Final Blog: What I Learned

As a whole, the class presented a new dynamic of government and public administration, which is the role of the internet and technology affecting the public and nonprofit sectors.  Understanding the government’s presence on the internet and the potential benefits of further utilization of technology to streamline government activities is a necessary component of a policy maker in the 21^st century.  This class went a long way in providing me with this necessary knowledge. 

There were a number of issues that were addressed in the course that presented new information.   Several of these will serve as valuable knowledge moving forward into my career than other, but all were worthwhile.  Three that come to mind in particular are the lesions on how the internet works, the growth of e-government and e-democracy, and the issue of information validity on the internet.

How It Works
Perhaps the most foreign concept heading into the class was the lesson describing how the internet actually works.  There were two real revelations during this section.  First was the fact that I knew as little as I did about how the internet works, and second was the fact that I had never given it any thought before.  It is something that gets taken for granted.  People turn on their computers and the internet is just there for their use.  Having this understanding may not be the most valuable piece of information I take from the class in terms of usefulness in my future career as I am not pursuing a career in IT, but it will serve as useful knowledge that is not possessed by that many people.

Another bit of usefully knowledge gained in the class that will be beneficial going forward, were the portions on how the internet and technology is transforming the way governments and democracy work.  There have are a number of final thoughts that I will take away from the class in regards to these issues.  This includes how the internet has already changed government operations and democracy, and the potential the internet has to produce further change.

E-Government/E-Democracy
One of the most important developments the internet has produced is an increased amount of transparency in government.  Information is being shared at speeds and in quantities previously unheard of.  The smallest moves and decisions by governments are broadcasted and available to just about everyone.  Transparency leads to a more responsible and responsive government.  It also allows for any wrong doings to be brought to light and dealt with. 

In addition to transparency, the internet has helped make the government more responsive to citizens. Providing services and responding to constituent needs is much faster and streamlined then before.  People can now pay fines, file forms, and request services from their own home, and no longer have to go to a government building.  This makes the process faster not only to citizens, but for the government who can handle several things at once.  It helps with efficiency and costs.  These features will only be expanded upon in the future as more and more services are transferred to the internet.  The potential for increased efficiency in the future is one of the best selling points of IT in government.  As the government’s operating costs have gone up and demand for more efficient government has risen amongst the citizenry, further development of service delivery online will be an attractive option for governments.

The effect on the democratic process has been extensive as well. The internet has provided a whole new medium for the government and politicians to interact with citizens.  It’s also a mostly free way to communicate and get a message out.  It has allowed for citizens to be even more informed on the issues and make better decisions when trying to decide who to vote for.  It also allows citizens to understand what sorts of decisions governments are making with the increased flow of information.


Information Validity
Generally, one would argue that greater access and exposure to information is better.  However, the quality and accuracy of the information people are exposed to needs to be accounted for.  For all the benefits the internet has provided, one of its most damaging attributes is the prevalence of inaccurate or misleading information.  This is seen in great deal with government and commentary on its activities.

When getting their messages out, politicians and governments can pick and choose which information to release and then release it in a way that is most appealing to their own interests.  They can place greater emphasis on information that is beneficial to them and gloss over that which is damaging.  The presence of a well designed website can lend credibility to a person or cause that may not be credible.  Opinion can be presented as fact.  Telling the difference is difficult and determining where the slant is coming from can be tough for the otherwise uniformed reader. 

One of the more fascinating sources of this is whitehouse.gov.  It’s a website run by the administration in power at the time and as a result, is favorable to the administration.  Why this fascinates me is because the president also has his own webpage.  One might think whitehouse.gov would be non partial presentation of information and news from the white house, and the president’s personal webpage would be acting as the political arm. This is not the case however, as both sites basically accomplish the same thing which is to promote the president’s agenda. 

This is a lesson that is valuable to anyone who may be doing policy research in the future.  Identification of reliable, nonpartisan sources of information is crucial for policy makers if they are to be able to support their arguments and present their case.  The value of this lesson to me moving forward is less about personally finding valid information, but understanding that many people are exposed to bad information which they take as fact. This is something to be cautious moving forward in a career in the public sector, and it’s also something that needs to be addressed to lessen its impact.

The material covered in this course will only become more relevant over time as governments become more dependent on the internet for service distribution.  As this process plays out, and understanding of the internet and its impacts on government and democracy will become even more necessary to policy makers than it is now.  As more public and non-profit sector employees emerge from graduate school with an understanding of technology’s capacity to improve efficiency, both industries will be better off.  This is important because these two industries are often among the most strapped for resources.  The knowledge I gained in this course has prepared me to be part of that new class of public sector workers, and I value that greatly.

E-Government is Improving, Still Needs to Get Better **GRADE**

In his study titled State and Federal Electronic Government in the United States, 2008 Darrell M. West of The Brookings Institute conducted a survey of over 1,500 state and federal government websites to find out how the current status of e-government across the country at all levels.  The goal was to determine how technology has changed the practices of government.  The findings provided detailed information on what is available online, how sites differ from one another, and how the use of online services has advanced and changed in the last decade.

The findings were supportive of the idea that governments are interested in, and developing greater ability to distribute services online.  In fact, close to 90% of state and federal websites have services that are fully executable online.  This number is only slowly advancing, however, as it are only up a few percentage points from the previous year.  Also, there is the point that if a state agency or other government body has still not developed a website, there’s a good chance they never will.  This number sounds good, but the fact that there are still over 10% of state and federal agencies without websites is pretty surprising. 

There are many improvements that need to be made in order for government websites to be full effective, and the study illustrated this point effectively.  For instance, only 3% of government web sites can be accessed through mobile devices such as cell phones.  This is a feature that is becoming more and more of a necessity to meet the needs of citizens in an ever increasingly mobile world.  The use of notebooks and cell phones with incredible internet capacity is growing at a greater rate than e-government has kept up with.

                There’s a serious issue with access as well.  The first finding that was rather startling in this regard is that only a quarter of federal websites and less than one in five state websites are accessible to the disabled, less than half of websites have foreign language translation, and 64% are written at a reading level that is above that of the average citizen.  These sorts of accessibility issues need to be addressed considering the wide range of customers that will require the use of the website.

                West makes a point to suggest that all government websites have a foreign language translation or some other means to make the information accessible to non English speakers.  This is especially true now as more Spanish speakers enter the country and need the services provided on government websites.  The data is trending in the right direction in this regard, as then number of states with foreign language translations has doubled since 2007.

                The policy recommendations made by West are pretty well thought out.  Many of the suggestions revolve around making the websites user friendly and easily navigable. Especially effective is the recommendation that agency websites have similar layouts to one another so that users realize they are using a government website.  Furthermore, having an effective site map and search engine is especially necessary.  Nearly all internet activity is instigated through a search rather than a unique visit.  This should be incorporated into state websites.  Knowing to go to Delaware.gov is simple, finding out where to go to do what the use needs to do within the states website is another thing.

                The demand for e-government services is only going to go up in the future.  Adopting the changes suggested by West and addressing the deficiencies this study points out would go a long way in getting e-government to the level of effectiveness that it will have to be in the future. However, it must be pointed out that needed changes will continually come up as technology adapts.  This is an ongoing development process and not something with a definitive end point.

Sources: 

West, Darrell. "State and Federal Electronic Government in the United States, 2008." 26 August 2008. The Brookings Institution. 6 May 2011 <http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/reports/2008/0826_egovernment_west/0826_egovernment_west.pdf>.

Legislative Information Systems **GRADE**

As the internet has further infiltrated their citizen’s lives and access to digital information has increased, governments have begun to provide greater transparency as to their activities through the web. The most common method of doing this for legislatures is through legislative information systems and legislative websites.

These sites have many functions, but they mostly serve as a way for the legislature to share information with constituents on their day to day activities.  Typically, these sites are completely non-partisan and only serve as a way to provide transparency and give people information.  For a partisan view of the legislature’s activities, most of the party caucuses will have a separate webpage that espouses their views on the legislation that has passed or is being considered. 

The type of information mostly shown on these sites includes bill tracking, legislative history, and legislative agendas.  They also have information on the composition of committees, meeting agendas, and meeting schedules.  Most states also feature audio and video webcasts of floor proceedings.  Many also archive floor proceedings from previous days.  There are also typically live and archived webcasts of committee hearings.

One area where the state is ahead of the game is with its feature of email subscriptions for bill tracking.  This allows people to follow the legislature’s activities in a very passive manner.  There is no need to go to the state’s website to become informed on the issues facing the state, and how the legislature is responding to them.

Generally, the development of these sites has greatly increased the amount of transparency in government which is typically seen as a positive.  With the multimedia options on the sites, constituents have an unprecedented amount of information on the daily activities of their legislature, as most of the necessary information on pending legislation is easily displayed on these sites.  The effectiveness of legislation information services has led to widespread adoption across the states.

Delaware’s legislative website is easy to navigate, but it lacks many of the enhanced features of other states.  Like 48 other states, Delaware has live webcasts of floor proceedings for the House of Representatives, but not the Senate.  The state does is one of only 17 states to not have archived webcasts of floor proceedings, one of only 15 states to not have live broadcasts of committee meetings, and one of 27 states to not have archived webcasts of committee hearings.  Furthermore, 30 states have television broadcasts, Delaware does not.

While there is a lot of information available on the site, adding many of these features would greatly enhance the website’s quality.  Hopefully they will look into adopting many of these features, but there is little hope for it in the near future.  Many of these things would have significant costs associated with them.  The technology needed would come at a pretty steep price, and with state finances as tight as they are, it is difficult to pass legislation that costs the state extra money.

Sources:

National Conference of State Legislatures. (2011, February 21). Bill Tracking and Subscription Services on Legislative Websites. Retrieved May 4, 2011, from NCSL: http://www.ncsl.org/Default.aspx?TabId=13474

National Conference of State Legislatures. (2011, March 2). Webcasts of Live Floor Proceedings and Committees. Retrieved May 4, 2011, from NCSL: http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://funnymail.com/sites/funnymail.com/files/imagecache/blogroll-image/230737_2019864581448_1388912077_32333882_2759560_n.jpg&imgrefurl=http://funnymail.com/category/tags/osama&usg=__aYdpbfsv5APohTHue3DWIy5wctc=&h=286

Campaigning and the Internet **GRADE**

The increased role the internet has played in American political campaigns is undeniable.  It has been used in presidential campaigns in 2000 and 2004, but the full capabilities likely were not seen until the 2008 race between John McCain and Barack Obama.  This was even more the case for Barack Obama, whose internet campaign strategy was unmatched and helped him reach and motivate young voters across the country.

Perhaps the most useful aspect of the internet is its ability to raise money from people with varying levels of economic standing.  Both Howard Dean in 2004, and Obama in 2008 were largely funded by regular people making smaller donations of $20 or $50. This was a group of potential donors that was largely untapped in previous elections and played a large role in putting up the record fundraising numbers seen by Obama and Dean.  Campaigns are typically funded though large scale donations from wealthy donors. 

This practice of collecting thousands of smaller donations has proved beneficial and comes at little cost to the campaign.  Whereas holding large, grandiose fundraising galas take the campaigns time and money to pull off, sending out an email with a ghost written plea from the candidate explaining that they need all the help they can get to defeat their opponent, is all but cost free and can be sent to every single email address the campaign has on record.  This increases the potential donor field exponentially.

Speaking of costs, the internet provides free advertising through social media like Facebook and Youtube.  This allows the candidates to infiltrate the lives of voters and get their message out through a whole other platform in addition to television and radio.  It was estimated that videos posted on Youtube by the Obama campaign were watched for 14.7 million hours which would have cost close to $50 million in television ads (Miller, 2008).

Organizing campaign events was another task made simpler and cheaper through the use of the internet.  Instead of using hundreds of volunteers to operate get out the vote campaigns and alert supporters of rallies and campaign stops, messages could be sent via the web to get the word out and save the volunteer man hours for other tasks.

The role of the internet created an increase in candidate scrutiny.  This allowed candidates to directly address the attack ads made by their opponent, and the extensive information on the web allowed voters to fact check the attacks themselves.  This issue was again addressed by the Obama campaign with fightthesmears.com which debunked a number of false accusations made by his opponents throughout the campaign.

Going along with the fact checking, the internet has allowed candidate vetting to reach new levels.  Voters have access to more information on each candidate than ever before.  Whether it’s the candidates personal life history, positions on issues throughout their career, or statements made in the past, the internet allows voters to hold candidates accountable for their statements and actions by providing them with a large quantity of information.

In all, the effects of the internet on campaigning have probably had a net positive effect for voters.  More information on candidates is always a good thing, even if voters may become annoyed with the constant barrage of communications they must deal with.

Sources:

Miller, C. C. (2008, 7 November). How Obama's Internet Campaign Changed Politics. Retrieved April 2011, from New York Times: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/07/how-obamas-internet-campaign-changed-politics/

Organizing for America. (2008). Fight the Smears. Retrieved April 2011, from http://www.fightthesmears.com/

Google is Making us Misinformed, Not Stupid **GRADE**

Nicholas Carr’s thesis in Is Google Making Us Stupid?  is that the volume of information that we are exposed to in short amounts of time on the web, has changed the way people read and process and absorb information.  People prefer expediency to the long drawn out process of reading through page after page of narrative.  He explains this using several examples of how the mind has changed through the development of technologies like the ticking clock, but the point he is really making is that our attention spans are much shorter now that we can access the information we deem necessary at such a rapid rate with the internet.

He argues that Google’s endgame, a world where people no longer utilize their own intellectual contemplations but rather a constant and never ending search for information, will change human thought in a way that should worry us all.  It will turn our concept of the human brain from what it is now, to just an “outdated computer than needs a faster processor and bigger hard drive.”

His concerns are legitimate and his argument is well crafted.  There does appear to be a change in our view of human intellect.  He references Socrates’ fear that people would no long utilize memory, but rather become dependent on the written word to provide them with the information they needed, when they needed it.  Information on demand, if you will.  This is what the internet has enabled, for better or worse.  Is there a need to retain large amounts of information when the answer can be found in a few seconds with a Google search?  After all, one of the greatest minds of the 20^th century, Albert Einstein, is credited with saying “never memorize what you can look up in books.”

While I appreciate Carr’s argument and understand his concern, I believe the worry is unwarranted.  What the internet and its predecessors such as the printing press and written word have done is increased human efficiency.  Any argument that that these developments have been counterproductive to human development fails to acknowledge the progress made since their invention.  There’s no denying that human life has become better since the access to information has increased.  Were people not machines when they served no purpose but to get up in the morning and work the fields without being exposed to any additional information than what is necessary to survive?

I’m of the thought that technology, and the internet, is far more likely to propel people to even higher levels than we are at present.  Carr’s statement that “our data-stoked minds will bring a golden age of intellectual discovery and universal wisdom” is far closer to what will actually happen as the internet further penetrates our lives and intellectual process.

While I disagree with Carr that greater and faster information access is a bad thing, there is a problem with this that needs to be remedied.  There are vast amounts of information on the internet that is inaccurate.  The internet has allowed anyone with a connection to pose as experts and present information on any subject imaginable as though it were fact.  While our access to information has grown exponentially, a large portion of that information is inaccurate or subjective in nature.

Internet browsers look for a quick answer to a question often plug said question into Google and end up on a Wikipedia page or Google answers page where the credibility of the person providing the information is unknown.  Whether it be the death of a celebrity who is actually still living, or the birthplace of the president, the internet has allowed false information or the opinion of a person without necessary expertise to be treated and interpreted as fact.  This should be the number one concern about the information overload provided by the internet, not that more information is somehow counterproductive to human progress.

Sources:

Carr, N. (2008, July/August). Is Google Making Us Stupid? Retrieved March 2011, from The Atlantic: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/6868/

Epic 2015 **GRADE**

From a philosophical standpoint, Epic 2015 has been incredibly accurate in predicting the effect of the internet on 21^st century society.  In this regard, we are increasingly close to actually living in a world described by the video.  However, the actual course of events outlined by Epic 2015 is overly dramatic and predicts a much more rapid evolution than what we have actually experienced.

While most of the video tells a story of how society will integrate with the internet, and how tech companies will evolve and alter information dissemination from now until 2015, the real theme I take from it is the following:  the interconnectedness created by the internet, will make traditional information dissemination obsolete.  What this means is that news agencies like the New York Times will be unnecessary because people will be so connected by the internet, that the information will spread from person to person so rapidly that we will not need to rely on the more traditional methods.

The way in which this has happened has not occurred in the same way that Epic 2015 predicted.  Although the emergence and diversification of Google has happened in a similar fashion (the acquisition of other companies into their larger service network and expansion into seemingly unrelated fields like renewable energy), the monopolistic nature of their presence is not the case.  Companies like Google, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, and Facebook (The video mentions Friendster; right church, wrong pew.), have emerged as competitors, and have not joined forces.

Microsoft, which has dominated the software market for decades, has struggled to keep up.  The video’s prediction that most of Microsoft’s moves would be responsive to the moves made by others, and not innovative, was accurate.  It has been pushed by more innovating companies such as Apple and Google and has seen its market share decline as a result.

Finally, the decreasing role of traditional news outlets is touched upon by Epic 2015.  Credit must be given for this fact.  Sites like Google news and the emergence of the “blogosphere” have greatly decreased the need for daily newspapers.  The damage has been significant for daily print media and the publishing world as whole.  Newspapers and news magazines have decreased significance.

My main critique with Epic 2015 is that is falls into the same trap as most predictions of the future: it identifies trends, but then overestimates the speed of their evolution.  Like most predictions of the future, they predict a much more rapid and dramatic evolution than what actually takes place.  This is common in just about every prediction of the future as there are too many variables in play.  Where’s my jetpack and flying car?

Also, while the decreased role of traditional news outlets such as the New York Times is occurring, the sources that have closed up are mostly smaller, local newspapers.  Larger ones have found ways to transition to online services.  In fact, they still play a vital role in information sharing; they just do so in a different fashion.

Although a lot of information is gathered through social networking sites like Twitter, Google, and Facebook, most of the information being shared originates from traditional news companies like the NYT.  The reporting done through social networks and Google is secondary.  This could change in the future, but not by 2015 as the video predicts.

Sources:

Sloan, R. (n.d.). Epic 2015. Retrieved March 2011, from Making it Happen: http://epic.makingithappen.co.uk/

Newsvine.com

Newsvine is a news website owned by MSNBC.com.  It is not a news agency in itself, but rather draws from other news sources such as the AP.  It is editor free and allows its users to determine which news stories are the most important.

One of the ways it does this is through its "vote up" option. Each article posted on the site is accompanied by an icon that allows readers to "vote up" the article.  The articles with the most votes appear on the "top of the vine" page.  The "top of the vine" page can also be sorted by articles with the most comments.

It also allows users to start their own column to comment on events of the day.  This is essentially a blog, but newsvine and its users like to think of it as something more than that.  Users can seed in news stories from other websites as well.  Finally, users can create a community of friends whose interests they share.  You can comment on other users' articles and see what they are seeding in, etc.