who’s desk it should land on for reply. Typically this is the lowest level of responsibility in the relevant province. The Regional Officer who’s desk it lands on composes a reply. It is proof read and adjusted by secretarial staff and bumps up the regional chain of command until it is approved by the regional execs secretary who then forwards it to H.Q. for further approval. The letter must meet certain standards and guidelines which are rigidly adhered to. Once the letter has moved up the ladder far enough it may be 1) sent back for further revision or 2) approved. The Ministerial reply letter once finalized is then sent to Joe Public. It has often become so bland by this time that it is virtually meaningless. It should be noted, however, that everybody’s posterior has been amply covered and that is the real purpose of the Ministerial reply.
I wonder if this process can be adequately converted to online communication :)
April 26th, 2007 at 4:03 pm
[…] Investigating social media and public policy […]
April 28th, 2007 at 6:05 pm
I totally agree with Sonia. I am currently on leave from my job in the provincial government. Everything goes through so many levels of approval. I work in HR and I always had to be very careful about what I was allowed to say to the public.