As more and more civil servants, government employees and politicians dip their toes in the rolling sea we like to call social media*, they are separating into three schools of behaviour:

• advocates for social media
• advocates for increased transparency in government
• advocates for advances in policy and programs

It’s that last group that can find themselves in real trouble. The first two are just blowing smoke and talking sweetness, in most citizen’s eyes.

Take the example of Owen Barder, currently the Director of the Global Development Effectiveness Department at the U.K. Department for International Development.

His personal blog is down after a right slagging in the Daily Mail. The Mail excerpted from his blog posts, concentrating in particular on an entry that apparently drew ties between Tony Blair, George Bush and Adolph Hitler. (commenters on LGNewMedia point out that his post was actually quoting from a piece published in the Guardian)

Now, Barder is not a neophyte to communications. He’s a senior official in the British government, and among previous positions was Director of Information, Communications and Knowledge at the same Department.

I haven’t been able to read his blog, so I won’t make any assumptions about its content or his judgment. Several commenters note that the Mail may have been motivated, in part, by Barder’s past work for Labour PM Tony Blair.

But civil servants have to be aware that their online musings may be exposed to much greater criticism than normally expected online. The freewheeling and bare chested mannerisms promoted by most pioneer bloggers are inconceivable for government bloggers: they will targeted for greater scrutiny and will be allowed less room for error.

Government blogs, podcasts, and other social media experiments will likely be researched to death for evidence of:

• political bias
• poor theoretical judgment
• poor political judgment
• selective use of information
• levity and lack of timbre befitting a civil servant
• lack of empathy for the common man

As Che Tibby points out, a “hot-heated morning with too much coffee can, and will, become a permanent record. If you’re a public servant who wants to blog, try to avoid typing anything at all around heated events in the political cycle.”

Most civil servants are used to tempering how they express their actual opinions when speaking in the pub, at conferences and around crazy Aunt Mae the libertarian. Maybe we need to remember that caution when working online.

At the very least, civil servants have to remember to provide context, clearly identify sources and ring fence their arguments. Oh - and remember the role civil servants always play in relation to their political leaders.

*(wow, really beat that metaphor to death, didn’t I?)

Sometimes, it’s useful to see how your high profile media event rolls out from the viewpoint of a bystander and beneficiary.

Matt Haughey, of MetaFilter, offers Seven tips on how to run a successful community. Many experienced social media professionals, when pitching to the uninitiated, dance around the level of effort and labour needed to successfully launch a new community. The benefits are undeniable! The costs are minimal! Your stakeholders will flock to your community!

Not for Matt:

“If you’ve got an existing site/service that you’re planning to add a community or social component to, don’t expect someone with a full workload to simply take it on and spend a few minutes here and there maintaining it. Your best bet would be devoting someone full-time to the effort.”

Just as important for government types contemplating launching social media apps are suggestions he originally published in 2001. Repeated again: a good community demands attention and nurturing.

Identifying a social media “expert” in your communications, consultations, outreach or community office is a fantastic first step, but a successful effort requires a partnership with the relevant policy analysts. Or the appropriate program specialists. Only together will you be able to plant the seeds of a community or discussion that will attract readers and participants.

“Seed content sets the stage

In the early months of a community site, it’s important that there is good content there, and that the comments or audience interaction are as close to optimal as possible, so that others reading the site can get a feel for how they are expected to act. If you’re building a site that covers politics and you’re dreaming of lively debate with a specific slant, make sure your first few articles, essays, or threads cover a good topic, and that some discussion follows where users (more than one) are debating things in an intelligent way. New members will see what is currently on the site, and react accordingly. If there is considerate and helpful criticism, others will usually follow. If there are “first posts!” and posts making threats on other members, other such garbage will follow that as well.

If it’s a company discussion forum, set up some threads and have some friends start discussions. If it’s a community of airplane enthusiasts, try and find 2 or 3 people to help start the site off the same way, by finding content and discussing it in a proper manner. You’re not shooting for having hundreds of fake discussion posts with no one, you’re just trying to convey a code of conduct by starting with things you can use as examples, and new members can follow.”

Matt echoes this advice in his more recent post:

“Be the best member of your site. Lead by example by participating as much as you can in your own community. This is a good way to attract other well-intentioned members of your site and also reminds everyone a real person is behind it all and building the best community they can for everyone. Speak honestly and be supportive of other members. When I think of all the communities I’m a part of, the ones I love are the ones I see the creators using everyday. “

Unfortunately, many government public relations specialists don’t have the resources to tend to a network of community sites, discussion threads and comment moderation queues.

In any other situation, like a trade show or a large event, they might contract out excess workload to external agencies: that is CLEARLY NOT an option here.

No matter how detailed the brief or longstanding the relationship between government organization and agency, an outsider cannot speak knowledgeably (or legitimately) about the “state of play” in policy development and program implementation.

More importantly, most people would not accept that their government is allowing the most direct form of communications (other than accosting your Member of Parliament while they’re doorstepping) to be stick handled and filtered by an outside supplier.

Obviously,  government types chasing the implementation of an effective social media program face a dual challenge: arguing that social media is the most effective and most responsive method to communicate with citizens and stakeholders WHILE arguing for more financial and human resources.

Damn those fly by the seat of your pants Web 2.0 firms and their exposed brick offices! They swoop in with their flashy shirts, tight slacks and MB-heavy powerpoints and make it all seem so easy!

Over in Old Blighty, the Conservative Party is looking for a new Digital Development Manager for their trio of sites (Conservatives.com, Webcameron and SortIt). Usual job description for this type of position, except for this one qualification:

• Developing sustainable revenue streams across the our digital portfolio.

That’s an unusual goal for a political party. Unless they foresee revenue pouring in from fees generated by new mobile and text message campaigns.

Like a David Cameron Advice for School Leavers line.

I could imagine some sort of political drinking game, where young political operatives would flip amusing and wry texts, all the while contributing 10p at a time to the Party.

Technorati Tags: engagement, consultation, Civil Society

I’ve got some colleagues who are seriously addicted to Facebook. Luckily, they don’t work for the Ontario provincial government, where the site was banned yesterday. Despite knee-jerk reactions from bureaucrats largely concerned with bandwidth bottlenecks, it seems that “respectable” networking sites like Facebook (or myragan) may prove to be the thin edge of the wedge for social media in the workplace.

Simply reading blogs, which is a frequent activity in government offices around the world, really doesn’t count as a participatory activity that builds value. Listening to podcasts, while informative, may not lead to further interaction with the podcasters or their audiences.

Social networking sites, on the other hand, offer office-dwellers an opportunity to extend their network of professional and personal contacts.

The “friend of a friend of a friend’s colleague” model may be their first chance to stumble into new friendships and networks since smokers were forced to take their fags to the lowest level of the parking garage.

“When workers tried to log on to their accounts yesterday, they were greeted with the same “access denied” message that pops up on their screens should someone attempt to download pornography on an Ontario government computer.

“The Internet website that you have requested has been deemed unacceptable for use for government business purposes,” the warning reads.

Facebook joins YouTube, online poker gambling websites and hardcore sex sites as verboten in any provincial government office across Ontario, said Government Services Minister Gerry Phillips.

But similar rival MySpace is still accessible to provincial government employees at work.

Facebook is prohibited from being used on computers in some – but not all – federal departments in Ottawa but the provincial ban affects every Ontario ministry.

“The staff determined it’s not as directly related to the workplace as we’d like it to be so we’re restricting access to it,” [Government Services Minister] Phillips told the Toronto Star.”