The Internet offers new opportunities to involve the public in regulatory rulemaking, including industry, media, nonprofits and citizens. A new social layer for the Web has shifted what’s possible in open government forward again, both hosting and enabling conversations. Below, one of those conversations is captured using the social media curation tool, Storify.

How should Regulations.gov be using social media?

http://a3.twimg.com/profile_images/1449496946/AlexPhoto.jpg); background-size: cover;">Story thumbnail How should government use Facebook and Twitter to improve public participation in rulemaking?

  • Yesterday, Jeffrey Levy, the EPA's Director of Web Communications, shared some news: Regulations.gov is now on Facebook. 

  • Regs.gov, the place to comment on and find federal regulations, now has a FB page: http://facebook.com/regulationsgov #gov20 #opengov levyj413 September 30, 2011 at 19:12
  • Levy immediately received some feedback on Twitter about what people found there:
  • And there are 25 of the exact same automated posts. Who launches like this? Seriously. #gov20 #opengov rupertmike September 30, 2011 at 19:15
  • And the language on their Info page is sooooo inviting #gov20 #opengov kristyfifelski September 30, 2011 at 19:25

  • That language is the following: "Agencies consider official public comments through Regulations.gov only. To explore various perspectives prior to formal comment, we invite citizens to participate in informal discussions on Facebook. Participation is reviewed per our policies."

  • At that point, I went back into Facebook to see what was actually going on there and discovered a few things.
  • Hmm. has been Facebooking since 9/16. 100s of tweets, 1 manual post. #gov20 #opengov digiphile September 30, 2011 at 21:15
  • Sad. So much potential with reg engagement. #gov20 #opengov rupertmike September 30, 2011 at 21:21
  • i assure you that broad tweets about regs ain't the way to go. tailor the feed. dsmorgan77 September 30, 2011 at 21:22
  • Given that I've met the man who tweets, blogs and now Facebooks for Regulations.gov, I invited him to the conversation, or at least directed those participating towards him. 
  • I would imagine that feedback would optimally be given to . #opengov #gov20 digiphile September 30, 2011 at 21:59

  • Later, Levy invited us to Govloop to join a pre-existing thread about best practices for social media use by government.

  • Is broadcasting a good way to start? Discuss here: http://bit.ly/kD3Q4O levyj413 October 1, 2011 at 0:11

  • In the morning, the conversation continued anew, on Twitter.

  • Others failed/succeeded already. Starting FB as a broadcast now isn't good business. rupertmike October 1, 2011 at 9:17
  • there are better media for broadcast/making feeds than FB. dsmorgan77 October 1, 2011 at 9:28
  • I wouldn't assume they'll only ever broadcast. I suggest patience. levyj413 October 1, 2011 at 15:29
  • Do you think treating Facebook like Twitter is a sensible start in 2011? What about the absence of questions or replies to them? digiphile October 1, 2011 at 15:52
  • Do you think treating Facebook like Twitter is a sensible start in 2011? What about the absence of questions or replies to them? digiphile October 1, 2011 at 15:52

  • Cian Dawson chimed in from San Francisco, further extending the conversation beyond the Beltway.

  • I've encountered gov accts that DM replies (regs .gov; fails w/uneven follow) or have individual staff respond (gao). cbdawson October 1, 2011 at 16:10
  • I think that insisting on perfection for any new gov effort is a mistake. Not everyone is as experienced as the leaders. levyj413 October 1, 2011 at 16:16
  • Bingo. It varies b/c some have a lot of experience and resources. Others don't. But being there's better than not. levyj413 October 1, 2011 at 16:17
  • Remember: you're WAY ahead of most of gov, even in 2011. I get questions regularly that we answered in 2008. levyj413 October 1, 2011 at 16:20
  • FYI, we still use FB mainly in broadcast mode. Some exceptions, but primarily one-way. Not my end goal! Just currently. levyj413 October 1, 2011 at 16:29
  • Did anyone in a conversation "insist on perfection?" What I see from was disappointment at lost potential. digiphile October 1, 2011 at 16:53
  • I understand context & constraints. No need to remind me of media or citizen edge. Question: why isn't the exp of leaders applied? digiphile October 1, 2011 at 16:59
  • At this point, the social media voice of Regulations.gov joined the conversation.
  • Agree w/ Levy. FB not final. Did 'soft' launch to inform further R&D :-) alex_moll1 October 1, 2011 at 17:02
  • Happy to discuss. Few tweaks this week, then load w/ orientating content. alex_moll1 October 1, 2011 at 17:08
  • Once we make a few adjustments, yes, lots of potential as we increase levels of engagement over time. alex_moll1 October 1, 2011 at 17:09
  • 100s of tweets, a fun experiment :-) Answer Qs w/ personalized content this week on FB. alex_moll1 October 1, 2011 at 17:16

  • Time for more open government context

     

    The reason that I'm particularly interested in how Regulations.gov uses social media to involve the public in rulemaking is that improving public participation is specifically cited in the new U.S. National Plan for Open Government that was introduced in the context of the launch of the Open Government Partnership in September.

  • Key context in U.S. National plan: "Expand Public Participation in the Development of Regulations" http://oreil.ly/qPA2ji digiphile October 1, 2011 at 17:01
  • When the White House asked for feedback prior to the release of the U.S. National Plan, Clay Johnson gave it, specifically referring to rulemaking.
  • A More Social Open Government - Expert Labs expertlabs.org Earlier this week, Federal CTO Aneesh Chopra and OIRA Administrator Cass Sunstein jointly released an inquiry about the future of open government-- specifically, they asked for insight on three things: How can regulations.gov, one of the primary mechanisms for government transparency and public participation, be made more useful to the public rulemaking process?
  • In that context, Levy offered further feedback.
  • Agreed 100% (I should note I'm not involved beyond giving some guidance). And that's the question they're thinking through. levyj413 October 1, 2011 at 17:07
  • I excerpt Clay's specific comments, below, because they are so specifically relevant to this conversation:"Improving public input today can"t be done without thinking of the existence and impact of social media. Much online sharing now happens through these social networks -- Facebook represents millions of posts and "likes" and shares per day, and Twitter represents millions of "tweets" per day, generated by ordinary people who may want to comment.

    People see institutions such as government agencies as monoliths, and as those agencies have chosen to interact with the public online in these venues, no normal citizen is aware of the distinction between the new media directors -- expert communicators who run these social media accounts -- and the regulatory agents who are soliciting comments. As a result, people already comment about issues to the agencies via these social media outlets, in a completely reasonable assumption that they"re speaking to one unified organization.

    There shouldn"t be a penalty or disregard for people who choose to participate with an agency via social media, especially when the agency is asking for that participation in the first place.

    If an agency, for instance, has a Facebook page and interacts with the public using Facebook, then the agency should obviously also be equipped to take public comments on regulations through that same Facebook page. And the same goes for every other social media outlet that an agency uses for soliciting information from the public. Government should not presume that the public knows that the formal channel of the regulation solicitation is the only way to provide official feedback, especially when the public may not be aware of those obscure channels.

    There are ways to do this using regulations.gov (or input.gov) as a hub to consolidate this information. Because the public social networks are largely open and indexable, very simple tools can be used to pull in feedback about regulations and display them alongside all the public comments submitted through conventional methods. In using social media, we"d recommend something that looks like the illustrative figure here, in which the public has the ability to see public comments provided via social media and via a web form appear alongside each other:

    If agencies are going to communicate with citizens using social media, then social media must become a first-class citizen in the e-rulemaking and regulatory process.

    From what we understand today, this recommendation may cause some conflicts with the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). The concerns revolve primarily around physical identity -- the ability to verify that the person is a bona-fide person, the ability to verify that they are eligible to make comments, and the ability to request more information from the person should the agency need clarification.

    While we understand the concern because the technology is new, if you look at the actual systems in place, social media provides all of these capabilities, and they"re baked into the platform and come for free. Presently on regulations.gov, one is asked for their first, middle, and last name-- their country and state, the organization that they are representing, the representative of the submitter, and to categorize themselves.

    Social media provides a superior way to pull all of these things, and to perhaps provide even more context to a comment. If a comment is submitted through Facebook, it"s easy to tell what that person"s name is. You"re able to get a picture of that person, and you"re likely able to get their occupational and educational information as well. With appropriate systems (many of which exist and are low cost) regulators could, instead of looking upon piles of comments submitted haphazardly and automatically through web forms, say "show me what all the people who work at T-Mobile have to say about the proposed merger" or "show me all of the people who have received advanced degrees in telecommunications.""

  • Given that perspective, is broadcasting tweets about regulations on Facebook and Twitter the best way to solicit public participation?To put it another way:
  • As a former teacher, when I wanted participation, I asked questions. I didn't write 100s of sentences on a blackboard & leave room digiphile October 1, 2011 at 17:10
  • As a current Socratic dialogue moderator, I agree. Posing questions impartially is a key lever for #participation. alex_moll1 October 1, 2011 at 17:19
  • I directed specific questions to Moll, in terms of lessons learned.
  • How's it going? What I see: 100s of tweets on FB. No shares. 3 questions (me, ) all left unanswered. digiphile October 1, 2011 at 17:06
  • Ok. Why was it a "fun experiment" to tweet 100s of times onto Facebook? Did you consult any .gov social media case studies 1st? digiphile October 1, 2011 at 17:18
  • Have you posed any questions yet on Facebook? Has ever asked any here? Why or why not? #edem #opengov #gov20 digiphile October 1, 2011 at 17:23
  • Yes. We pumped up the activity too high, so we'll modulate the twitter stream or relocate it, w/ both automated & manual posts. alex_moll1 October 1, 2011 at 17:25
  • Pose questions for discussion in future. In near term, it will provide information useful for #participation. alex_moll1 October 1, 2011 at 17:38
  • If Moll wants more involvement from the broader open government community, there's some interest.
  • Would love to help regulations.gov connect w/ppl. Please let us know if we can help =) kristyfifelski September 30, 2011 at 22:13
  • Good to hear. Looking forward to seeing where it goes. rupertmike October 1, 2011 at 17:53
  • Postscript: On Monday, Alex Moll posted on Facebook about how Regulations.gov will be using Facebook. "Hello, Facebook fans! It's great to see all of you here. My name is Alex Moll and I'll be the main administrator for this page. As communications lead here at Regulations.gov, my role is to equip you with useful information about how to participate effectively in the Federal decision making process. In my official capacity, I"ll also be bringing you a little bit of awesomeness. 
    Each week I"ll share a mix of cool stuff happening inside or outside the halls of Federal agencies: fun, inspiration, creativity, and innovation--the stuff you rarely see on TV. Here"s a recent favorite of mine by from GovLoop about Hi5 Fridays (see link). Ok, back to the basics. 

    Over the past couple of weeks, we"ve launched Regulations.gov Facebook and have already engaged in interesting discussions with Open Government leaders and social media experts. This past weekend"s discussions were engaging. Check out a great summary here from Alex Howard (see link).

    In response to these and other discussions, I"ve highlighted below what our public stakeholders can expect to see here on the Regulations.gov Facebook page. The page serves as an Open Government portal and a platform. 

    As a portal, 
    • Learn. It"s a place to learn about the regulatory process, regulations in the news, and features of Regulations.gov, including the Exchange.
    • Opportunities. Here you can discover new Federal-wide opportunities for submitting public comments to regulations (a.k.a. "rules") in development through Regulations.gov.
    • Guidance. We"ll offer useful tips for how to get the most out of Regulations.gov when you wish to submit a comment (e.g. how to search and examine rules).

    As a platform,
    • Discussion. It"s a place to discuss with fellow participants (and possibly government officials if we can work with policy leaders to address constraints within the Administrative Procedure Act policies and process) the substance of Federal regulations or to submit questions for Regulations.gov response. These conversations can serve as an open exchange of information and useful perspectives for formal or official public comments later when you visit Regulations.gov. 
    • Feedback. You"ll have the opportunity to provide input on web features of the future that matter to you. 

    Each week, you can expect posts that:
    • Pose questions.
    • Answer questions. 
    • Share links to relevant policy briefs (e.g. briefs from the White House Open Government Initiative, see link). 
    • Announce opportunities to participate in making your voice heard. 

    Rule writers value public comments because your input makes a difference in regulatory policy. Participation matters.

    Plans of Regulations.gov Facebook
    For the team at Regulations.gov, we are first and foremost champions of public participation; this is our daily focus and we pursue it with dedication. As we move forward, we have plans in place to continually expand the use of different social media channels that aim to improve public participation in the regulatory process. As referenced in the U.S. National Action Plan (see link, page 7), we are working to overhaul the participation interface on Regulations.gov and social media will be a part of this. As a Facebook participant, you will be one of the first to view how we plan to implement this integration and other new features. We hope you will provide the Regulations.gov team with your feedback.

    Today, we invite you to be a part of our initial tryout of Facebook. We invite you to submit a question, respond to wall post, or explore Regulations.gov. See what you think. We aim to enhance your ability to participate in the Federal decision making process. "

 

US National Action Plan Final 2