The Internet is certainly playing a key role. In fact, YouTube may have officially reached its digital advocacy “tipping point” when a handful of videos were recently uploaded featuring flustered politicians struggling to answer tough healthcare questions during several Congressional town hall meetings.

Many Democrats in support of the bill have moved to characterize opponents as an organized, astroturfing, angry right wing mob. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) even went so far as to call the protests “un-American.” On the contrary, it was the SEIU who was caught on tape beating a black conservative who voiced dissent over the plan.

However, this wasn’t an organized gotcha campaign tactic like the infamous “Macaca” incident that many credit for the derailment of Sen. Allen’s re-election campaign in Virginia. Rather, these videos were shot, edited and posted by average, passionate American citizens who gathered to exercise their First Amendment right and demonstrate their concern over President Obama’s proposed healthcare legislation.

As Congress heads into their summer recess, some Members may wish they were spending more time on the beach instead of answering questions from frustrated constituents about government-run universal healthcare. I say let them vacation. After all, it will give them time to actually read the 1,000 page bill, perfect for a little summer reading.

In the midst of all this debate, the Internet continues to ramp up full throttle on both sides of the issue.

The Obama White House is attempting to utilize the Web, just as they did so masterfully during the campaign, in an effort to push the legislation through. How? Well, for starters, Linda Douglass took on the Drudge Report and asks users to “snitch” on fellow citizens if they see “fishy” information online about the healthcare discussion. They even set up an email address (flag@whitehouse.gov) to ease the reporting process.

The primary issue I have with this approach is that the White House Website is taxpayer funded and shouldn’t be used as a tool to gather information about Americans for pure political gain. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) agrees and promptly sent a letter to the White House asking President Obama to bring the program to an end.

If the DNC or BarackObama.com/Organizing for America wants to do this (i.e. Tweet Your Senator = brilliant way to build buzz and your E-mail lists!), fine by me. However, WhiteHouse.gov should steer clear especially when the data collected is not subject to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and new questions are arising about federal government privacy policies.

Is there a double standard here? Former White House Press Secretary Dana Perino makes an excellent point in Politico’s Arena:

“What would have happened if President George W. Bush had asked Americans to forward to the White House emails they’d received that spread “disinformation” or seemed “fishy” regarding any topic, such as the war on terror, immigration reform, tax cuts? How soon would the New York Times have splashed it on the front page, that moveon.org would have flipped its lid, and the Congressional Democrats called for new legislation to strip the President of his wildly expanding powers?”

Just today, WhiteHouse.gov launched a new “Health Insurance Reform Reality Check” feature which offers “facts about the stability and security you get from health insurance reform.”

Those at the National ObamaCare Opt Out (NOOO!) Registry disagree and have launched a site designed to motivate opponents of the bill to join the fight against it by registering and tweeting out with the #optout hashtag on Twitter.

I was recently reminded of the Internet’s infancy about a month ago when Rep. John Fleming (R-La.) appeared on FOX News with Megyn Kelly to discuss H.R. 615. The resolution would require Members of Congress who vote for public option healthcare to give up their current federal employee healthcare plan (as currently written, those serving House and Senate are exempt for five years). While on the program, Rep. Fleming encouraged viewers to visit his Website fleming.house.gov to track the bill’s cosponsors – all Republicans at the time. Interest was so great that increased traffic crashed the server for almost 45 minutes resulting in a 403.9 Error: Too Much Democracy All At Once!

Instead of using some of the more traditional methods, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) chose to outline his thoughts regarding healthcare reform via a video he posted on Facebook. Of course, I learned about this during a talk radio interview with the congressman as I drove into work one morning last week. See, MSM isn’t dead!

As the showdown continues to heat up after the break, one thing is for sure: This is fight is real and the implications are huge. Since Inauguration, many have wondered if Obama would be able to leverage his online campaign supporters into governing once he transitioned to the Oval Office. I think we are about to find out.

UPDATE

Megyn Kelly discusses healthcare “flag” email lists and the Presidential Records Act with Deputy White House Press Secretary Bill Burton on FOX News. (Politico.com, 8/12/09)

‘Omnipotent Clarity’
At last Thursday’s (8/13/09) press briefing, Major Garrett of FOX News asked White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs about many who claim to have received unsolicited healthcare related emails from David Axelrod at the White House.

On Sunday, 8/15/09, Nick Shapiro, White House spokesman for New Media released the following statement, with a follow-up posted on the FOX News White House blog, Row 2, Seat 4:

The White House email list is made up of email addresses obtained solely through the White House website. The White House doesn’t purchase, upload or merge from any other list, again, all emails come from the White House website as we have no interest in emailing anyone who does not want to receive an email. If an individual received the email because someone else or a group signed them up or forwarded the email, we hope they were not too inconvenienced. Further, we suggest that they unsubscribe from the list by clicking the link at the bottom of the email or tell whomever forwarded it to them not to forward such information anymore. We are implementing measures to make subscribing to emails clearer, including preventing advocacy organizations from signing people up to our lists without their permission when they deliver petition signatures and other messages on individual’s behalf.”

Related

White House will change e-mail rules (Politico, 8/16/09)

White House Passes Blame on Unsolicited Health Care E-Mails (FOXNews.com, 8/16/09) The White House suggests third-party groups are to blame for unsolicited health care e-mails.

ACLU – Apologists for Obama? (Scott Stanzel)

Remember when protest was patriotic? (Glenn Harlan Reynolds, Washington Examiner)

Obama’s Authoritarian Style (Wall Street Journal)

Cartoon: Get Out of the Way (John Trever, The Albuquerque Journal)

The group includes Craig Newmark of Craigslist.org; Andrew Rasiej, founder of the Personal Democracy Forum; Ellen Miller from the Sunlight Foundation; Jon Henke, a consultant and blogger for The Next Right; and David Weinberger, a fellow at Harvard Law School’s Berkman Center for Internet & Society.

Due to the overwhelming response to the first column, Jose decided to add a guest reviewer for “Grading WhiteHouse.gov, Round Two,” which was posted earlier this week — and I was honored that he thought of me. Of course, he did indicate that he wasn’t going to be able to print my entire thoughts, but agreed to allow me to post them here.

However, a few things to note before we start:

• The transition was absolutely flawless. President Bush’s site was archived and President Obama’s new site was officially launched on Inauguration Day right on time. I don’t think many truly recognize what a major accomplishment that was.
• It’s important to recognize that the Internet is still relaltively in its infancy and that social media is just a few years old. When I was at the White House, MySpace was all the rage, Facebook was still limited those in college with .edu email addresses and Twitter hadn’t officially launched yet. Today, many are still trying to figure out what it means for business, the media and yes, even for our democracy.
• The Obama White House new media team, led by Macon Phillips, has only been in place a short time so let’s give them some room to settle in. They join a small fraternity of White House Internet staffers who came before them that built the foundation for what they will ultimately achieve. They are breaking new ground, trying new things and will certainly make some mistakes along the way. As ttechnology and tools continue to improve, I know that they’ll get there, but it will just take time so let’s be patient. However, there some basic things that seem to be missing, some of which are discussed in more detail below.
• I originally wrote this in late April just before the official 100 day mark — and about a week before the White House officially launched a presence on Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, etc. The first Obama White House email (on Health Care) just came out yesterday.
• These comments and opinions are purely my own and I’m very interested in your feedback. Feel free to weigh in at the bottom of the post.

So, in the spirit of transparency, the full transcript is provided below for your review.

Q: How would you define transparency? Accessiblity? Engagement?
There’s a whole lot of buzz about transparency these days, but I believe that there’s a lack of common understanding as to what it really means and how it should apply to the process of governing online.

In my opinion, the word “transparency” as it relates to government represents the ability for citizens to gain easy access to information surrounding the decisions and public activities of our elected officials. Clearly the Internet has assisted with this. People have more information available to them than ever before and this is one of the primary reasons why I refer to President Bush as the first “digital president” despite the fact that President Clinton was the first to launch a White House site. In the same way, President Obama will certainly build upon this progress as the Internet continues to expand.

However, most would agree that complete transparency for every communication, no matter how large or small, between federal employees poses unique challenges of its own, especially in our fast-paced, technology driven world.

Despite the sheer volume of content, privacy concerns, national security protections and political sensitivities, there are some technological hurdles, as well. For example, content must be universal to ensure that everyone can consume information equally including those without regular access to the Internet, on slower connections or using outdated equipment, browsers and plug-ins.

In addition, Section 508 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 requires that content on federal government Websites must be made available in different formats for those who may be hearing or sight impaired. There have been major strides in this area, including closed captioning options in YouTube, readable PDFs, audio/video tagging and other web-based software innovations which have leveled the playing field, most of which either didn’t exist, were restricted or too cost prohibitive to employ just a couple years ago.

Conversations that used to be one-way and constrained to “walled-gardens” on a handful of specific sites are a thing of the past thanks to social media. Now, when the White House publishes information, there is no shortage of online outlets where those issues can be discussed including social networks, news sites and blogs. The big question that still remains is whether the White House will use the Web to engage and better connect with citizens.

We saw the beginning stages of this under Jimmy Orr’s leadership (my predecessor) with the launch of “Ask the White House” in April 2003. By January 2009, the White House had hosted over 400 online chats via ATWH with officials from all areas and disciplines within the federal government, including one with President Bush aboard Air Force One in January 2008 on return from a Middle East trip.

President Obama broke similar ground with his “Open for Questions” event. Essentially, this was a standard live Webcast from the East Room where a handful of questions submitted via WhiteHouse.gov were answered in front of a pre-screened invited audience. It was reported that over 10,000 questions were sent in and I am hopeful that there will be many future opportunities to have those addressed in the coming months, as well, including live questions randomly selected from those who may wish to connect to the White House via real time video streaming technology such as Qik, Ustream or Skype.

Q: In your mind, what’s the mission of WhiteHouse.gov?
During White House events, President Bush often welcomed guests to the “people’s house” and I always viewed the Website in the same manner: WhiteHouse.gov is the people’s site — and it is one of a kind. Sure, other world leaders have similar sites but WhiteHouse.gov is the one place that users should be able to go to answer one simple Twitter-like question, “What is the president doing?”

I believe every American should have access to the activities of our president on any given day. For those looking beyond the sound bite to learn more about what is said and done on their behalf, the site serves an important role as a digital archive for unedited transcripts, photos, audio and long-form video of public events and press briefings.

In addition, WhiteHouse.gov should be a place where one can find more information about the president’s positions on current policy issues, as well as historical information about the American Presidency, the White House and the United States.

Q: What has surprised you most about Obama’s WhiteHouse.gov?
I was very impressed by the speed and efficiency of the transition when the White House team successfully managed the transfer and archival of President Bush’s site (including related multimedia) while simultaneously launching President Obama’s new version at 12:01 PM on Inauguration Day.

Load times are fast and the design is clean, crisp and modern. I am a fan of the rotating features which helps the user navigate the site based on relevant and timely issues. As an E-Gov evangelist, I was very pleased that President Obama chose to answer questions from WhiteHouse.gov for the East Room Webcast and the implementation of Google Moderator to manage the process was smooth and seamless. Also, the White House LiveStream has worked quite well since its launch. I specifically enjoyed watching the multi-stream coverage of the meetings on healthcare, as well as the continued tradition of the White House Easter Egg Roll Webcast.

Q: What has disappointed you the most?
As we know, this week marks 100 days since President Obama officially took office, (originally written in late April) so it is fitting to take a step back to examine some of the areas where the site still needs improvement now that his team has a few months under their belt.

My biggest disappointment with the new site is the difficulty I have in locating information due to poor organization architecture. It is confusing to locate specific content and the structure is not intuitive. So much emphasis is placed on the blog that, unfortunately, related materials such as transcripts, photos, audio, video and links get lost, are buried or seem to be posted as an afterthought in separate, unrelated locations.

For example, the March 24, 2009 press conference was posted on the blog as, “Addressing Our Problems Head-On” and only included President Obama’s answer to a tough question posed by CNN’s Ed Henry which many thought was a highlight. The next morning, I still couldn’t find a transcript or video and when a link finally did appear a few hours later, it sent users to the Los Angeles Times blog. I’m sure the LA Times executives (and the blog’s advertisers) appreciate the increased site traffic from a taxpayer funded site, but shouldn’t WhiteHouse.gov – and ultimately the National Archives – be the permanent source for that information? What happens if the LA Times moves the transcript or starts charging for archived content on their site? In all fairness, I did eventually find the transcript a day or so later after several attempts via the search engine, but it wasn’t easy.

This isn’t an isolated situation. Since I couldn’t find a daily listing of presidential activities, I went to the Speeches section of WhiteHouse.gov under “The Briefing Room” and found only three (one in Spanish) currently listed. At the time of this post, the most recent listed is from 2/27/2009, “Remarks of President Barack Obama – Responsibly Ending the War in Iraq.”

Similarly, it is unclear as to how the items listed in Official Statements differ from speeches which have remarks mixed in with written statements from President Obama, Mrs. Obama and Vice President Biden – which are all separate from Presidential Actions such as executive orders, proclamations, etc.

Q: As it stands, what grade would you give the site? And give your one paragraph explanation.
Although the new WhiteHouse.gov has an attractive, modern design and a number of new features, it is still in its infancy and it is important to remember that. However, in some ways, the site seems to actually have less content than its immediate predecessor.

Simple things that were standard on President Bush’s Website such as daily press briefing video (which is on YouTube now, but not embedded or otherwise available on WhiteHouse.gov), Cabinet member photos and bios and RSS feeds for all remarks, weekly addresses, briefings and other releases (not just selected items) all seem to be missing. Given this, combined with the site’s organizational challenges, delayed postings and hard to find information, I have to give it a current grade of: C

I am confident that the Obama team will eventually fix these issues and ultimately take WhiteHouse.gov to the next level as the Internet also continues to grow and evolve. More importantly, users will help shape the site’s future by expecting the White House to add new functionality by providing more data, finding ways to incorporate social media, offering mobile versions of the site, adding text messaging and soliciting feedback from citizens on important legislation, thus improving the transparency of, access to and engagement with their government.

Related

Grading WhiteHouse.gov, Round Two (Jose Antonio Vargas, The Washington Post)

Grading Whitehouse.gov, Part 2 (Jon Henke, The Next Right)

Your Government & New Media (Macon Phillips, The White House)

In conjunction with the paper, I will be moderating a live panel discussion this morning, Tuesday, February 24 at 9 AM EST at The Madison, 1177 15th Streeet, NW in Washington, DC. The event will also be available via live webcast.

The panel will focus on the online regulatory issues currently facing the healthcare industry, as well as the advances and the promise of Government 2.0. Participants include:

• Mark Gaydos, Sanofi-Aventis US Regulatory Affairs Marketed Products, Senior Director
• Sanjay J. Koyani, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Director, FDA Web Communications
• Christina Pearson, former U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs
• Jenny Moede, Waggener Edstrom, Healthcare
• David Almacy, Waggener Edstrom, Studio D (Moderator)

From the release:

Following the unprecedented use of social media throughout President Obama’s campaign, the new administration will bring a fresh perspective to digital regulations for healthcare. Companies will need to become educated on how new regulatory policies will affect their online communications. As the administration and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) begin to review existing policy and move to create new guidelines, now is the time for pharmaceutical and biotech companies to learn how to effectively engage their audiences online to stay ahead of the competition.

Those who are watching online and may wish to ask a question may do so via Twitter by using the hashtag: #wehealth. Looking forward to great event!

UPDATE

Watch on demand video of the panel discussion.

Download the PDF of the Waggener Edstrom digital healthcare whitepaper.

As the Washington Post’s Jose Antonio Vargas reported yesterday in The YouTube Presidency:

President-elect Obama will record the weekly Democratic address not just on radio but also on video — a first. The address, typically four minutes long, will be turned into a YouTube video and posted on Obama’s transition site, Change.gov, once the radio address is made public on Saturday morning.

According to Mike Allen, who writes Politico.com’s Playbook, the Obama-Biden transition stated on Friday that “No President-elect or President has ever turned the radio address into a multi-media opportunity before.”

Actually, that’s not true. All of President George W. Bush’s radio addresses have been published weekly since January 27, 2001 and available via WhiteHouse.gov on the White House Radio page. In addition, President Bush has delivered several LIVE radio addresses, many of which included a webcast, audio, photos and on demand video post event.

• September 11, 2004 from the Oval Office
• September 3, 2005 from the Rose Garden
• December 17, 2005 from the Roosevelt Room
• November 4, 2006 from Mile High Coffee shop in Englewood, Colorado

On a related note, Mrs. Laura Bush became the first First Lady to deliver an entire Presidential Radio Address when she spoke to the nation from Prairie Chapel Ranch in Crawford, Texas on November 17, 2001. She gave another radio address from the headquarters of Radio Free Europe in Prague, Czech Republic May 21, 2002 to discuss Afghanistan and again, most recently, on February 1, 2008 from her office in the East Wing of the White House to highlight the importance of heart health during American Heart Month.

In July 2005, as White House Internet Director, I worked with our web team and Apple to create a “room” in iTunes to house all White House Podcasts, starting with President Bush’s Weekly Radio Address in both English and Spanish.

We built it out further in September 2005 to include audio from all of the President’s public remarks, events and White House press briefings. We also added video such as State of the Union speeches and Presidential Addresses to the Nation.

At the time, washingtonpost.com’s Robert MacMillan wrote about the new WhiteHouse.gov feature in The Paradox of Podcasting:

I don’t know any other word to use besides “mainstream” when I hear from the White House that President Bush’s radio addresses will be offered via podcast. … Not only that, the White House has created RSS feeds for the radio addresses in English and Spanish. That means that anyone who wants to can sign up to receive the information through their RSS readers along with news and other Web site updates that offer this service. … Regardless of the current brouhaha over what that vision is, it might be possible to classify the Bush White House as jumping ahead of the curve on technology.

Why Audio?
President Franklin D. Roosevelt spoke directly to the American people about thirty times via radio from 1933 to 1944 in a series of broadcasts which later became known as “Fireside chats.”

During this Golden Age of Radio, FDR envisioned American families huddled around the radio in homes around the country listening to the voice of their President providing them assurance and comfort as the nation struggled to endure the trials of The Great Depression.

Today, the president typically records the radio address on Friday in the Cabinet Room with audio broadcast and web transcript publication embargoed until 10:06 AM EST Saturday morning. Originally, that time was chosen because the five minute national news reports aired at 10 AM, with the address immediately following. To honor that past tradition, we usually published the content on the White House staging servers before we went home on Friday night, and set the pages to auto-publish on Saturday at the appointed time.

Using video is an interesting — and definitely more modern approach, but I think it defeats the spirit and purpose of a “radio” address. There’s a big difference between audio and video presentations. Anyone who has ever set the tuner to AM to hear a local talkshow, subscribed to XM Radio, enjoyed the long form style of C-SPAN Radio coverage, National Public Radio reporting or the CBS Sunday Morning’s use of ambient sound during the nature segment can certainly appreciate the nuance of the medium.

How will President Obama’s radio address differ from any other Presidential webcast or televised speech he gives? Will it lessen the value of other White House addresses to the nation, like those typically delivered from the Oval Office? What about the fact that it might be in YouTube as opposed to just on WhiteHouse.gov (assuming E-Gov policies are changed to allow it)?

Well, here is President-Elect Obama’s first one from today. What do you think?

A couple weeks ago, I had the pleasure of making another trip to the “Live Music Capital of the World” (as well as a side visit to Dallas) for work and to visit WE’s Austin office.  On Saturday afternoon, Social Media Club Austin and Waggener Edstrom kindly hosted an event at Scholz Garten to welcome me to their town.  I met some terrific folks, including David J. Neff, who then introduced me to … his house.  

You see, David’s day job is with the American Cancer Society as Director of Web, Film and Interactive Strategy.  So, when it came time to sell his house, of course, he turned to the Internet.  Makes total sense, especially considering the challenges of the current market – why not use social media to help make a sale?  He’s still using a professional realtor to assist with negotiations, mortgage advice and legal paperwork, but he has been quite innovative in his approach thus far. 

First step was to launch a section on his blog to track his progress: Selling My House the Social Media Way. Next, he solicited feedback from friends via LinkedIn then got to work. Now, one can become a fan of his house on Facebook, and “Rate His Space” at HGTV and on Zillow.com. If you leave a question, he promises to answer it or you can just ping him via Twitter: @daveiam.

Also, while in Austin, I had the opportunity to speak at the RightOnline conference hosted by Americans for Prosperity and the Leadership Institute.  At the same time, the DailyKos crowd gathered just across town to hear Speaker Pelosi, Al Gore, Howard Dean and other “progressives” speak at Netroots Nation - even the C-SPAN Campaign 2008 Bus was on hand to cover some of the events. 

I participated in the opening panel at RightOnline along with David All and Matt Sheffield, moderated by Robert Bluey. I discussed some of the Web 2.0 advances that have occurred in the “DotGov” world during my time as White House Internet director – and since. Here’s the video, courtesy of Danny Glover at Eyeblast.tv, and my PowerPoint for those who would like follow along: How the Internet is Changing the Way We Govern

Later that afternoon, I presented during another session entitled Social Networking: Getting Tapped In where I walked through some of the more common social media sites – with an eye toward what may be coming down the road next.

Major thanks to SMC-Austin and WE folks who helped set up, host and attend the Scholz event. Also, I really appreciate those from AFP and LI for their hard work to organize the RightOnline conference.

David, good luck with the house – I’m a huge fan!

Related

In Texas, the Right Boots Up to Gain Strength Online (Washington Post)

In Online Politicking, Republicans Play Catch-Up (Wall Street Journal)

Austin hosts dueling conventions on Internet-era politics (Dallas Morning News)

Almacy is RightOnline. Well, we all are. (David All)

Making progress online at RightOnline (Abby Alger, TechRepublican)

Pictures from Americans For Prosperity-RightOnline-Samsphere Conference, Austin, Texas (Dr. Melissa Clouthier)

The popularity of the site has certainly grown, especially in the world of politics in recent months:

• The White House has been on Twitter for about a year.
  UPDATE 1/2009: President George W. Bush’s Twitter account (@TheWhiteHouse) was closed shortly after President Obama was sworn-in. The new account may be found at @whitehouse.
• Many presidential hopefuls were Twitterng early in the 2008 campaign including Sens. Edwards, Obama, Clinton and McCain.
• At the Personal Democracy Forum (PdF) on June 23-24 in New York, Ana Marie Cox moderated a policy debate between Liz Mair (for McCain) and Mike Nelson (for Obama) via Twitter (hashtag: #pdfdebate).
• Just this past week, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown was Twittering live from the G8 Summit in Toyako, Japan.

Although the U.S. House (@HouseFloor) and U.S. Senate (@SenateFloor) are both on Twitter, supposedly the leadership feels differently about individual Members of Congress using the tool.

Can We Be Frank?
So, what’s the issue? According to the House Administration Committee, any official communication with constituents needs to be approved by their Franking Commission which issues policies related to mailings from Congressional offices.

Rep. Culberson believes that preventing Members from Twittering is a violation of First Amendment rights regarding freedom of speech. House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) agrees and fired off a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

It has come to my attention that the Democratic-controlled Committee on House Administration, at the recommendation of the Democratic chairman of the Commission on Mailing Standards (Franking Commission), is considering the adoption of new congressional rules that would effectively shut down what has emerged as a free and helpfully uncensored pipeline of real-time information between the American people and their elected leaders.

I believe Members of Congress should have the ability to choose whichever service they believe will best assist in communicating with their constituents, and not be limited to only services “approved” by the House Administration Committee or any other government entity. We must encourage, not restrict, the free and open flow of uncensored information between the American people and their elected leaders over the Internet.

Members should be allowed to use technologies, websites, and services (paid or unpaid) to communicate with their constituents via text, video, or audio, so long as the content posted by the Member complies with House rules and Franking content regulations.

So, should tweets fall under House franking rules or does Congress need to adapt to 21st Century technology? I vote for the latter – and I am not alone.

Others, such as The Open House Project and the Sunlight Foundation are also calling on Congress to update their policies to reflect our changing digital world.

‘Twitter’ origin
A side note: After reading a few books to my 5 year-old daughter a couple weekends ago, I came across a character named “Twitter” in a Disney published fairy tale called “Beck and the Great Berry Battle.”

In the story, the hummingbirds get into a blackberry battle (actual berries, not RIM devices!) with the chipmunks over a big misunderstanding. Beck, an animal-talent fairy, attempts to resolve the dispute along with her friend, Twitter, a little blue hummingbird. They fly between the various animal factions delivering messages and attempting to broker peace, all the while dodging flying blackberries.

Hmmm. Note that the Twitter logo is a little blue bird. Coincidence? Don’t know, but for some reason I felt the need to tweet about it (@almacy).

UPDATE

During an interview with Chad Pergram from Fox News just outside the House chamber, Rep. Culberson LIVE streams via Qik and discusses the issues surrounding the proposed House rules to restrict Member content to only a list of “approved” websites. Look out CNN iReport, here comes iHouse.gov!

Related

Republican = Open, Democrat = Closed (Patrick Ruffini, The Next Right)

Pelosi: New Bipartisan House Rules Won’t Quash Free Speech Online (Wired)

Why does Pelosi want rules she already violates? (Soren Dayton, The Next Right)

Speaker Pelosi to Leader Boehner on Proposed Franking Changes (The Gavel: Speaker Pelosi’s official blog)

Culberson, Capuano, and the Struggle for Relevance (Michael Turk, Kung Fu Quip)

Sunlight Foundation launches LetOurCongressTweet.org, complete with @LOCT08 Twitter page, #LOCT08 hashtag “tweme” and this recommended tweet:

Nice work by Andrew (@agfhome) over at Washington Internet Daily to nab this Qik interview with Rep. Culberson.

On Day 2, I had the pleasure of participating on the Morning Plenary panel sponsored by Politico entitled, “White House 2.0.”  We discussed how the Internet, which has been so prevalent in the current presidiential race, will possibly change how a future Administration will govern.

The panel, moderated by Ari Schwartz, Center for Democracy and Technology included Sunlight Foundation Executive Director Ellen Miller, former Congressman Rick White of the Wood Bay Group and Tom Steinberg from the UK’s mySociety.org.

It was a very lively discussion where a number of innovative ideas for citizen activist and engagement websites were shared - but, in my opinion, most would be best managed outside the official dot gov arena.  There are a number of current restrictions and regulations that govern federal government sites that may provide some barriers to participation. 

For example, there are rules prohibiting federal government sites from linking to or publishing content on external sites other than .gov or .mil, concerns about info collected by agency sites while protecting user privacy, and compliance with Section 508 which requires dot gov sites to provide content in alternative formats for those who are sight or hearing impaired.  All certainly have merit, but these are rules that non-gov sites don’t have to adhere to which may create challenges when attempting to apply universal standards for digital dissemination.  Bottom line: policies will have to be changed in order to adapt to the growing and everchanging online landscape.

However, at the root of the issue seemed to be a general lack of familiarity of the purpose of “dot gov” sites.   I was surprised to hear one of the panelists characterize federal sites as nothing but a useless repository of government brochureware and press releases.  Not only is that statement incredibly unfair, it’s entirely at odds with the facts.

Of course, sites do serve the important function of communicating with the public on policy initiatives and agency news but many dot gov’s offer so much more, with new functionality being added every day by a myriad of hard working, dedicated public servants.

A few examples:

• The Education Department uses ED.gov to connect teachers from across the country to share lesson plans, best practices and provide training via the Teacher-to-Teacher Initiative.
• The Small Business Administration offers over 25 online training courses on SBA.gov for those interested in learning more about how to start, manage or advertise their business.
• The National Institutes of Health solicited feedback via NIH.gov in an effort enhance and improve the effectiveness of their peer review system.
• USA.gov, managed by the General Services Administration, is a wealth of information and offers over 100 government services accessible online.  

It is important to note that the Internet is still in it’s relative infancy when compared to other communication innovations like the telephone or TV.  When President Bush was elected in 2000, iPods, YouTube, Facebook, and Smartphones didn’t exist and most were still accessing the Internet via dial-up.

There is always room for improvement but, in my opinion, the Bush Administration has not been given due credit for the E-Gov advancements that have been made over the past seven years. A full list of all 24 Presidential E-Gov Initiatives may be found on the Office of Management and Budget’s eGov site located at egov.gov.

There has been some real progress indeed, including the move to paperless documents which travel electronically on a digital infrastructure built during President Bush’s time in office.  For the first time ever, a document was digitally transmitted from the Executive Branch to the Legislative Branch when the President submitted his FY09 eBudget eariler this month. It was digitally signed by the White House Executive Clerk with an unique authentication code which was successfully validated once it reached Capitol Hill.  Not only does this process increase efficiency, it also saves trees, time and resources.  As a result, GPO and GAO both announced that they were moving toward the paperless route, as well.

So, regardless of one’s party or personal politics – I am excited and anxious to see how the next President will build on the successes of our current one.  Especially since the candidates had to campaign so effectively online, they will definitely be expected to govern there in the same manner. 

Related

Wanted: A More Digital Congress  (NY Times Political Blog: The Caucus)

White House 2.0  (TechRepublican)

Politics Online Day 2: Morning Roundup  (Capitol Valley)

Politics Online Conference Day 2 – Morning Plenary  (The Spewker)

White House 2.0  (CDT: PolicyBeta)

http://.senate.gov – Technical difficulties.
Sorry, the http://.senate.gov web page you have requested is experiencing technical difficulties. The Webmaster has been alerted. …
www.senate.gov/~gov_affairs/egov/ – 2k – Cached – Similar pages

Then, by visiting the page, the visitor is greeted with:

Sorry, the http://.senate.gov web page you have requested is experiencing technical difficulties. The Webmaster has been alerted.

You will be automatically redirected to the http://.senate.gov Home page after 10 seconds.

If this problem persists, please contact the Office of the Secretary Webmaster at webmaster@sec.senate.gov.

After waiting 10 seconds, you are not redirected to the Senate.gov Home page, but rather to this: “Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage.”

Of course, I should have just visited the President’s E-Gov Initiative site in the first place.