E Pluribus Unum

Main menu

Skip to content
  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Disclosures

Tag Archives: public engagement

Post navigation

How this White House is failing to engage the public about the federal data strategy

Posted on July 8, 2019 by Alex

1

Today in Washington, DC, the White House Office of Management and Budget and the Data Coalition are hosting a public forum for feedback on the draft action plan for the new federal data strategy. Remote access is available for those … Continue reading →

Posted in access to information, digital government, freedom of information, government information technology, open data, open government, Open Government Partnership, technology, transparency, Trump Administration, White House Tagged Data Coalition, federal data strategy, Office of Management and Budget, open government, public engagement, White House

White House open data engagement suggestions highlights lack of public engagement [UPDATED]

Posted on July 22, 2014 by Alex

0

"Data jam" on disaster response at the #SafetyData Palooza.

Here’s how the White House Office of Science and Technology suggests government engage the public around open data:  data jams, datapaloozas and hackathons.

Open Data Engagement

So you’re opening up government data and making it easier to find and use – to inspire new ideas, spur economic growth, and ultimately make your agency more effective in achieving its mission. But you realize that your agency can’t just supply data – it’s also about getting and acting upon feedback, and catalyzing use of the data from a wide variety of stakeholders. A community event is a great way to hear ideas and feedback from passionate people, offer your expertise to people with thoughtful questions and evangelize your data assets. This document gives an overview of the main types of open data community events the U.S. Government holds.

Data Jam

A closed-press, day-long ideation event with developers, designers, and subject matter experts focused on one topic and top related open data sets. Several are held in succession, leading up to a datapalooza three months later. Ex: Health Data jam (HHS), 21st Century Jobs Jam (OVP, Commerce, OSTP), Mitigating Campus Sexual Assault (Department of Education, Department of Justice)

Goal: To connect tech and policy communities and get commitments to make things with open data, in support of agency mission and priorities.

Datapalooza

An open press celebration, demo day, and platform to announce government open data releases or improvements. Ex: Safety Datapalooza (DOT, CPSC, FDA.)

Goal: To celebrate open data tools, companies and commitments and build momentum for projects.

Hackathon

An event where developers, designers, and strategists work in teams to solve problems with software and/or hardware and demo the resulting work at the end of the day. Ex: White House “We The People” API Hackathon, The American Art API Hackathon

Goal: To build relationships with the tech community and to see immediate tools and prototypes.

Not mentioned: ongoing relationships over social media, use of email groups (hello, Investigative Reporters and Editors / NICAR and Sunlight Foundation), online communities like the ones hosted on Data.gov or Facebook or Google+, and one of the most important signals for demand and vectors for government data becoming open: requests from the Freedom of Information Act, both from industry and media, particularly data journalists.

Bottom line: Datajams, datapaloozas and hackathons are all new methods for the White House to engage the public, and they’ve advanced the policy goals espoused in the open data executive order, but they aren’t enough on of themselves to broadly engage the public or end users for data.

After all of these years, it’s unfortunate to see the policy folks at the White House still failing to acknowledge, in a policy document like this, many of the primary end users of their data or where to go find them and engage them, much less do so. It’s also consistently disappointing to see the @OpenGov Twitter account, with nearly 700,000 followers, just broadcast messages and ignore @replies, instead of acknowledging criticism and engaging the public more around these efforts.

Some government staffers have joined the NICAR mailing list and responded to the concerns or wishes expressed there: here’s hoping more follow onto other communities. In the meantime, I’m experimenting with a pull request on Github to see if these suggestions might be incorporated into the policy.

Update: The White House accepted my pull request.

20140722-152230-55350239.jpg

Engagement now includes:

Online Community

A website, social networking group and/or email mailing list where people who use open data congregate to offer feedback, tips, new uses or reuses, data requests or case studies. Ex: Data.gov communities, NICAR/IRE, Code for America and Sunlight Foundation email listserv, Open Government Facebook and Google+ groups

Goal: To build and sustain ongoing relationships with media, nonprofits, good government advocates and civic technologists

FOIA Officers and Ombudsman

Federal agency staff dedicated to handling Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests from industry and media. The Office of Government Information Services (OGIS) at the National Archives and FOIA staff at agencies

Goal: To monitor and measure the incoming demand for data and proactively release data in response to that signal.

This post has been updated, including the headline.

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Print
  • Email
  • More
  • Pocket
  • Tumblr
  • Reddit
  • Pinterest

Like this:

Like Loading...
Posted in digital government, FOIA, open data, open government, social media Tagged FOIA, open data, open government, public engagement, White House

FCC opens docket on Open Internet rulemaking. Will the Internet show up to comment?

Posted on February 25, 2014 by Alex

2

4808777114_aaa9fb7f2e_zOver at The Verge, editor-in-chief Nilay Patel is urging his readers to contact the Federal Communications Commission and urge the regulator to stand up for consumer protections, competition and to classify the Internet as a utility. The post includes a big graphic with the FCC’s phone number and FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler’s email, encouraging readers to weigh in.

The passionate post and call to action is missing a key component, however: a link to the new public docket on the Open Internet where people can submit official comments through the commission’s electronic file system. As useful as it might be to get the FCC’s phone’s ringing — and as entertaining as it might seem to make the FCC chairman’s ability to get to Inbox Zero impossible — not sending a river of traffic to that docket means that people won’t be adding their voices to those of the companies that are being regulated.

That’s a shame: These comments are entered into the public record and are legally binding. If this is something you care about, on either side of the issue, go weigh in here.

Unfortunately, people are continuing to comment on docket for the first open Internet rulemaking, from years ago. Given that the FCC has no indication on thus FCC.gov webpage that it’s the old one, you can hardly blame them. You can still see all of the old filings online from 2009 at the FCC’s ECFS system, from Level 3 Communication’s recent plea to avoid “anticompetitive, monopoly rent-seeking conduct” one from one B.Davis”: “It is vital that the internet stay neutral and an open field without influence forced upon consumers by internet providers. The internet should be considered as a utility.”

The relaunch of FCC.gov years ago was supposed to make all this easier.

““It is our intention that every proceeding before the agency will be available for public comment,” United States Chief Information Officer Steven VanRoekel told me. (He was the managing director of the FCC then). “If we think of citizens as shareholders, we can do a lot better. Under the Administrative Procedure Act, agencies will get public comments that enlighten decisions. When citizens care, they should be able to give government feedback, and government should be able to take action. We want to enable better feedback loops to enable that to happen.”

As he noted then, comments from Broadband.gov or OpenInternet.gov were entered into the public record. “Today, you can take us to court with one of the blog comments from Broadband.gov,” said VanRoekel. “More than 300,000 citizens gave comment on the Open Internet proceeding.”

Unfortunately, the FCC is not going the extra mile to get people onto the docket. While the commission has tweeted links to the chairman’s statements and fact sheet, they haven’t tweeted or put up a blog post that will lead people directly there.  To be blunt, not doing so looks like public engagement malpractice to me, promulgating press releases but failing to directly engage the American people on an issue of public interest using free social media tools and considerable platform the agency has built over the years.

The FCC may be seeking public comment but anyone clicking this tweet would be hard pressed to figure out how to give it: there’s no link to the Open Internet proceedings on the page.

FCC to propose new rules of the road for #OpenInternet, seeks public comment http://t.co/XBpueqx6mA #NetNeutrality

— The FCC (@FCC) February 19, 2014

So, here’s a free suggestion to the FCC, if they’re listening: tweet a link to the Open Internet proceedings out and give the American people who you serve an opportunity to weigh in.

UPDATE: The @FCC stepped up, tweeting a link to the Open Internet docket 3 times since February 27.

To submit comments on the #OpenInternet proceeding go to http://t.co/EjFcs6Ng9K & click Proceeding #14-28 #netneutrality

— The FCC (@FCC) February 27, 2014

As of March 5th, there were 9,341 comments submitted to proceeding 14-28.

UPDATE: As of May 15, the day of the FCC Open Hearing on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on the Open Internet, the 14-28 docket had received 21,017 comments. Watch live online at FCC.gov/live.

 

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Print
  • Email
  • More
  • Pocket
  • Tumblr
  • Reddit
  • Pinterest

Like this:

Like Loading...
Posted in digital government, open government, regulatory reform, social media Tagged civic engagement, digital government, FCC, open government, public engagement

Post navigation

Civic Texts

Emerging technology has the power to make democracy stronger or weaker. Understanding where, when, and how is the hard part. Subscribe to Civic Texts to get insights about how technologies are changing our democracy in your inbox.

280 character dispatches

My Tweets

Subscribe

RSS Feed RSS - Posts

Recent Posts

  • In 2021, We the People need a Public Chair to ask the White House public questions and pose petitions January 26, 2021
  • Open letter on open government to Press Secretary Psaki and White House officials January 26, 2021
  • Why Twitter and Facebook were right to ban President Trump January 26, 2021
  • IN A HISTORIC OVERRIDE OF TRUMP VETO, USA BANS ANONYMOUS SHELL COMPANIES January 1, 2021
  • In 2021, the White House should engage Americans in governance, not censor our data November 2, 2020
  • How to invest in closing America’s “information voids” and digital divides October 28, 2020
  • In a dual crisis of of pandemic and protest, DC extends “vote-by-email” to people who requested an absentee ballot June 3, 2020
  • Trump’s executive order on social media is a transparent attempt to stop his viral disinformation from being checked May 28, 2020
  • The watchdogs protecting American democracy and informing the public May 1, 2020
  • Using location data to fight COVID19 puts civil liberties under greater threat April 1, 2020

Top Posts & Pages

  • Why HealthSherpa.com is not a replacement for Healthcare.gov [UPDATED]
  • [FAQ] How do I download a tax transcript from IRS.gov?
  • About
  • In 2021, We the People need a Public Chair to ask the White House public questions and pose petitions
  • IN A HISTORIC OVERRIDE OF TRUMP VETO, USA BANS ANONYMOUS SHELL COMPANIES

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Flickr

Today, I asked the US National Archives if President Trump's direct messages on Twitter are presidential records. Answer: yes. Context: https://www.archives.gov/press/press-releases/2017/nr-43Foster HackathonHackathon
More Photos

Recent Comments

IN A HISTORIC OVERRI… on After years of delays and demo…
In 2021, the White H… on How this White House is failin…
Megha Jhariya on Digital technologies are disru…
The Cybersecurity 20… on In a dual crisis of of pandemi…
Trump’s execut… on Federal judge rules public off…

Archives

  • January 2021
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • September 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • June 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013

Meta

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.com
Create a website or blog at WordPress.com
Cancel

 
Loading Comments...
Comment
    ×
    loading Cancel
    Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
    Email check failed, please try again
    Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.
    %d bloggers like this: