It has only been a month, so I suppose some patience is needed. But so far, the new Obama White House has shown little of the Internet savvy that was on display during the campaign.
That has been brought home by the handling of public “discussion” surrounding the stimulus package (which was signed into law on Tuesday). Before assuming office, Mr Obama promised to open all non-urgent legislation for online comment five days before signing it. The stimulus package got nearly that amount of time (according to TechPresident) – but the discussion was entirely one-way, which doesn’t really make it much of a discussion at all.
Anyone wanting to get into the conversation on Whitehouse.gov was met by this very intimidating page, which offered the chance to read the bill in its entirety (I wouldn’t recommend it) before sending a comment of up to 5,000 characters (longer than most school essays). There is no indication about what will happen next – whether anyone will actually read the messages, or what they will do about them. There is no way to see anyone else’s comments. Just a void.
Considering this is one of the most important pieces of legislation in years, that it will directly impact the lives of millions of people, and that it has aroused incredibly strong feelings across the country, this hardly looked like a serious attempt to “join the conversation”.
What would you rather do – cast 5,000 characters into a vacuum, or tap out 140 characters and be part of a vibrant discussion on Twitter? (Typing “stimulus” into this Twitter search box brings up plenty of commentary.)
This is not an isolated failing. As Saul Hansell at the New York Times points out, the White House has also asked for feedback from the American public about how the stimulus package is working in practice. In a line that sounds disturbingly like an advertisement for rehab, you are invited to “share your recovery story”.
But what will happen to all those heart-warming recovery stories? Who knows.
This lack of transparency is a serious failing. Any use the White House makes of these comments in future – any individual stories it chooses to single out and publicise, any claims it makes for the overall tenor of the comments – will be deeply suspect. There will be no way to tell whether comments have been used selectively, or out of context, to make whatever point the White House requires.
And that sounds very much like politics as usual.
