Generating new sales leads can be challenging, time consuming and frustrating — but it’s a critical element in growing a business. Believe me, I’ve been there and can sympathize with anyone who has ever had to build a list from scratch, make a cold call or contact someone they simply don’t know.

Some people really thrive on the excitement of aggressively securing a new lead, while others are uncomfortable with the pursuit. In either case, there’s no excuse — especially with all the information available on the Internet these days — for not performing even the most basic research before reaching out to a prospect.

A couple weeks ago, I received an unsolicited sales email. Typically, I prefer to receive a phone call first, but if an email does arrive in my Inbox, I would hope that the sender would at least make sure that it’s relevant to the recipient.

But before I go into more detail about the email itself, I want to share a story from a few years back.

It was 8 PM on a weeknight and I had just arrived home from work a few minutes before. My 2yo daughter was wrapping up dinner. We were just about to head upstairs and get her ready for bed when we were both startled by a knock on the front door. I picked my daughter up in my arms and opened the door.

A young woman, most likely college-aged, stood on the front step with a clipboard in hand and a bag full of pamphlets thrown over her shoulder. It was dark out, so I couldn’t immediately determine what was printed on the literature or the reason for her visit.

Without introducing herself, she abruptly started in on her opening pitch and blurted out, “George Bush is ignoring climate change, hates the environment and wants to destroy it. Will join us in our fight to stop him?”

Before I could answer, she just kept right on talking. I stood there, staring at her as she spouted off several talking points filled with misinformation, distorted facts and partisan rhetoric. I let her continue for a minute or two, mostly because I wanted to hear what she had to say before I responded.

Unfortunately for her, it wasn’t a fair debate. I informed her that I was a White House staffer and had just posted several items to WhiteHouse.gov about President Bush’s commitment to the environment that very day including a “Setting the Record Straight” fact sheet entitled, “President Bush’s Strong Record of Addressing Climate Change.” How’s that for good timing?

Many of the statistics were still fresh in my mind and I picked apart her arguments one at a time with facts based on the president’s actual record. However, she was persistent. She kept looking to her clipboard for more talking point ammunition, even repeating a couple that I had just debunked.

All the while, I was holding my 2yo who had been observing our conversation quietly and patiently. My patience, on the other hand, was beginning to wear thin after 15 minutes or so. My 2yo was getting heavy, it was late, we all were tired and I still needed to get her ready for bed.

It was clear that we were just on different sides of the issue and that neither of us would budge so I needed politely end the discussion. In doing so, I offered a little advice:

“Look, I appreciate and respect the fact that you are going to door-to-door about an issue that you are passionate about. You have every right to do so and I commend you for getting involved and speaking out. However, you’re speaking to a President Bush supporter who is educated on the issues. Plus, you’re in a moderate to conservative neighborhood where misrepresenting facts and attacking the president probably won’t go over too well either. So, before you start knocking on doors, bothering people late at night in the privacy their homes and interrupting family time, I suggest you do the research.”

At that point, my 2yo (who was still learning to talk at the time) pumped her fist in the air and without missing a beat said, “Yeah, do the research!” I couldn’t have chosen a better way to end the conversation myself. We wished her a good night and closed the door.

I’ve told this story a number of times and that phrase, “Do the research!” has become a favorite among family and friends. I think about it now and again, particularly when someone isn’t diligent about obtaining general background information before tackling a project. Plus, it’s good advice — which brings me to the reason for the post.

As I mentioned, I received an email from a potential vendor that really missed the mark. I have included an image below but have redacted specifically identifiable information to protect the sender’s privacy.

My goal in writing this post is not to publicly embarrass anyone, but rather to point out ways to improve. There’s a right way and a wrong way to write effective email messages and much of it is plain common sense.

Here’s a list of where this email went wrong — along with some friendly “unsolicited” advice:

Time
Normally, messages sent at 2:23 AM ET wouldn’t be a problem except that my work email account is tied to my BlackBerry which buzzes when a new email arrives. Most of the time I sleep through it, but this one woke me up. Thanks for that.

Advice: Be considerate when choosing a day and time to send.

Subject
I know many rely heavily on catchy subject lines to increase open rates, but “Conference Call” is plain boring and misleading.

Advice: Get creative. If not, how about just using the name of the company, products, services or even something simple like “Introduction?”

Name
My name is David, not J.J. David is in my email address, as well. I have no idea who J.J. is or how I earned that nickname, but this email immediately lost credibility after I read that.

Advice: Use a person’s actual name. A formal salutation would be nice, as well.

Address
I live and work in Washington, DC — not Chicago. Perhaps Chicago is where J.J. lives.

Advice: Again, this could have been avoided with a little research. A simple Google search would’ve cleared this up.

Personalization
In the third paragraph, there’s some language about a “personalized and customized PDF presentation” which is attached to the email. The filename (VIP_J_J_Almacy.pdf) is quasi-personal. Don’t get me wrong, I’m flattered to be considered a “VIP” even if it’s in a PDF filename and I have to go by J.J. to attain that status. However, I was disappointed to see that the PDF was four pages of standard marketing materials with “JJ Almacy” and the name of my employer stamped on every page. There was nothing in there at all that seemed to be directly relevant to my clients or even my line of business.

Advice: Slapping someone’s name and company (even the correct one) on a template is not personalization. Even if you can’t cite minute details, providing relevant case studies based on geography or industry specific examples demonstrates a more thoughtful approach.

Attachment
Since it’s not coming from a trusted source, I am always hesitant to click on attachments for fear that it may be malware or some type of computer virus. Also, larger file sizes may bounce back or could clog up Inboxes.

Advice: Avoid attachments in initial email communications. Instead, connect with your potential client first to learn a little about their business objectives & challenges. Then, follow-up with a customized document that offers solutions and demonstrates tangible value for partnership. Another option is to provide links directing people to Web based versions of your case studies on your company Website in the body of your email. Of course, an in-person meeting is typically a more effective and preferred method to walk through presentation materials, if possible.

Contact
Next, the author — this company’s CEO — indicates that his EA (executive assistant) will be giving me a call to set up a time to speak with him. Really? I understand that some people rely heavily on assistants to manage schedules, but I found the tone of that sentence a little off-putting. If you have the time to send an unsolicited email fraught with errors, you certainly have the time to pick up the phone and call me yourself. Besides, it has been a couple weeks and still no word.

Advice: Everyone’s time is valuable. Remember, you are the one who is seeking their attention. So, be polite and respectful in your tone. Lastly, if you say you are going to follow-up, then do it.

If your target database is too large and you can’t do these things in an individualized manner for each person, then you should rethink your strategy.

Bottom line: Know your audience. Treat them with respect. Connect in authentic ways. Personalize without getting too personal. Seek to understand their challenges. Offer solutions. Be sincere.

And, oh yeah, before you begin: Do the research!

Back in March, Jose Antonio Vargas from The Washington Post assembled a bipartisan group of five panelists to periodically review President Obama’s White House Website in a feature called “Grading WhiteHouse.gov.”

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)

There has been a lot of buzz recently about how President-Elect Obama might carry the online momentum created during his campaign into the White House with him come January 2009. Taking a step in that direction, the President-Elect announced this week that he may alter the traditional method of delivering the Presidential Weekly Radio Address.

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?

Last night, Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John McCain participated in a forum on volunteerism and public service in conjuction with the ServiceNation summit at Columbia University in New York. Clearly, given McCain’s military service and Obama’s background as a community organizer, it should be no surprise to anyone that both presidential candidates were in agreement on the importance community service.

Yesterday was also the seventh anniversary of the 9/11/01 terrorist attacks that forever changed the lives of so many Americans. Earlier in the day, the two presidential candidates visited Ground Zero along with New York City’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Sen. McCain’s wife, Cindy. It was entirely appropriate and refreshing that both campaigns put politics aside in a brief moment of unity to pay their respects and honor the fallen.

President Bush observed a moment of silence on the South Lawn of the White House, then participated in the dedication ceremony of the 9/11 Pentagon Memorial. In a taped message this week (below), President Bush took the opportunity to reflect upon America’s strength, courage and grace in the wake of the attacks. He discussed the intent behind the creation of USA Freedom Corps: to connect Americans with opportunities to serve our country and to foster a culture of citizenship, responsibility and service.

I was actually in New York briefly myself yesterday. On my way back home from business travel in Seattle, I had a couple hours layover at JFK Airport before arriving at Dulles late last night. Honestly, I was a little nervous a couple weeks back when making travel plans and I realized that I would be flying from the west coast back east on 9/11.

In many ways, it felt like any other typical travel day. I got up, packed, checked out of my hotel and headed off to SEA-TAC. I shuffled through both the check-in counter and security line like an old pro, hunted down the closest Starbucks and made my way to the gate. Since I flew on JetBlue, I was able to watch some of the 9/11 coverage including some History Channel programming via my in-flight television – but the world still churned along and people continued to go about their business as usual.

I was in Washington, DC on 9/11/01 and will never forget the panic, fear and gravity of emotions I felt after the tragic events we all witnessed on that horrific day. Seven years later, it’s still difficult for me to comprehend the meaning of it all. Although I was quite pensive yesterday, it wasn’t until I boarded my plane in New York (JFK) en route to Dulles (IAD) that it truly hit me.

Just after we took off, I looked out my plane window and in the distance, I could see the twin World Trade Center spotlights shining from where the towers once stood. As I stared at the lights that brightly pierced the darkness and boldly beamed into the night sky, a profound sense of both sadness and hope came over me.

Although some wounds will never fully heal, our great nation has come a long way since that fateful day and we got through it … together.

As President Bush said:

The terrorists who attacked America on 9/11 underestimated our character. Evil may crush concrete and twist steel, but it can never break the spirit of the American people.

Indeed, setting politics aside to focus on service to country was a perfect way to commemorate the true essence of what it means to be an American and to remember the heroes who served, fought and died to defend and protect it. Never forget!

This week, a few hundred convened to attend the 2-day Politics Online Conference 2008 hosted by the  Institute for Politics Democracy and the Internet (IPDI) at the Renaissance Hotel in Washington, DC. 

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)

In preparation for an upcoming speaking engagement, I was doing some research on Sen. Lieberman’s (Independent-CT) past comments during a U.S. Senate hearing on E-Gov reauthorization.  So, I went to Google and searched for “lieberman egov” which yielded the following top organic result:

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.

As President Bush wraps up his weeklong trip to Africa today, there is some discussion as whether he has been given due credit for his strong commitment to the people of the region during his tenure.  Under President Bush, the United States has developed extensive progams and initiatives for Africa to address the issues of education, poverty, human rights, democracy, economic development, and health concerns such as the fight against HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other treatable diseases.

Jim Long (aka newmediajim), conducted a fascinating impromptu mobile video interview with Irish musician and political activist Sir Bob Geldof, of “We Are the World,” Band Aid, World Aid and The ONE Campaign fame. He has also teamed up with friend and U2 frontman, Bono, in many of these and other global charity endeavors. 

Sir Geldof stated that because of Iraq, the media, as well as many Americans and others in the world, understandably turned their focus away from the U.S. efforts and achievements in Africa.  He praised the President for his leadership and aid to the continent from day one “since he came into the job” stating that “what’s happening in Africa is probably the best that America has done, right up until now.”

At the end of the interview, Sir Geldof was asked about human rights violations in China and how that might affect the upcoming Summer 2008 Olympics slated for August 8th-24th in Beijing.  He called on the Chinese to “act responsibly” and encouraged citizens of the world to “turn off the telly” to get attention of advertisers in an effort to increase the pressure and make a telling impact. 

On Tuesday, Mrs. Laura Bush hosted Ask the White House and answered questions about the trip and U.S. Africa policy.  I also encourage you to read Ambassador Jendayi Frazer’s chat from April 2006 where she discusses the Sudan crisis in Darfur.

Update
After returning from a weeklong visit to Africa, President George W. Bush addressed the Leon H. Sullivan Foundation in Washington, DC on 2/26/2008 and narrated a photo slideshow from the trip.