Web 2.0 Continues to Challenge Government, Even as Departments Try It Out

The State Department has begun operating what it calls “21st Century Statecraft,” said Alec Ross, senior adviser for innovation to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The four currents are government-to-government, government-to-people, people-to-government and people-to-people, he said. He cited a Swat Valley refugee fundraising effort as an example of the administration moving at Internet speed and using the power of ordinary people to connect with people overseas. The U.S. is giving $110 million to aid Pakistani refugees fleeing fighting in the Swat Valley. It also announced an initiative to raise money from regular citizens, who can text “SWAT” to 20222 and donate $5 to the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. That idea, raised on a Thursday and announced the following Tuesday, “already promises to be a success,” he said.

Using crowdsourcing to find individuals affected by the crisis and highlighting their story could be an effective way to “push a message,” O'Reilly said, using Ross’ term. Ross agreed, but said the department isn’t there yet. Faiz Shakir, research director for ThinkProgress.org at the Center for American Progress Action Fund, said it would be great to see government sites whose mission is to inform and educate the public about their point of view and “break news” on their own sites, as the president did with his Nowruz address to the Iranian people.

Ross didn’t appear worried that government messages might veer into propaganda. There will always be a certain segment of society that regards with skepticism what government does and will question motives, he said. The best response, he said, is to do the right thing and build global trust based on actions. Another point, said O'Reilly, is that the government doesn’t have control of the media as is the case in other nations’ regimes.

The government doesn’t necessarily control low-level agency bloggers, either, and that’s caused hesitation among agencies to join the Web 2.0 world. In one of his papers, Swire pointed out that during the campaign, a North Korea expert might be readily available to give the campaign’s views. With Obama now in office, the North Korea expert might be quite busy with North Korea, and as questions come in to interactive White House Web sites about Korea, low- level bloggers could be left to their best judgment. That, he said, could have serious repercussions if the blogger misspoke and North Korea didn’t like the posted answer. “Saying words back is scary,” he said, noting that the current White House Web site doesn’t do much talking back. Shakir said in such cases, it must be clear that a blogger doesn’t speak with the authority of the president or the secretary of the department. Yet individuals within the federal government must be allowed to act as individuals, O'Reilly said. The government will never be successful with social media if it doesn’t recognize this, he said. “It is not a broadcast medium with an official point of view,” he said. And there would probably be different rules for different contexts, such as the military, he said.

In addition to interacting with the world through Web 2.0, the State Department can also encourage growth of Web 2.0 with aid. Ross, co-founder of One Economy, said “this is a personal priority of mine.” The department will think of how it can use aid to promote ubiquitous access, while also recognizing it can’t wait for ubiquitous access to get out there, he said. O'Reilly suggested the conversation is turning to strategic investments that can be made in technology rather than focusing solely on broadband infrastructure, which he said might be akin to the infamous “bridge to nowhere” in Alaska. With smartphones emerging as the technology of choice in developing countries, connecting every village to broadband “may in fact not be the point,” he said.