K Street Cafe

Report: Facebook and the New Age of Privacy
(Fast Company)
A look into the evolution of Facebook privacy, from the F8 Conference in April to the present.

FourSquare and Seven Months From Now: Would Lincoln Be on LinkedIn? (The Huffington Post)
More politicians look toward the web for campaigning tools as midterm elections approach.

Originally published on Epolitics.com

Update: See also Kate Kaye’s earlier coverage at ClickZ.

Politico’s Morning Tech column has highlighted a clever use of mobile advertising in last week’s Florida primaries:

As the Sunshine State headed to the polls yesterday, down-ballot candidates bought Google online ads on mobile geo-targeted to specific districts, hoping to capture people who are doing last-minute research while waiting in line at the polls. Democratic State Senator and Attorney General hopeful Dan Gelber, who easily won his primary, used mobile Google ads for a 24-hour blitz on primary day. Lisa Small, likely soon to be declared winner of her circuit court judge race, also used the strategy, Google told us.

(more…)

Originally published on PMPU.org.

Clay Johnson, formerly of the Sunlight Foundation, wrote in his blog recently that “online petitions are a sham.”  He even used some of our data about congressional mail volumes to help make his point.  While I think that he makes some really keen observations and puts his finger on some of the key challenges, not all online advocacy is the same.

The Congressional Management Foundation has done research with both the senders (citizens) and the receivers (congressional offices) and majorities of both believe that advocacy campaigns are good for our country.  In fact, 73% of internet users who had contacted Congress in the last five years confirmed that they thought advocacy campaigns were good for Democracy.  On the Hill, 53% of the congressional staff that responded to our survey confirmed that even they (the ones on the front lines of helping Members manage communications) thought that advocacy campaigns directed at Congress were a good thing.

What’s more, our survey of internet users found that interest groups played an integral role in how citizens learn about and communicate with Congress.  Citizens join interest groups, visit their websites, and participate in their online petitions to learn about the issues they care about and to take collective action.  However, interest groups need to realize that they occupy a key role in the connection between their activists and the Members of Congress who represent them.  With that role comes responsibility.  On the Hill, congressional staff do not have the tools that they need to quickly distill meaning from the overwhelming volume of communications that they receive on any given day.

Clay is right that there are bad actors that don’t have the facilitation of genuine dialogue as their primary motivation.  However, we can’t let a minority of interest groups negate the critical and valuable—both to citizens and Congress—role that interest groups and grassroots advocates play.  He’s also right that there are currently some significant obstacles to meaningful communication.

It is specifically because there are these challenges, that we recently launched The Partnership For a More Perfect Union to help improve the relationship and communication between citizens and Members of Congress.  Through the Communicating with Congress Project we are seeking ways to improve the channel of communication between citizens and their elected officials because it’s good for citizens, Members, and democracy.

Originally published on PMPU.org.

The Congressional Management Foundation and its Partnership for a More Perfect Union present “Inside the Hill”, a web series that allows you to hear directly from Members and staff on how technology is changing the way Congress works. It is produced by Fleishman-Hillard.

In the third installment, “How and Why Does Congress Use Twitter,” congressional staff discuss the different uses and advantages of Twitter.

Previous editions of “Inside the Hill” are also available:

Congress and New Media: The World Has Changed

What Makes An Award Winning Website

The state of Maryland, the attorney general of Pennsylvania and a group of researchers are taking on political campaigns using social media platforms.

Maryland’s State Board of Elections is submitting a proposal on June 3 requiring candidates to include standard language on their Facebook pages and their associations with these campaigns. In addition, the proposal would require candidates to create a system of authenticated official Twitter accounts. If this proposal passes, regulation could begin as early as this year.
(more…)

In case you missed the Politics Online Conference last week, Microsoft announced the launch of Townhall, a new online community platform. The Townhall platform allows political campaigns to quickly launch a sophisticated ongoing community discussion with supporters and volunteers. The platform not only allows a campaign to manage the community, but also gather instant and ongoing feedback from voters through polls, surveys and other kinds of data feedback mechanisms.

Of course, Microsoft is not new to the world of political campaigns. Its Windows operating system and Office products have been the staple technologies of political campaigns for decades. Campaigns of all stripes would also be well advised to explore how Microsoft Tag and Windows Live Messenger can be used to communicate and collaborate with voters.

(more…)

Last week at the Politics Online Conference, I sat on a panel where the question of e-mail versus social media was posed.  Is social media replacing e-mail?  Are members who join through social media more or less valuable than members collected via e-mail?
(more…)

This weekend, nearly 300 top transparency and open government experts from non-profit, technology developer, and government staff communities gathered at George Washington University to attend the Sunlight Foundation’s Transparency Camp 2010. The purpose of this second annual “unconference” was to clarify the needs for making government transparent, both from a philosophical and a how-to perspective.

As with all of these self-organizing, “barcamp-style” unconferences, participants are actively tweeting their thoughts throughout the sessions. The depth of these sessions and Twitter discussions is such that this article cannot adequately cover them. Thankfully, the tweet-stream is available online here (or you can follow the hashtags #TCamp2010 and #TCamp10 yourself).

Some of the key points raised in sessions include:

1. Making government data accessible in online, machine-readable format is essential.

2. Transparency is essential to improve trust in government by making it more accountable.

3. Transparency is a long-term need, so building a strong foundation to ensure it continues to develop is essential.

4. Building a foundation for transparency means we cannot use as a short-term success metric how many people use what we are building now (that audience will grow over time).

5. Digital divide issues remain important and they are building universal broadband network, getting computers and mobile devices into the hands of underserved communities, training them on how to use these tools, and developing a culture that encourages people to use these resources.

The conversation will continue on Twitter and elsewhere, so book mark the Tweetstream link, follow along, and add your thoughts.

I recently gave a lecture at American University’s Public Affairs and Advocacy Institute on how to use social media and other online strategies for advocacy. You can watch it here.

GOP Leads Media Charge (The Hill)
Republican’s social media agendas are becoming prominent in state elections and daily constituent outreach efforts.

Members Grapple With Media Trends
(Roll Call – subscription required)
House members are still trying to figure out how to effectively use new media to streamline internal communication as well as amplify their message to the public.