Schools Get an F: Our Kids and Tech

While I am loathe to admit it, I danced on a lighted dance floor. I did The Hustle. I was quite underage to be going to clubs, but that's what we did. Those were the times I grew up in.*

Why the confession?

Because while I was a girl--disco dancing under a mirrored ball--I got a better computer education than high-schoolers get today.

At my working-class public high school, I took a "computer" class. We had to learn a language and write a program. We called the computer on the special phone, put the telephone receiver in suction cups and typed the commands to run the program. If the program didn't work, we had to figure out why. Line by line. And when it worked, we had accomplished something and did a happy dance.

I used  the C:\ prompt on my first computer (at work). Not because I am geeky, but because that was all there was. We had to imagine what was behind the dir command, because directories were opened one at a time. There was no tree, like in Windows, so you had to abstract and remember the directory structure.

The very, very basic programming and directory commands that I learned introduced me to using computers. I've been lucky enough to work with nice, smart, truly geeky people to help develop my technical knowledge. But I had something to build on, a basic computer literacy.

My kids go to pretty good schools. Their computer classes include how to use Excel and Powerpoint. Kids don't need to learn how to use productivity software. They just use it. "Programming," when offered, is usually HTML markup. They don't use logic. No IF...THEN...ELSE statements. The teachers don't use computers and are reluctant (don't know how?) to use them in class. The teachers who teach technology are hockey coaches. Kids get lessons in net-etiquette but not in three tier architecture.

We think that "born digital" kids know technology, but many of them can only put together a tacky, over-animated, under-researched slideshow. We have web "programmers" with a knowledge of HTML which they have parlayed into a visual programming language, but without any understanding of databases and data structures, systems analysis, or resource management. And, we have leaders who run programs based on technology, but who disengage whenever tech is mentioned.

Kids use technology and computers from sunup to sundown, but they don't know how it works. And they need to. Whether or not they are computer scientists or technologists, everyone needs a basic technical literacy. We teach the basics of reading, the building blocks of math, the structure of writing, but no fundamentals of technology. This is a huge mistake.

Government depends on the effective deployment of technology to solve problems. We need to recruit people who can write effective RFPs, navigate technology issues, oversee technology and technologists, as well as be geeks. But, that means we need people with the right knowledge and skills in the pipeline.

Kids do need to learn that The Cloud consists of physical servers, that data quality is critical to good output, that the semantic web can help machines make sense out of information on a web page so information structure counts, that information stored across multiple datasets and servers can be combined and mined, and all this is at least as important as whether a train leaving Boston for New York will beat an earlier, slower train from Providence.

Teachers, principals, schools, Secretary Duncan, let's get back to the future and do some meaningful updating of our technology curricula.

Technology is the fourth "R"--reading, (w)riting, 'rithmetic, and rechnology (that last one only works when spoken like Scooby-Doo another relic of my past).

[* here's how I was saved. Not quite fodder for On dot-gov.]

On the Side: Sidewiki and SideKick

First, a side of Google. A few weeks back, Google introduced a new feature on it's Toolbar letting people comment on any web page. Called Sidewiki, people with Google accounts can comment on the entire content of a Web page or about specific portions of the page. They can also publish these comments to Twitter, Facebook and Blogger accounts.

Why is this important? Well, it's importance depends on it's popularity, but it frees comments from websites by opening all websites to comments--outside any comment, moderation or policy of a site.

People can have discussions around your site, rather than on it. Google wins by collecting information about pages and sites from humans rather than machines to grow their search algorithms. It's also another potential ad space--imagine an ad for Coke on the Pepsi homepage, Or ads from private sector employers in the same browser window as usajobs.gov.

For site owners, Google lets you claim your sites on Sidewiki. It's a good idea, too, since site owner comments appear first. You'll need a Google Webmaster Tools account. Many government sites are already using the Google Webmaster tools after the the Google Sitemaps push in dot-gov a few years back. Follow the steps here to claim your site. It took my team about ten minutes.

My second side is a side of the cloud you didn't want to see. People using T-Mobile's Sidekick smart phone lost all of their data supposedly safe "in the cloud."

A server meltdown over the weekend wiped out the master copies of personal data -- including address books, calendars, to-do lists and photos -- accumulated by users of T-Mobile's formerly popular Sidekick smartphone.

This computing calamity allows Sidekick owners only a faint hope of backing up the information currently on their devices, and none of recovering anything they'd trusted to online storage. And it leaves T-Mobile and the operator of the Sidekick's data service, a Microsoft subsidiary formerly known as Danger, Inc. -- oh, the irony! -- with some serious explaining to do.--Read more on WaPost.

Is this a setback for cloud computing? Well, it does put a damper on the cloud hype-machine. Importantly, the "cloud" in question was a single server--a single point of failure. To me, that doesn't sound like a cloud application but an application called "cloud computing."

For government, at the simplest it means to make sure you know what you are buying, understand redundancies and risks, and NEVER let your data get out of your control. A tough reminder, caveat emptor.

When You Wish Upon The Cloud

Government cloud computing is being touted as the next new thing. Promises of cheaper costs and a reduced carbon footprint, along with consumer experience with the ease of free e-mail and document sharing via "the cloud" makes it a no-brainer. And, bonus, instead of using out-dated government computing structures, the commercial cloud promises innovation and flexibility.

It's not necessarily easy, though.

First, a reminder that cloud computing is real. There are physical servers in physical server farms. It's important to remember that The Cloud is made up of data centers running 24/7/365. There are racks and racks of blades, power supplies, spare parts, monitoring tools and data center staff. These servers and computing capacity are shared by The Cloud tenants. The Cloud is excess computing capacity from the likes of Amazon and Google. The Cloud is not frozen water crystals or fluffy cotton puffs. It's not magic. The Cloud is physical. Learn more about The Cloud here.

This is important because issues with cloud computing are real, too. And real is the backbone of my wish list for government cloud computing. I wish for

Analysis of the risks. Some security experts are very concerned about the security of cloud computing. Casey Coleman, CIO of the General Services Administration, said, "Something like 45 percent of the IT portfolio is ranked at a FISMA certification level of low. What that means is that those applications and that data are candidates for running on some sort of commercial or hybrid cloud service." [Read more from Coleman in Federal Computer Week.] So, what can securely be run in a cloud environment? What can't be? And no cheating on the analysis because the idea of the cloud makes you nervous. Be real.

Analysis of the costs. It makes intuitive sense that money can be saved by sharing computing resources, but the devil is always in the details. Consumers think that software and storage is free--Facebook, Gmail, Google Docs--but they pay by viewing advertisements. Will some applications and storage be on a commercial cloud? Will government data centers shut down? Will they connect and share computing power to become a gov-cloud? Will government share applications with commercial and retail tenants? What would it cost? What about software licensing? Cloud-wide software licensing agreements? Money is real, too.

Useful cloud services. I want to improve accessibility of content by having captioning, live captioning, and translation services on demand. I want a government-wide blogging platform like Blogger for Government. The Department of Defense is already doing this in the dot-mil domain--DoD Live, Army Live, Air Force Live, Coast Guard Live--using a common Wordpress install. I want to be able to transfer large files securely from agency to agency using a cloud FTP server. I want a platform solution for posting multimedia and conducting surveys. I want easy access to website analytics--and, better yet, a way to compare the traffic data across agencies. I want government-wide options for search, dialogue, white pages, email, relationship management, instant messaging. And, I want the service whether it's available on the GSA schedule or via another purchasing option. No reason to be parochial in The Cloud.

What I want from the government cloud. Quicker--like "just in time"--purchase and implementation of tools that are being used in government. Removing roadblocks and silos that make government function like hundreds or even thousands of governments instead of one. Each of these mini-governments have their own ways to buy, their own ideas of security, their own interpretations of the Privacy Act of 1974, their own cookie policies, their own implementations of accessibility guidelines, and their individual risk tolerances. This makes sense for individual agencies who know their particular niches, but it makes no sense to the people--businesses, NGOs, staff, citizens--who need a simple answer and a single conduit to find it. Last, and not the least, I want citizens to control their own identities and to manage their relationship with government not on a per-agency basis but in a system that recognizes that they are whole people. This would make a real difference in the way government does business.

Now, keeping it real, what are YOUR wishes for the government cloud?

If Social Media is the New Punk, Who Are You?

This is a fun video. And whether you do or don't like punk, you must admit that it influenced the music following. So, for fun, if gov-social media is to punk rock, where do you fit?

Ramones. Raw, stripped down and honest. Listen to Blitzkrieg Bop. Let's face it, not many in gov have the guts or the ability to be leaders in this space. But NGOs can.

Take a look at the innovative, crowd-sourced and brave efforts of the JumpStart Mapping Initiative. This program aims "to produce complete, free, and open public-domain street maps in developing countries." Volunteers are being trained in GIS surveying and cartography and walk the streets to produce a data set for a street map of the West Bank using web-based open source software to get to

• better transparency in government planning for civil services
• better relief and reporting for humanitarian efforts
• better fluidity in private markets
• the potential to generate job opportunities that enable businesses to enhance their services

See also the slides from Mikel Miron's program from Crisis Camp Ignite. This is one of the most amazing projects I have seen.

Another Ramone's era example is the useful, cool and edgy mashup created with official D.C. government data. Stumble Safely is a mobile application that helps people "find the best bars and a safe path to stumble home on." It uses uses data about D.C. crime, streets, liquor licenses, parks, and subway stations to build a safe route home as well as awareness information to let you know club hotspots. This is what happens when government takes the chance of opening up it's data stores-an application that gets people's attention and fills a niche need (or maybe desire). Watch the local government space for more Ramones-like applications.

The Clash: Punk from across the pond, The Clash took raw energy and politics and recognized that production values count with some added polish. Try Train in Vain. Still crazy innovative, they brought the in-your-face punk to a wider audience with the best LP of the 80's.

We are starting to see examples of Clash-level work, like the TSA Blog which brings a bite not normally seen in government discourse with an openness, and, yes, sometimes even in-your-face-ness that others have yet to emulate.

Another example, less edgy and more harmonic, is the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and their e-marketing social media efforts. Their steps into interaction in virtual worlds reaches new audiences (kids and their grandparents) to change people's behavior, like getting a flu vaccine. CDC is also using widgets to encourage people who care--not everyone--pass on public health information to their friends.

Much to come in this category.

U2: Still with a distinct sound, this Irish band has defined rock and roll for 25 years. From Two Hearts to Beautiful Day to a turn at the inauguration, they are definitely mainstream, but with an edge. They ask us to participate and to collaborate with them and with each other.

We are too soon for any U2-style examples as we're at the beginning of the trek (at this stage I see more examples like this).

We must continue to evolve, experiment and take risks. There would be no U2 without the Clash and no Clash without the Ramones. Punk evolves to mainstream, but a bit of the anarchy remains (did you hear what Bono said about int'l relations at the Inaugural concert?).

It's up to the folks who want more than a controlled, conservative approach to government "interaction" to step up to be dot-gov rockstars, the next Bono.

Hey, ho, let's GO!

5 Social Media Memes Changing Government

Federal Computer Week, reporting on a government leadership summit [sorry, too lazy to find out more about another one of these meetings prolly sponsored by some publisher or something] talks about five social media elements that will change the way the government works.  

My [very] loose roundup of the new memes are

1.  Where, once, government was leading on technology requirements, it is now one among many (competing) consumer interests. 

What I think this means: I've been at plenty of meetings where folks say "we're the government, we are huge, they want our business, they will change to meet our needs." But if a company's entire business model is advertisement, and government doesn't drive enough traffic, where is their incentive to destroy their income stream? If government wants to use the tools, we need to figure out how we can adapt.

2. Public engagement reveals the law of unintended consequences. 
What this means: Forays into social tools need to be flexible, and program managers need to keep an eye on results. None of us knows what will happen when we try something out--servers may crash, agencies may be overwhelmed with comments, the only response will be the chirps of crickets, or you might be stuck naming your international space station after a satirical opinionator. Good news for NASA on this last one--they saw an opportunity rather than a disaster.

3. Stop the analysis paralysis and make data available. 

What this means: Here is a big cultural change, from the government churning data into tables and reports that is delivered tied up in a bow to a dynamic process of developers unleashing the data to tell all kinds of stories. See #2. Also, expect a clamoring to open up more data sources.

4. It's the content, stupid!
What this means: Government can embarrass itself jumping into social streams without having anything to say. It's a conversation. It's a message. It's not just having a Facebook page or Twtitter account. It's not the technology, but the way that it's used.  So, if you say, "What's a hashtag?" you have no business putting your government agency on Twitter. Leading to #5.

5. This is the new way of the world. 
What this means: Despite old-fashioned concerns about employees goofing around (what's the difference between that sudoku book and YouTube, as far as productivity goes?) and real, to-be-addressed concerns about privacy and security, people are working, learning, collaborating and living differently. It's happening. And, even as some of the tools fall to the wayside and new ones developed, expectations of citizens and employees are out of the bottle. They can't be put back in.

Welcome to the changing government.

Read the FCW article I jumped off from, here. 

The Duty to Increase Technology Literacy

Robert Groves, President Obama's pick to lead the Census Bureau offered a new competency for leadership when he was before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, criticized the bureau's program to develop handheld computers..."It's really been appalling, after spending literally billions of dollars and much time, the Census Bureau scrapped its plans to use handheld technology for nonresponse follow-up due to significant performance problems and a loss of confidence in its contractors," Collins said.

[When Groves was] asked how he would correct problems associated with the handhelds. He said the IT issues stemmed partly from management issues and partly from an absence of research and development. Groves said he would ask the bureau's top leaders to become involved in all future IT projects.

"It seems clear in my part of the IT world, large-scale surveys, that successful hardware and software development has the user involved at the beginning, middle and end," he said, adding the traditional model of developing a list of requirements and waiting for the product to be built no longer works. "Leadership at Census can't walk away from these contracts; they must be involved. This way you build a little piece, if it's not satisfactory, you throw it away." [my emphasis] --Read the entire article on NextGov.

At a time when all of our systems are running on technology, it's critical that leaders and managers have a basic competency in technology. This doesn't mean that program managers need to know how to code, bring up a server or reindex a database. 

It does mean that they need an understanding of the complexity of systems, the confidence to ask questions, and the knowledge to pull a plug or refocus efforts when necessary. It means they need to get beyond the promise of what can be to a cool-eyed assessment of timelines and requirements. It means that leaders need to develop trusted tech-counselors to help fill their technical gaps.

In 2009, leaders can't outsource or abdicate technology knowledge. They need to amass it. Amen, Mr. Groves. 

Has RSS Peaked?

Forrester Research published a report a few months back on the state of RSS feeds [see below for info on RSS feeds]. Forrester thinks that the numbers of users of this technology has topped out. According to Steve Rubel, blogging at Micro Persuasion

[T]he research entitled "What's Holding RSS Back?," says that nearly half of marketers have moved to add feeds to their web sites. Further, RSS adoption among consumers is at 11% up from just 2% of users three years ago.  [But] that might be all she wrote for RSS' growth track.

According to the research, of the 89% of those who don't use feeds only 17% say they're interested in using them... "Unless marketers make a move to hook them — and try to convert their apathetic counterparts — RSS will never be more than a niche technology,"

RSS is only one form of opt-in communications. The potential is bigger when you look more broadly to social networking [like Facebook newsfeed, Twitter and Friendfeed]. This larger promise still holds and as the technologies become more invisible the newsfeed could even one day subsume RSS. --Read Steve's entire post. 

This trend is important since government is using RSS to broadcast press releases and other information to stakeholders. It's not costly if automated, so even if the numbers of users are small, there is little lift to implement.

The White House stimulus reporting site Recovery.gov is working to incorporate RSS feeds from Departments and agencies into their reporting, and the potential to use RSS to transmit data for mash ups remains appealing. While this technology may be niche as far as mass subscriptions go, the use of this data by developers and other key stakeholders makes the small effort create and maintain government RSS feeds worthwhile.

Did you want to learn more about RSS? Here is a great introduction video from CommonCraft:

Prototype to Development Success

Why do so many IT projects fail? Well, one of the reasons, according to CIO Update is the requirements process.

You know requirements: When you write down everything you want, might think you want, and might think you might think you want in excruciating detail? And then you turn over the document to the developers only to find that the software or website doesn't do what you expected? Or, from the developer point of view, the client didn't know what he wanted, kept changing the scope and then complained that it doesn't work?

Dot-gov exists on software. Software that can be complex. The challenge is 

While it may seem simple to just have the customers or end users write up a requirements document, those often include unnecessary features or have a tendency to omit key elements.

Skimping on gathering the requirements leads to problems down the road when users start adding to the project scope, or get upset about features that were never mentioned, but, they assumed, would be included. Getting it right takes time, so don't underestimate what it takes to actually determine what it needed or shortcut the process.--More on CIO Update

How about a suggestion to get this closer to right?

The flaw...is building a prototype to the requirements, rather than using the prototype to determine them.

“We're asking (developers) to define dynamic systems that configure themselves, based on previous answers and state changes and applying business rules,” [Brian Cook of Cook Enterprise Corp] said. “There is all this complexity and we expect people to describe in words what it will do? No wonder such dismal record in terms of the results; it is the wrong medium, the wrong way to approach requirements.”

The correct approach is to build a visual prototype and then engage with the stakeholders about how the system should work. Users can then work with the initial model and give their feedback. That feedback then gets incorporated into the final design. And since it is based on actual user experience, it eliminates trying to add in lots of additional features which may not be needed. He said that doing it this way gets more people engaged in the requirements process, instead of one expert dominating the discussion of what should be built.  --More on CIO Update

This method requires a clear set of goals, the right people building, reviewing and working on the prototype and significant time and engagement from the business owner. Just as Amazon has incrementally evolved over the years based on user feedback and goals to be the biggest online retailer, and  just as Google brings projects out in large, ongoing betas, so can complex projects be brought online using prototyping and a multi-phased approach.

Today's e-gov projects are never "done," but continue to be developed as part of a feedback loop between users, business owners and developers. This also means the development costs are an ongoing budget item--like subscriptions or building and vehicle maintenance. Let's look at updating what it means to develop and deploy software.

Who Controls Language on the Interwebs?

A rose by any new name may be unfindable.

Last week, official Washington began calling the artist formerly known as "swine flu" the "H1N1 flu," as did the World Health Organization. There are very good reasons for this--the virus isn't transmitted by eating pork products, it is hurting the economy, the relationship between pigs and the virus is debatable, it is more accurate to call it by it's scientific name and the government response is based on science, etc. 

That said, people are looking for information on "swine flu" and people are talking about "swine flu." From BlogPulse:

The blue line is the trend for the use of the term "swine flu" in blogs, and the orange trends "H1N1." 

Looking at Google Trends, we see that the change in terminology from "swine flu" to H1N1 was picked up and acknowledged in the news (lower graph), but is not having much impact in general web searches (upper graph). This data is for U.S. searches only.

CDC has said that they were going to work on transitioning their online information to H1N1 from swine. That sounds like a good idea, since we wouldn't want a choice of words interrupting people's ability to find critical health information. 

Takeaway? Use data and trends to find out what people are looking for and build web sites and tools according to data. Help people learn the new terms, but remember that once a meme has legs, it's ingrained in the collective and will not be replaced easily.

In the meantime, wash your hands!, and see CDC for up-to-date information on the H1N1 (swine) flu. 

If you want to track what is happening in the blogosphere the Nielsen BlogPulse is a great resource. Book mark it! Also, Google Trends for what people are looking for. Great FREE sources.

Innovation Causes Failure

The idea of opening up government to her citizens--allowing anyone in the country to ask the President a question or to comment on policy or to even set the policy agenda--seems to be a natural fit for technology, but continues to baffle.

Enter a really interesting interview on Federal Computer Week with Kim Patrick Kobza of Neighborhood America. Kobza takes a critical look at the Online Presidential Town Hall held last month. He notes some good elements, but

Fatal flaw: Where the application breaks down is the volume of solution possibilities – it is not credible. Think about it this way. Most choices in policy are essentially an “alternatives analysis” -- a choice between different but well defined solution possibilities. What is happening in whitehouse.gov is that the public is being asked to create and compare an almost infinite number of choices. Who could possibly read 53,808 questions? 53,808 alternatives? Most people understand that it just isn’t credible to think that that is possible. So the application creates an illusion of meritocracy when in fact the statistical significance of any one person’s participation is negligible. Put in a network context, it treats choices as a mechanical data management exercise, rather than as one that develops and advances logic to why choices might be made. There is no exchange that takes place between members within the network (citizens) and that limits the network value (intelligence) being generated.

Another thought on design. In my view, when building citizen participation, and more importantly, in discovering great ideas it is important that these types of sites build social attention. Social attention comes from novelty, uniqueness, and experiences that are fun and that promote learning. The design of this site again is not interesting. It might be argued it was interesting enough to gain 54,000 ideas. The other side of that argument is that many congressmen receive tens of thousands of emails a week. This application has not upped the standard or participation. [my emphasis] --Read the entire interview here. 

Kozba has some specific recommendations for improving future forays, but finishes by saying:

I believe that this is not a good example of how social networking adds value to public processes. In fact, in some ways these methods hurt more than help because they set the wrong citizen expectations. They are not our best effort so to speak. So citizens will ultimately be discouraged because the application as used, will not achieve results. 

...Success depends upon much more than data management and mashing up technology features. We spend a lot of time studying what works and what doesn’t, and have had experiences to validate over 10 years. That has built an appreciation for how hard it is to get this right.

What we showcase at a Whitehouse.gov should be a shining example of our best efforts. It should be state of the art and based on our deepest knowledge and experience. It should not be, and does not have to be, based on experimentation. 

Wow, this is a harsh criticism, but quite on target. Sometimes, we in dot-gov are quick to give ourselves props because we tried. But this isn't U-5 soccer, this is the big leagues. We should be competing with the best and most sophisticated technology implementations.

Yes, this is definitely a resource issue. Many smart and creative people in government are using duct-tape, paper clips and super glue to build engagement tools. People turn to"free" tools like YouTube, Blogger, Google Docs, Flickr, because the barriers are low and something can actually be accomplished.  There are world class websites in government being hand coded--no database, no content management systems. 

This innovation and creativity does not serve government well. 

The reliance on the cheap and the intuitive rather than the quality and the researched supports the lack of a cohesive government-wide approach to using technology to improve government. It allows "progress to be made" despite the absence of empirical data to drive decisions, the proliferation of stale and inflexible development methods, and a process that does not include citizens and their actual needs. It does not challenge the stove-piped agency development and procurement of technology solutions. By making things work, we aren't forced to face the requirements and to build an actual 21st century government. 

I was talking to a colleague yesterday, and she said that government is the best place to work--that the very best and the very brightest technologists and innovators in the country should be clamoring to work at the White House and HHS and the Department of Education, etc.  Where else can you work on projects and programs that have such a huge impact?

It's time to reconcile this last thought with the rest of this post.

Shorts: Tools not Gov20 Ready, Catch-22 and URL Shorteners

Twitter, Facebook not ready for Government 2.0? Bill Schrier, CIO for the City of Seattle and a creative adopter of technology, writes, "Amazingly enough, social networking tools may not be of much use to local government, unless there are significant improvements or new applications. How do social media companies and local governments need to change to really bring social networking "to the people"? " Schrier calls out issues with identity and relationships to government, challenges with volume and true one-one communications with officials, and the digital divide as issues that need to be thought through and addressed. Read his post.

Government 2.0 Meets Catch 22. NY Times blogger Saul Hansell writes, “Do I need to P.I.A. Facebook?” said the perplexed bureaucrat squished into a narrow basement hotel conference room in Washington DC. P.I.A. stands for Privacy Impact Assessment, a procedure that federal agencies must go through every time they create a new computer system. It was one of many questions about how the government can use the tools of Web 2.0 raised in a session of a privacy conference last week. Organizations of all sorts have been trying to figure out how they can adapt social networks, blogs, wiki’s and other Web tools to their traditional operating methods in order to connect to customers and partners." Really, who woulda thunk that a PIA would be mentioned in a NYT blog? Also, for the record the Dept of Homeland Security doesn't have a Facebook page per some misinformed "official" quoted in the blog. Read the entire post.

Analysis: Which URL Shortening Service Should You Use? Search Engine Land has a great primer and comparison for URL shorteners. "URL shortening services are experiencing a renaissance in the age of Twitter. When every character counts, these services reduce long URLs to tiny forms. But which is the best to use, when so many are offered and new ones seem to appear each day? Below, issues to consider and a breakdown of popular services, including recommendations and services to avoid (the new DiggBar being one of these)." Very practical read.

Shorts: Online POTUS Town Hall, Search & Better Websites

White House Using Google Moderator For Town Hall Meeting. And AppEngine. And YouTube. The White House is using Moderator, hosted on AppEngine, to determine which questions President Obama should answer at an online Town Hall meeting on Thursday. In just a few hours 6,932 people have submitted 7,037 questions and cast 236,048 votes on the site. Read more on TechCrunch.

And, Holy Cow, The White House Has a Digg Clone. The White House has launched a new web site where anyone can submit and vote up their most important questions for President Obama about the economy. That's right - the White House has a Digg clone! At least for the next two days. Activity on the site will culminate in Obama addressing the top questions on Thursday, March 26. Read more on ReadWriteWeb.

Transforming the Relationship Between Citizens and Government: Making Content Findable Online. [T]o truly make content available, it has to appear on the first page of search results for relevant queries on major search engines. What can government web sites do to be more findable? Findability is an in-depth process that involves both technical site architecture (ensuring search engines can crawl the pages) and content (ensuring the text is in the language of the searcher). As Kundra acknowledged, "“A two-way interaction between the government and its citizens,” he said, “will require a massive transformation by the government, on the back end, to ensure the government can deal with this new reality.”. But while a long-term plan to make government content findable in search engines is necessary, there are some basic steps that government sites can take to make content more visible in the short term. Read more from Vanessa Fox on O'Rielly blog.

Fed Web Managers Featured on Radio. Did you hear Fed 100 Winner Sheila Campbell on Federal News Radio? Sheila talks about helping citizens complete their top tasks and the Federal Web Managers Council. Also, the April Government Web Managers Conference. Listen here. Get information about the Conference in D.C., here.

In the Clouds? Cloud Computing Is Real

It seems that everyone has their heads up in the cloud--cloud computing. There also seems to be more than a few people who misunderstand what it is. Some people actually believe that there is a magic cloud "up there," where magic happens. For free.

There are some misleading definitions, like this one,

Cloud computing is the concept where agencies put software and information on the Internet so it is accessible from anywhere, at anytime. It is similar to the services offered by Google, Yahoo or companies that provide online e-mail or document access.--More from Federal News Radio.

While true in "concept," the cloud is physical, too. You don't "put software on the Internet." Software and data have to be hosted somewhere, just like on your hard drive. The "cloud" is really a third party server farm that you can buy (or use) a portion. It saves money because a business or government doesn't have to maintain servers and you can increase or decrease capacity as needed.

Here is a great little video that talks about cloud computing. It will help you in your discussions either by making you smarter or as a resource to help make others around you smarter.

Transparency Camp Building a Path Forward

Had the very good fortune today to attend Transparency Camp sponsored by the Sunlight Foundation.

This un-conference is about convening a trans-partisan tribe of open government advocates from all walks — government representatives, technologists, developers, NGOs, wonks and activists — to share knowledge on how to use new technologies to make our government transparent and meaningfully accessible to the public. --More on Transparency Camp

I haven't been to an "un-conference" before. Attendees put together the agenda on the fly, with sessions developing and held in available rooms. The real value is the convening of a great assemblage of geeks, consultants, practitioners from dot-gov both executive and leg branches, nonprofits and the private sector. Transparency has become a key touchstone since President Obama issued his oft-quoted Transparency Memo.

There was useful discussion about why transparency is important, the risks and costs of transparency and of not being transparent, privacy, recovery.gov, and crowd-sourcing (specifically the issue of the pot-people).

There was a lot of energy in the Camp (especially when geek superstars Tim O'Reilly and Craig Newmark were in sessions). Sessions ranged from technical to theoretical to how-to. During my sessions, people were talking about the importance of representative democracy as outlined in our Constitution and the hope that technologies will make government more responsive and more of the people, by the people, and for the people.

The folks in the room are the ones who will help to make it so.

You can get a feel for the Camp and see the twitterstream here.

The Change is Here

Change came today to whitehouse.gov, and I saw it happen live!

It was noon-oh-something, and I was looking at the site when it changed before my very eyes. I didn't refresh my browser. It was pushed new to my existing session. Pretty cool.

It's been a very long day, but I did want to acknowledge that in addition to a fabulous day on the mall--no arrests despite 2 million folks crowded on the mall and parade route--change is already happening.

Not so good, the new White House site deleted all the old pages so many federal sites--and other sites throughout the Interwebs--now have a bunch of broken links. The Good News, the White House site has a blog and other interactive and the promise of interactive features. Setting the bar for other government agencies!

See the quick change at www.state.gov, too. In addition to a nice and clean new look, they also archived the old Dipnote. It looks like they will continue to build on this popular destination. To the team at State: Nice work getting a half-dozen or so new blog posts up today! I hope State continues to provide a multimedia hub on the Dipnote site.

Fishing Through Documents for Information

Saw this, this morning and nodded. Another way folks can adopt to make government information more available.

Government likes it's DOCUMENTS. Documents are the coin of the realm. [Documents with alot of unnecessary over-syllabelized words, but that's another post] Papers, brochures, powerpoints, pdf's of press releases, reports, lists, tables, etc., etc., etc. Logos and boilerplate language reposted and repeated again and again in formats requiring downloads and plugins, opening new applications and interrupting the flow accessing and using information.

People (also sometimes called "users" in the tech space) should be able to choose the format that they will see the information. The open document format separates the content, styles, metadata and application settings into four separate XML files. Then the XML can be read by different applications that use the same standards.

Opening up documents--especially data, but also reports and papers--allow the information/content to be more easily analyzed and reused. It's a good step toward opening up the content locked in government websites and applications.

Tim O'Reilly's tweet also is a reminder that we need to think again about how we present information. Is the age of the memo done? Why have a report with five pages of introductory information when you are on the website that provides all the context via click? How do we tease the information from print-documents and integrate it into the information stream? How do we help people fish and take what they need from the stream?

Open APIs Are Good (Government)

The Atlantic has a good piece--albeit on the fringe of geeky--about government using open APIs.

APIs are a way to access data that can be easily used and shared--mashed up with other data for example. This is important because it makes government data available for re-use in other applications.

Well, USAspending.gov might look like any other government Web site, but its API—that’s Application Programming Interface—allows access to the site’s raw data in an open, standard file format...Enterprising programmers, researchers, bloggers, or watchdogs like the Sunlight Foundation or Govtrack can grab that data and slice it, dice it, chart it, graph it, map it, or mash it up with new feeds.

It’s not just the API that’s a big deal, Greg Elin, Sunlight’s chief data architect, told me. “It’s the discipline an API imposes,” he said. To build one, an agency has to record and store data in a way that anticipates public use. “Data sharing is no longer an afterthought,” Elin explained. “You begin with the notion that you’re going to share information. And you’re going to make it easy for people.” (Compare that with the approach of the Federal Communications Commission, which allows only limited searching of filings and comments; or that of the Department of Justice, which puts out data on foreign lobbying in unwieldy PDF format and binders.) An API also encourages the release of data in real time, instead of in occasional reports, like Federal Election Commission figures, or earmark spending. --Read the whole article.

My favorite quote from the article, "It’s not 1995. A single Web site is not the endgame anymore."

See also Marketing Profs Daily Fix for a better explanation of APIs for non-technical people, with a non-geek video.