I cleaned up Detriot, now it's on to Washington.

In 2007 VentureBeat.com reported that if elected, Barack Obama would be the first president to appoint a cabinet-level Chief Technology Officer (CTO). At the time, the President-elect had already drafted an ambitious technology plan with two of the main initiatives being the creation of a more transparent government and the stimulation of job growth (mostly through the development of broadband networks).

Regardless of whether it’s a national broadband buildout to create jobs, increased cybersecurity initiatives or the implementation of an enterprise architecture system to streamline the way agencies handle their day to day business, someone with brains and clout is needed to fill what will be one the most important jobs in government over the next 50 years.

Rather than provide my misguided ideas about who would excel in the position, I’ll leave it to folks who are smarter than the above average PR guy. Several notable bloggers and writers have created lists of potential candidates, some of which are highlighted below.

Dan Tynan – Blogger/Freelance Writer – Who will be king of the geeks? – “Al Gore. Sure, he invented the Internet, but can he get the White House email system to work properly? Even if he were qualified he wouldn’t want the job; he’s too busy saving the planet one polar bear at a time.”

Tom Lowry of BusinessWeek – The Short List for U.S. technology Officer – Quoting Ed Felten, a U.S. CTO candidate and professor of computer science and public affairs at Princeton University, “First, the CTO could act as the cybersecurity czar, ensuring that reliability of the government infrastructure is protected. And much like the role of presidential science adviser, the CTO could offer advice to the president on all areas of technology. The role could be a catalyst to push us closer to being a more entrepreneurial, high-tech country.”

Jason Hiner of ZDnet.com – 10 Candidates who could become Obama’s CTO – On Julius Genachowski, founder of LaunchBox Digital, “Genachowski went to Harvard Law School with Obama and served as an advisor to the Obama campaign on technology issues, even helping to draft Obama’s technology platform. He previously served as chief of business operations at InterActive Corp, was an FCC advisor during the Clinton administration, and founded his own company, LaunchBox Digital, to help tech startups. Since the election, Obama has named Genachowski to his transition team. It’s likely that he will have a role in the Obama administration, either as the first CTO or, more likely, as head of the FCC.”

Robert Scoble – Tech Evangelist/Blogger for Scobelizer.com – Who Should Be U.S. CTO? – Posted a video interview on Fast Company’s site with Larry Lessig, founder of Creative Commons and professor of law at Stanford University. Consequently, Mr. Lessig is not interested in the position but his description of the CTO’s role as well as Robert Scoble’s suggestions and all of the reader comments make this worth a visit.

Posted by: Nick

The writers of a recent military report examining the mobile technologies used by terrorists, theorized that

militants might pair some of these mobile applications with Twitter, to magnify their impact.

Part of the foundation of this idea came from the Republican National Convention where

Twitter was [...] used as a countersurveillance, command and control, and movement tool [...] The activists would Tweet each other and their Twitter pages to add information on what was happening with Law Enforcement near real time.

In response, Dan Tynan makes a fair point in his Computerworld “Culture Crash” blog, noting:

Saying Twitter can be used by terrorists is a bit like saying oxygen can be used by terrorists.

[...]

But is it such a great leap to suggest that when the US Army means “terrorists,” they’re not just thinking of fanatics with bombs who blow up innocent people, but ordinary folks who might occasionally be moved to exercise their Constitutional rights?

Check out the rogues gallery of evil doers cited by the report:

“Twitter has also become a social activism tool for socialists, human rights groups, communists, vegetarians, anarchists, religious communities, atheists, political enthusiasts, hacktivists and others to communicate with each other and to send messages to broader audiences.”

I love one of the comments to this posting:

We’re not really terrorists, but we are atheists. Where do we turn ourselves in?

Of course, if some activist or anti-social group does decide to use Twitter, they are going to have to face the same issues we regular non-Twitterrorists face.

*checking Twitter*

тупоумная американская технология!

Kalalau Lookout on the western side of Kauai

When I buckled my seatbelt low and tight recently on US Airways flight #146 to Hawaii and flipped open the in-flight magazine to an article by Dan Tynan on Twitter, I knew it was time to blog it. Two nights before, 100 other people and I packed into my friend Mike Schinkel’s buzzing Atlanta Web Entrepreneur’s meeting about…Twitter, including a video conference with Robert Scoble. For a Twitter tutorial, Mike’s slides are the best.

Twitter is a technique, an Instant Messenger-like micro-blog using 140 characters, a social networking platform, a birdsong. That said, concentrate on the relationships, not the technologies [thanks, Charlene Li in her book Groundswell, pg 18.].

Speaking of relationships, you might wonder: are your customers talking on Twitter without you? To find out, go to www.twitter.com and search for your company name.  Want to try out Twitter? Will it help your company reach its strategic objectives?  Set up a free account and keep these three things in mind:

1. Set your intention; why do you want to use Twitter?
2. Listen first.
3. Remember it is more important who you follow = where you’re getting your input, than who follows you [per Robert Scoble]
   

Thanks to my friend Desiree Scales for her 3-part blog series on “How to Make Twitter Work for You.”  Included is Darren Rowse’s “Twitter for Beginners–5 Things to do as a New Twitter User.”

Twitter rules in the Networked Economy, Rule #9, that is: 9) Relationship Tech. “As the soft trumps the hard, the most powerful technologies are those that enhance, amplify, extend, augment, distill, recall, expand, and develop soft relationships of all types.”

I have to be careful with all these new media options (remember the chameleon who crawled into a box of crayolas and exploded?); and for now have decided to join the conversation via FaceBook for family, Twitter (@Juliesquires) for business friends and this blog.

[Update:  Sept 5, Just received our copy of Federal Computer Week.  Cover story?  "What's the Buzz about Twitter?"  See Heather Hayes' story, "Psst!  Are You Twittering Yet?" ]

[Updated Oct 13, 2008:  Thanks, Debbie Reale, for pointing me to this blog "50 Ideas on Using Twitter for Business." Short and sweet.]

[Updated Dec 1, 2008:  Thanks to Tim O'Reilly who wrote, during Thanksgiving down time, "Why I love Twitter."    You remember Tim; he coined the "Web 2.0" phrase.]

[Updated Dec 13, 2008:  Twitter for Beginners. ]

[Updated Mar 9, 2009: The Washington Post's Kim Hart: "Firms Take to The Tweetable Business Model"]

[Updated Mar 12, 2009: Thanks Tammy Farley with The Rainmaker Group:“100 Twitter Tools to Help You Achieve All Your Goals"]

[Updated April 17, 2009:  Excellent article by my friend and colleague, Joab Jackson - senior technology editor with Government Compute News: Twitter Tools on the Rise. ]

Enjoy and Aloha.

]]> http://fly4change.wordpress.com/2008/05/31/debate-continues-does-anonymity-hurt-social-media-success/ Sat, 31 May 2008 05:29:45 +0000 socialbutterfly4change http://fly4change.wordpress.com/2008/05/31/debate-continues-does-anonymity-hurt-social-media-success/

As mentioned in my previous post, I read an interesting article by Dan Tynan titled: For Change, Use a Wiki. This particular article grabbed my attention not because of its discussion about wikis, but because of two other main points Tynan makes:

1. Collaborative web sites are becoming tools for social change…driving collective work into collective action.
2. The other reason this article grabbed my attention was because it brought up the issue of anonymity when dealing with collective action and social change by asking the question:

Does anonymity injure a social media initiative’s success?

Tynan not only talks about wikis potential good for social change, but also warns that this collective action can too easily mean collective anonymity.

With collective anonymity, it is harder to identify who is doing what and why. It is like an added shield of protection in someways in that with anonymity, accountability is lacking. This is especially dangerous when it comes to collective think.

Now, you’re probably thinking, “Miss SocialButterfly, you are anonymous.” I am already ahead of you. I am open to disclosing who I am. If someone contacts me or asks me, and there is professional relationship-building occurring, then I will openly share who I am, what I am doing and why. Plus, I am an individual.

Thus, onto this question at hand. The article continues acknowledging that there will always be ill-intentioned individuals and groups out in existence and is optimistic that the good, the changebloggers and agents for good, will outnumber the bad.

Tynan gave two credentials for how to separate the pack for well-intentioned and ill-intentioned motives. The good will not be anonymous because A) They care about their online reputations and B) Want to collaborate for social change.

In conclusion, Tynan quotes quotes Andrew Hopping, Community Liaison for NASA’s CoLab wiki who shared:

“As with any technology, there are benevolent uses and malevolent ones. In any community I’m part of there’s little patience for people who want to stay anonymous. Our goal is to create a vibrant, transparent, and effective federal agency. To cause any form of social change, it starts with and ends with people you trust. Anonymity doesn’t lend itself to that at all.”

Where do you stand? Can social change be accomplished despite anonymity?

Upon my flight into Baltimore the other day, I read an interesting US Airways Magazine article in its Digital Life Section titled: For Change, Use a Wiki. This particular article for some odd reason, I can’t find online, but it was written by Dan Tynan who also has his own blog Tynan on Technology.

In this article, Tynan leads stating:

“Collaborative Web sites are becoming tools for social change. [Continuing] …What started as an easy way to collaborate has morphed into a tool that could change the world.”

This article first gained my attention because it talked about wikis in particular and how they could relate to social change movements. Backing up, a wiki is a collaborative work space of web pages that allows for anyone who can access them to edit, contribute or modify content. A wiki can also track the editing process and can either be public for open access, such as Wikipedia, or be used internally with access for certain users.

Tynan’s article raised my eyebrows [1] because he raises attention that Wikis are now turning the term collective work into collective action. And, today, of all things, guess what I find… THE SOCIAL MARKETING WIKI.

• Social Marketing Wiki
  • Mission: Highlight and provide a learning, collaborative resource for social marketers. The wiki is an open source for ‘people who want to pass along and exchange ideas, methods, examples and wisdom of introducing and enhancing the knowledge and skills of social marketing among various groups of people.’ -Lefebvre

I was elated! To my surprise, this wiki was originally established in 2006 according to a blog post by social marketing expert Craig Lefebvre! And, I am just now finding it…at least late, is better than never. The wiki has categories for: academic programs, case studies, definitions, research studies, professional development, Job Postings, and many more resources and materials.

The wiki was launched by a group from the social marketing listserv and its top contributors include Lefebvre, social marketing researcher Stephen Dann, and others. The wiki currently has 120 members, and has some recent activity.

Anyone know any updates on the wiki and where it stands? Would love to discuss. Thanks!

************

The other reason this article grabbed my attention was because it brought up the issue of anonymity when dealing with collective action and social change. Stay tuned for the next post for more information.