Social Media and the Public Service

Part 1: Introduction to Social Media

Part 2: Discussion on Social Media

By Hugues H. Lhérisson, March 2010

Social Media and the Public Service

Part 1: Introduction to Social Media

Suggested Format: 45-60 minutes

Background

All governments are being asked to accomplish more within shorter time frames and smaller budgets. (…)  I believe that Web 2.0 tools are part of the solution. Wayne G. Wouters, Clerk of the Privy Council of the Government of Canada.

With funding provided by 23 different departments /agencies, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada commissioned Phoenix SPI to undertake research related to new technologies and their potential use for Government of Canada communications.

Source: GCPedia (http://www.gcpedia.gc.ca)

Objectives

Raise Awareness about SM

Explore Possibilities for

the Public Service

Provide a Forum for Discussion

on SM

Social Media and Me

Initiate more than 3000 people to the Internet (1999-2001) Increase Technology Literacy Narrow the Technology Gap between Old/Young,

North/South, Poor/Rich, City/Country, Small Organizations/Large Organizations

Internet and Outreach (2000-2006) E-Organizations, E-NGOs

Social Media Management Trainee Program Phase II Natural Resources Canada: Pioneer and leader in

Gov. 2.0

What is Social Media

What is Social Media

Man (Person) of the Year1927: Charles Lindbergh

2006: You = Social Media

1982: The Computer

(concept invented by

O’Reilly Media in 2004)

                                                                                                                       

What is Social Media

Most common Social Media

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               

Supporting Elements

                                                                                                                                

Play- “Cloud Computing Explained” -Youtube

AdvertisingTeaching

Sharing Art: i.e. music, short films.

Entertaining Sharing recipes, practices, how-to, etc.

Play- “OECD: For a Better World Economy”

on YoutubePlay- “Qualitative vs Quantitative

Research” on Youtube

                                                                           

Keeping in touchNetworking

Sharing NewsCommunicating

Research

Your Library

Learning community

Some Practices

NRCan WIKI, GCPedia, AAFC wiki Prime Minister Office: Youtube, Facebook Government Channels on Youtube:

By Department By State By Issue: H1N1 Videos

One Web 2.0 window: Environment Canada NRCan Library on Delicious NRCan on Twitter

Social Media and Canada Public Service

Part 2: Discussion on Social Media

Format: 45-60 minutes

Objectives

How Social Media is

changing our organizations

Explore Challenges and Opportunities for

the Public Service

Social Media and the

Public Service

Play and discuss presentation by Clay Shirky

“Institution vs Collaboration” on

Study: Government of Canada

Institutional Barriers Many government agencies do not view their website as a core business function. Perception that it is an unproductive way for government

employees to use their time Web 2.0 is a rapidly-evolving platform/policy-making is a time-

consuming process Focus on what cannot be done with Web 2.0, rather

than what can be done in a government environment. Hierarchical organization of government

Technological Issues Outdated technology and limited bandwidth Web 2.0 technologies often do not have the same

management and security capabilities as more traditional enterprise systems.

Governments should discuss about interactive, accessible and exportable content before making a decision

Study: Government of Canada

Policy and Legislative Concerns How does government maintain control over the integrity of its

data when it can be used in mash ups created by third-parties Web 2.0 applications will not protect privacy in the same way as governments. Increase type and volume of records that may be subject to

freedom-of information requests Access to free online Web 2.0 applications and tools can create

challenges for government in the area of procurement: Youtube or Google Video

Workforce Capacity Lack of trained and dedicated staff If a government department is going to have a blog, resources

are needed to provide regular content, as well as to manage and respond to reader feedback

Financial implications: adjust staffing levels/composition, provide training to some staff.

Study: European Commission

Political Impacts Power balance: Citizen and Public Servants From party line to issue-based involvement Issues about equally representation

Socio-Cultural Impacts Inclusive, horizontal, openness, informality, equality Knowledge above seniority and position Five core values: openness, expertise, informality,

community sense, and sharing Cohesion in community as opposed to organizations Growing threat to privacy

Organizational Impacts New players have entered the public arena Content creation more horizontal/bottom-up Strong control by initiating organization/people Discipline and language boundaries as opposed to

organisational and geographical boundaries Better match of demand and supply

Legal Impacts Privacy vs Openness philosophy Crowd plays an important role of collecting evidence (i.e.

short videos sent to the police in Montreal)

Study: European Commission

Future Opportunities

Transparency: enhance transparency of citizen demand and government services and processes

Citizen-centred and generated services: stimulate the accessibility and personalisation of some public services

Improvement of efficiency (cost/benefit): knowledge needed to create public value can be built up efficiently

Study: European Commission

Future Risks

Ensuring good governance principles: Privacy vs openness philosophy

Privacy infringements: highly sensitive information on social networking sites

Reliability of published information

Inclusion of all: some groups may be excluded from participation in online social network

Study: European Commission

Government of North Carolina Best Practices

Clear communication strategy:

Who is the media meant to reach? Is this my target audience?

What is the agency attempting to communicate? Can it be effectively communicated using this media?

Who is responsible for managing the agency’s account? Will this person represent the agency appropriately? Have they been properly trained in the use of social media?

What are the agency’s responsibilities regarding collection and records retention including preservation of social media content?

Government of North Carolina Best Practices

Acceptable use

Separate Personal and Professional Accounts

Personal accounts to share personal, non-work related, information

Never use govt e-mail or password in personal accounts Use personal social media for family or personal

communications so long as they do not interfere with the work.

Professional communications in accordance with the communications policy, practices, and expectations

Be Clear As To Identity

Use actual name, not pseudonyms in both accounts Do not assume privacy Use different passwords for different accounts

Government of North Carolina Best Practices

Acceptable use (cont’d)

Terms of Service Any employee using a form of social media on behalf of a

state agency should consult the most current TOS in order to avoid violations.

Professional Content of Posts and Comments

Communication should include no form of profanity, obscenity, or copyright violations.

If there is any question or hesitation regarding the content of a potential comment or post, it is better not to post.

Posts and comments are public records

Government of New-York

Values sought from social media tools

Greater competitiveness in employee recruiting Enhanced access for the disabled Creation of virtual communities Instantaneous information sharing Enhanced collaboration Enhanced public safety Information dissemination and exchange “Coolness” factor: put a “human face” on their agency Improved training capabilities Documentation: common information depository available to

everyone Cost saving

Government of New-York

Social media issues and concerns ranked by participants

Resources Legal and regulatory ramifications Governance Making a business case (How to sell web 2.0 to higher-level) Security Accessibility Perception “too cool for government” Information overload

Government of Australia

Central recommendation: A declaration of open government by the Australian Government

Help achieve a more consultative, participatory and transparent government

Public sector information is a national resource Online engagement by public servants, benefits their agencies,

their professional development, those with whom they are engaged and the Australian public

Recommendation 2: Coordinate with leadership, guidance and support

A lead agency should be established for advancing the Government 2.0

Engage other members of the Council of Australian Governments to work with the lead agency

Government of Australia

Recommendation 3: Improve guidance and require agencies to engage online Issue and maintain guidance to improve the extent and quality

of online engagement by agencies Australian Government should ensure that all submissions are

posted online in a form that makes them searchable, easy to comment on and reuse. The Government 2.0 lead agency should encourage those conducting inquiries to use interactive media such as blogs to publicly discuss emerging lines of thought and issues of relevance.

Recommendation 4: Encourage public servants to engage online

Recommendation 5: Awards for individual public servants and agencies

Recommendation 6: Make public sector information open, accessible and reusable

Government of Australia

Recommendation 7: Addressing issues in the operation of copyright

Recommendation 8: Information publication scheme

Recommendation 9: Accessibility

Recommendation 10: Security and Web 2.0

Recommendation 11: Privacy and confidentiality

Recommendation 12: Definition of Commonwealth Record

Recommendation 13: Encourage info-philanthropy

E-Repression or E-DemocracyClay ShirkyEvgeny Morozov

Evgeny Morozov is a Belarus-born researcher and blogger who works on the political effects of the internet. His writings have appeared in various newspapers and magazines around the world, including The Economist, Newsweek International, International Herald Tribune, Boston Review, Slate, and the San Francisco Chronicle.

Clay Shirky is an American writer, consultant and teacher on the social and economic effects of Internet technologies. He teaches New Media as an associate teacher at New York University's graduate Interactive Telecommunications Program. His columns and writings have appeared in Business 2.0, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Harvard Business Review and Wired.

Clay Shirky: Optimistic• Flash Mobs with subtle anti-gvt messages

• Protestant Revolution and Printing Press/ Iranian insurrection and Social Media

• Twitter Revolution: speed, immediacy, scope

• Shift of balance of powers from State to Citizen

• New type of participants and new ways of raising money: OBAMA election

• “Group Action Just Got Easier”

•“Ridiculously Easy Group Forming”

E-Repression or E-Democracy

E-Repression or E-DemocracyEvgeny Morozov: Pessimistic or realistic

• Government monitor Flash Mobbers, take photos and persecute participants

• A study: It is possible to predict one’s sexual orientation by analyzing info on Facebook and start harassing that person

• Crackdowns are riskier… only if the regime cares about its image

• Some protests organised on Facebook were successful, not all.

• Extremist orgs., street gangs are using Web 2.0 as well.

• De-politizing factors: gossip, pornography, trivia on Web 2.0

• Cyber-attacks: lack of consistency on whether it’s a crime

• Most activists, intellectuals, dissidents in the South don’t know Facebook, etc.

Bibliography

Australia Department of Finance and Deregulation (2009), Engage Getting on with Government 2.0: Report of the Government 2.0 Taskforce, 136 pages

Clay Shirky (2010), “The Twitter Revolution: More Than Just a Slogan”, Prospect, January 6th, 2010, Issue 166 (www.prospectmagazine.co.uk)

Evgeny Morozov (2009), “How Dictators Watch Us on the Web”, Prospect, November 18th, 2009, Issue 165, (www.prospectmagazine.co.uk)

Evgeny Morozov (2010), “Why the Internet is Failing Iran’s Activists”, Prospect, January 5th, 2010, Issue 166 (www.prospectmagazine.co.uk)

Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (2009), Public Services 2.0: The Impact of Social Computing on Public Services, European Commission, 134 pages

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources (2009), Best Practices for Social Media Usage in North Carolina, 9 pages

* Phoenix Strategic Perspectives Inc. (March 2009), Final Report- Web 2.0 and Government: Secondary Analysis, Government of Canada, 56 pages

The Research Foundation of State University of New York (2009), Exploratory Social Media Project: Phase I: Identifying benefits and concerns surrounding use of social media in government, 23 pages

All (except *) and lot more are available on http://delicious.com/hlherisson/socialmedia