Spring Break
Promise of transparency a false hope in new administration
Alex McElroy
Issue date: 6/4/09 Section: Forum
Promise of transparency a false hope in new administration
The promotion of the Obama administration's recent Open Government Initiative has been met with mixed reviews, for the transparency it claims to offer the general public might be a step beyond the resources available in years past, but nothing near what the government is making it out to be. In theory, it offers Americans a venue to collaborate and suggest what they think should be done in order to improve their country.
It used to be that things like this were done with a letter to the local Senator or a picket-signed protest on the city hall lawn, but now, with the advances technology has made, it would be futile to think that such demonstrations could get the attention of higher-ups.
The initiative requires that people go to the open government website and search around, making sure that their question hasn't been asked already. But if so, that isn't a problem; one can add a question or relevant problem with just the click of a button.
And barring administrator denial, any topic seems to be up for interrogation. Ideas ranging from the necessity for more public access to the emissions records of businesses to the release of the "LONG FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE that would contain VERIFIABLE details of Obama's birth" fill the recent post board, where surfers have the opportunity to respond with a thumbs-up or down similar to another popular social network on the internet.
The government is finally hearing us out, letting us not only talk to one another about where we think they're going wrong, but personally to them over the internet. So what's the problem?
Discussion should influence our public officials, but it's likely that with so many avenues open for people, the project could become something more of a rural New England barnyard town meeting, with the post's level of controversy inflating to gain the attention of the administration. But the biggest problem isn't the emergence of a public opinion, but its re-emergence. If America has to advertise its return to democracy - which is essentially what it's doing, returning the voice to the people - shouldn't it acknowledge its prior lack thereof?
The promotion of the Obama administration's recent Open Government Initiative has been met with mixed reviews, for the transparency it claims to offer the general public might be a step beyond the resources available in years past, but nothing near what the government is making it out to be. In theory, it offers Americans a venue to collaborate and suggest what they think should be done in order to improve their country.
It used to be that things like this were done with a letter to the local Senator or a picket-signed protest on the city hall lawn, but now, with the advances technology has made, it would be futile to think that such demonstrations could get the attention of higher-ups.
The initiative requires that people go to the open government website and search around, making sure that their question hasn't been asked already. But if so, that isn't a problem; one can add a question or relevant problem with just the click of a button.
And barring administrator denial, any topic seems to be up for interrogation. Ideas ranging from the necessity for more public access to the emissions records of businesses to the release of the "LONG FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE that would contain VERIFIABLE details of Obama's birth" fill the recent post board, where surfers have the opportunity to respond with a thumbs-up or down similar to another popular social network on the internet.
The government is finally hearing us out, letting us not only talk to one another about where we think they're going wrong, but personally to them over the internet. So what's the problem?
Discussion should influence our public officials, but it's likely that with so many avenues open for people, the project could become something more of a rural New England barnyard town meeting, with the post's level of controversy inflating to gain the attention of the administration. But the biggest problem isn't the emergence of a public opinion, but its re-emergence. If America has to advertise its return to democracy - which is essentially what it's doing, returning the voice to the people - shouldn't it acknowledge its prior lack thereof?
Note: writers will not reply to comments.
Be the first to comment on this story
Comments by registered users are approved by default.