An Advisor for the "E-Government Strategy & Policy" contacted me "looking to get some input from the New Zealand blogging community regarding the potential future blogging may have as a tool of communication by State servants and services (not, as of yet, elected representatives). As part of the E-government strategy, the State Services Commission is currently assessing the potential value of blogs in the public sector to engage with stakeholders, exchange information and views on policy and service delivery."
Well the obvious thing would be to put up a post about it and let you, the commenters have a crack as well. The Advisor then added that their responsibilities - and by extension probably that of all staff in the public service and by further extension that of any blog operated in an official capacity - were to:
Now I see nothing incompatible with that as far as presentation of posts go as long as the official blogger is competent and does not try to respond too off-hand to comments. Because the comments may get personal or heated it may even be appropriate that the official blogger/moderator even not get involved with comments at all and just passively note them. I consider the ability for punters to make comments and have them available for others to comment on to be absolutely criticial to the success of any official blog.
So here are the questions he posed:
1. Blogs have connotations of being personal, and are often opinionated. Do you feel either or both of these are essential aspects of what a blog is?
2. Do you think a blog is suitable tool for an organisation to communicate with? What risks / safeguards do you think they carry/need?
3. Are you aware of the NZAID blog? Do you have any thoughts on its utility?
4. Do you feel a blog would provide more transparency for State servants/services? Do you feel there is a lack of transparency currently?
5. Would a blog be an appropriate medium for discussion on policy or