It may not be a particularly elegant solution but here is a 30-second cut and paste integration of a blog and a microblog. There will be a more elegant solution soon but this will work for now.
February 2009 Archives
A hugely popular social network angered a sizable chunk of its users last week with a unilateral change in terms of service that, in essence, said "your content and your life becomes our IP and our revenue."
It regrouped and is back with a surprisingly Web 2.0 second chance -- one in which it remembers that conversation and community is based on communication that goes both ways. In so doing, it has come face-to-face with issues that have long bedeviled governments -- transparency and openness.
With a wink and a nod to a popular Portland, OR radio station that once had a contest during which callers were given a proper name and had to decide whether the person was Dead or Canadian, it is now time to play the inaugural round of Government or Facebook:
Statement One
If government can school Facebook on the complexity of these issues (and it can), the social network is not constrained by deliberately slow bureaucratic processes in dusting themselves off after a big, public mistake and taking a second shot. Being fast is good. Being right is better. Listening and developing policy iteratively may prove to be -- in the long push -- the best.
Concluded that noted policy wonk Mark Zuckerberg after a particularly bad week for a company that quickly found its footing again in a way promises a better future, "History tells us that systems are most fairly governed when there is an open and transparent dialogue between the people who make decisions and those who are affected by them."
[More analysis of the Facebook approach to policy making is coming in the May 2009 issue of Government Technology.]
It regrouped and is back with a surprisingly Web 2.0 second chance -- one in which it remembers that conversation and community is based on communication that goes both ways. In so doing, it has come face-to-face with issues that have long bedeviled governments -- transparency and openness.
With a wink and a nod to a popular Portland, OR radio station that once had a contest during which callers were given a proper name and had to decide whether the person was Dead or Canadian, it is now time to play the inaugural round of Government or Facebook:
Statement One
1. "Forever won't work: Use of our content has to have clear limits."Statement Two
We make it clear that we can only use your content in a manner consistent with your privacy and application settings.
[ ] Government [ X ] Facebook
2. "Opt-in only: You can't just change the terms whenever you want."Statement Three
We sought to address this comment by adopting a virtual Town Hall process for providing users with notice of proposed changes and an opportunity to comment, as well as an opportunity to vote where certain thresholds are met.
[ ] Government [ X ] Facebook
3. "Write it in English: No legalese (or Latin!) please."Of course, there are not-so-subtle clues that give away the answers. But notice how the issues are similar: Whose information is it? How long should it be retained? How and where should we talk about these issues? (In Town Halls says Facebook, how old school governmental is that?) And what language do we use to talk about this stuff? (Plain and simple, an area where exemplar governments including Washington state are getting much better.)
We sought to address this comment by making the proposed Statement simpler and shorter, and avoiding legal terms where possible. That said, some legal concepts demand the use of very specific legal wording, so it is not possible to avoid all legal language.
[ ] Government [ X ] Facebook
If government can school Facebook on the complexity of these issues (and it can), the social network is not constrained by deliberately slow bureaucratic processes in dusting themselves off after a big, public mistake and taking a second shot. Being fast is good. Being right is better. Listening and developing policy iteratively may prove to be -- in the long push -- the best.
Concluded that noted policy wonk Mark Zuckerberg after a particularly bad week for a company that quickly found its footing again in a way promises a better future, "History tells us that systems are most fairly governed when there is an open and transparent dialogue between the people who make decisions and those who are affected by them."
[More analysis of the Facebook approach to policy making is coming in the May 2009 issue of Government Technology.]
With $1 billion on debt and a looming repayment deadline, BearingPoint
filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy for its US operations today. The company has asked the courts to allow operations to continue
uninterrupted during the reorganization.
In a statement, the CEO Ed Hapbach said:
Government is one of its three major practice areas, a practice which ranges from federal defense work to management and technology consulting to state and local governments.. Based in McLean, Virginia, USA, the firm, which emerged from KPMG, has approximately 17,100 employees.
In a statement, the CEO Ed Hapbach said:
BearingPoint has reached agreement with our lead creditors to significantly reduce our debt. To implement the agreement, the company commenced a pre-arranged Chapter 11 process on February 18, 2009. This is a major step forward in securing a stronger financial foundation and better future for our company, our clients and our employees.
We will continue to operate our business as usual while we complete our restructuring.
Because we have already negotiated terms of our restructuring with our lead creditors, we expect to emerge from this process quickly.
Government is one of its three major practice areas, a practice which ranges from federal defense work to management and technology consulting to state and local governments.. Based in McLean, Virginia, USA, the firm, which emerged from KPMG, has approximately 17,100 employees.
In a playful YouTube spoof of the "Real Men of Genius" ads made famous by Bud Light, Maryland Comptroller Peter Franchot marshals "real taxpayers of genius" to e-file their state income tax returns this year.
Those familiar with the original series of beer ads will recognize the formula. "Today, we salute you, Mr. Frustrated Taxpayer," says the unseen voice over announcer. Then, as backup singers repeat his words in falsetto, the announcer suggests that life will be better with e-filing.
As with the originals, the spot ends triumphantly.
Those familiar with the original series of beer ads will recognize the formula. "Today, we salute you, Mr. Frustrated Taxpayer," says the unseen voice over announcer. Then, as backup singers repeat his words in falsetto, the announcer suggests that life will be better with e-filing.
As with the originals, the spot ends triumphantly.
"Well done, e-filer, well done," the announcer deadpans as a taxpayer files online and pumps his fists in the air.
According to a release from the Comptroller;s office, the
state spends $1.98 processing a paper return, compared with 38 cents
for a return filed online.
E-filing is free for people who meet certain requirements.
After a long and often emotional hearing on a separate bill about same sex benefits, a characteristically brusque committee chair Darlene Fairley (D 32nd District) told the people who had stayed to testify on Senate Bill 5256 that she only wanted to hear from three of them due to the lateness of the hour.
At issue, the proposed elimination of the Washington State Department of Information Services (DIS). Fairley summarized the sponsor's motivation for closing DIS as "gathering up money for his social services" although committee staff said the benefits or costs of such a move were either "indeterminate" or "over $360,000" depending on how you read the as yet incomplete fiscal notes.
As for choosing only three people to testify off a long list of those who had signed in as "opposed" to the bill, Fairley acerbically concluded, "I know why you're opposed ... because you go away."
With that as his introduction, Interim DIS Director Jim Albert, appointed just over a month ago, reminded the flagging committee members of how his agency provided a wide range of technology goods and services to some 600 public entities in the state that would have to find replacement providers -- possibly at a higher cost. Albert said that one in five state residents receive services from or through DIS, whether that is a payroll or benefits check, electronic funds transfer or eligibility letters -- not to mention the 700,000 unique visitors who visited the state portal for information during the December storms.
With Albert's two minutes up, Department of Personnel CIO Steve Young itemized the DIS provided services on which his agency relied -- e-mail, security, secure file transfer and server hosting among them.
Washington Federation of Labor Lobbyist Alia Griffing was last up, saying simply that the Federation had 349 members at DIS and the reasons for the Federation's opposition were "self evident."
But by themselves, evidently not enough.
At issue, the proposed elimination of the Washington State Department of Information Services (DIS). Fairley summarized the sponsor's motivation for closing DIS as "gathering up money for his social services" although committee staff said the benefits or costs of such a move were either "indeterminate" or "over $360,000" depending on how you read the as yet incomplete fiscal notes.
As for choosing only three people to testify off a long list of those who had signed in as "opposed" to the bill, Fairley acerbically concluded, "I know why you're opposed ... because you go away."
With that as his introduction, Interim DIS Director Jim Albert, appointed just over a month ago, reminded the flagging committee members of how his agency provided a wide range of technology goods and services to some 600 public entities in the state that would have to find replacement providers -- possibly at a higher cost. Albert said that one in five state residents receive services from or through DIS, whether that is a payroll or benefits check, electronic funds transfer or eligibility letters -- not to mention the 700,000 unique visitors who visited the state portal for information during the December storms.
With Albert's two minutes up, Department of Personnel CIO Steve Young itemized the DIS provided services on which his agency relied -- e-mail, security, secure file transfer and server hosting among them.
Washington Federation of Labor Lobbyist Alia Griffing was last up, saying simply that the Federation had 349 members at DIS and the reasons for the Federation's opposition were "self evident."
But by themselves, evidently not enough.
The heart of Senate Bill 5256, introduced in the Washington State legislature, is the repeal of the enabling statute for the state Department of Information Services (RCW 43.105). With its repeal, the agency would go out of business on January 1, 2010.
Strangely, the digest written by legislative staff says the bill "eliminates the department of social and health services' information system services division and prohibits maintaining a similar division in the future." Indeed, it does that but the accompanying Senate Bill Report acknowledges the wider scope, summarizing the bill in a singe sentence, "The Department of Information Services is eliminated."
Except for a provision that would transfer any balances in the DIS revolving fund to the general fund, the bill is silent on government operations without DIS. Who if anyone would assume responsibility for the third largest data center in the northwest, the statewide network and a big basket of IT related goods and services? Put another way, would the 130 or more public agencies that are DIS customers be left to find new providers by themselves? Those agencies that provided fiscal notes on the bill concluded that the impact of the bill would be "Non-zero but indeterminate cost and/or savings."
When Senator Jim Hargrove (D - 24th Legislative District) dropped the bill on January 19, the conventional wisdom was that it was, to use a popular euphemism in Olympia, a "conversation starter."
There was also a sense that, if for no other reason than the massive volume of legislation with which the Senate was dealing, the bill was not likely to get a hearing. So much for conventional wisdom. SB5256 is scheduled for a hearing this afternoon at 3:30PM before the Senate Committee on Government Operations. The hearing is scheduled to be carried live on TVW, the state level C-SPAN service.
Strangely, the digest written by legislative staff says the bill "eliminates the department of social and health services' information system services division and prohibits maintaining a similar division in the future." Indeed, it does that but the accompanying Senate Bill Report acknowledges the wider scope, summarizing the bill in a singe sentence, "The Department of Information Services is eliminated."
Except for a provision that would transfer any balances in the DIS revolving fund to the general fund, the bill is silent on government operations without DIS. Who if anyone would assume responsibility for the third largest data center in the northwest, the statewide network and a big basket of IT related goods and services? Put another way, would the 130 or more public agencies that are DIS customers be left to find new providers by themselves? Those agencies that provided fiscal notes on the bill concluded that the impact of the bill would be "Non-zero but indeterminate cost and/or savings."
When Senator Jim Hargrove (D - 24th Legislative District) dropped the bill on January 19, the conventional wisdom was that it was, to use a popular euphemism in Olympia, a "conversation starter."
There was also a sense that, if for no other reason than the massive volume of legislation with which the Senate was dealing, the bill was not likely to get a hearing. So much for conventional wisdom. SB5256 is scheduled for a hearing this afternoon at 3:30PM before the Senate Committee on Government Operations. The hearing is scheduled to be carried live on TVW, the state level C-SPAN service.
Pending Senate confirmation, King County Executive Ron Sims has accepted an appointment to serve as Deputy Secretary of Housing and Urban Development under HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan in the Obama administration.
Sims has clearly been thinking about the Obama team's seven-page, 63-item questionnaire, the completion of which is required of every candidate for Cabinet and other high-ranking positions.
The questionnaire includes requests for personal and professional records, including a "list all aliases or 'handles' you have used to communicate on the Internet," and links to any blog posts and links to their Facebook pages.
In an interview with Seattle public radio station KUOW, Sims said,
Sims has tweeted sparingly on his appointment as he keeps his micro diary of the days of the life of a county executive. His Facebook profile notes, "Ron Sims, King County Executive has no recent activity." Not surprising given what's on his plate. Given the troubles some of his fellow nominees have had, you wouldn't blame the guy for going back to the questionnaire and that question about taxes....
Sims has clearly been thinking about the Obama team's seven-page, 63-item questionnaire, the completion of which is required of every candidate for Cabinet and other high-ranking positions.
The questionnaire includes requests for personal and professional records, including a "list all aliases or 'handles' you have used to communicate on the Internet," and links to any blog posts and links to their Facebook pages.
In an interview with Seattle public radio station KUOW, Sims said,
"They know I Twitter and they know I Facebook. So it's gonna be really interesting to see what the rules are. They may say to me no Twitter and then I wouldn't. So trust me, they know I Twitter. They know I'm active. It'll be up to the White House and it'll be up to Secretary Donovan about their comfort zones with my Twittering and my Facebook."
Sims has tweeted sparingly on his appointment as he keeps his micro diary of the days of the life of a county executive. His Facebook profile notes, "Ron Sims, King County Executive has no recent activity." Not surprising given what's on his plate. Given the troubles some of his fellow nominees have had, you wouldn't blame the guy for going back to the questionnaire and that question about taxes....
"Please don't adjust your set, you ain't seen nothing yet." The line is a send-up of those serious-sounding "One Moment Please" announcements that were once commonplace on local TV when things went wrong. The parody was on a scratchy comedy album from a misspent youth, but could prove prescient on the eve of the nation's transition to digital television -- or DTV -- this month.
The issue on the ground is how you get the signals out of the sky. At-risk viewers are those who rely on rabbit ears or rooftop antennas. Their sets will fall silent and snowy on Feb. 17 without a converter box.
Thankfully it's not IT's problem, unless you are South Dakota's Otto Doll. He is unique among state CIOs because running and programming the state's public broadcasting stations are in his wheelhouse. Public radio and TV happen to be the largest broadcasters in South Dakota.
"We have a natural tendency to expect the state to come to the aid of people in trouble," said Doll, who noted that South Dakota's experiences with fires, tornadoes, floods and hurricanes helped officials prepare a rabbit-ear rapid response. "We know things are going to fail, we just don't know where," he said. Losing TV reception is less severe than losing access to bank machines, he said, but residents still rely on broadcasters for emergency alerts and other information.
The problem is threefold. "Some people will not have heard they needed to do anything, some will have heard but decided to do nothing and others will have done something but will have done it wrong," Doll said. Consequently the state deployed a handful of its public TV engineers in a modified train-the-trainer model to make house calls to different communities. The engineers work with volunteers to provide troubleshooting knowledge, including how to reorient antennas.
South Dakota's planners studied an early DTV transition in Wilmington, N.C., last fall to get a sense of what to expect. The Wilmington experiment drew 1,823 phone calls about adjusting antennas, setting up and tuning converter boxes, and why the transition was happening in the first place. But the largest share of the calls (553) was from residents who complained they were unable to receive their favorite TV stations' signals.
Doll said his state "will muster another six engineers [and] whatever resources I have to make do" as the DTV deadline approaches. Given Wilmington's call breakdown, Doll saw an opportunity to enlist communications students from the University of South Dakota to staff a phone bank, with his engineers standing in the wings. South Dakota Public Broadcasting (SDPB) will cap an awareness campaign that has included 5,000 radio and TV announcements with a DTV telethon, which will have the look and feel of a pledge drive, but instead of asking for money, the SDPB will answer viewers' questions on the air and through the phone bank.
By definition, this will be the last time that video will not be IT's problem. Digital video is the new lingua franca, and broadcasting's transition removes analog as the last big barrier to convergence and carriage on any network, including yours.
Editor's Note: This column was published before a congressional decision on Feb. 4 to delay the DTV transition deadline. Broadcasters now have until June 12 to turn off their analog signals, although they can do so anytime after Feb. 17.
This post originated as a column, Rabbit Ear Response, in the February 2009 issue of Government Technology magazine.