Once again Open for Questions: the pilot continues

Round two of change.gov’s Open for Questions is up.  Not a lot of details … last time, it was open for about three days, and there were brief answers to the top five questions, and a more detailed post and video on at least one topic (bailout transparency).

Dan McSwain, on the change.gov blog, describes one change:

In this round, you can still view all of the questions that have been submitted—or you can break down the questions by category for easier navigation. For instance, you can read the top-ranking question regarding Energy and the Environment and browse through other questions on the same topic by clicking on that issue.

Also it seems that there’s a subtle difference in how URLs are handled that makes it harder to send out a link to an individual question.  This change cuts down people’s ability to promote their ideas in email and blog posts, which fits in well with Open for Questions’ role of routing around different kinds of “gatekeepers”: making it harder to link to a question cuts down the influence of bloggers and organizations with large email lists.

There were only about 500 questions when I submitted mine (45 minutes later, there are now over 3000) so it was an interesting snapshot for what the quickest people to react are most concerned about.  Eight of the top 10 were about the economy, with JGP of Seattle WA’s “What strategies other than bailouts can we employ to keep jobs in America?” leading.

As usual there isn’t a category for civil liberties but these issues dominate the National Defense category with Dave D of Santa Clara leading with the twofer:

Will President Obama eliminate domestic warrantless wiretapping of US citizens by modifying the “Terrorist Surveillance Program” (TSP)? Is the Fourth Amendment going to be restored, or weakened further by the Obama Administration?

Good questions!  Overall the quality of questions is impressively high, with a few duds but most well-worded and on important topics.  They’re mostly more specific than last time; it’s obviously sunk in that the Obama campaign is going to respond to the question as asked.

Disappointingly, there hasn’t been any improvement on the privacy front.  The change.gov front page still points off to Google’s misleadingly benign Google Moderator on Change.gov Privacy Notice and you still have to follow a few more links until you get to the stuff about Google selling the aggregate information and potentially sending personal information overseas.  (More here.)  It would have been easy enough to have a clearer disclaimer — or to require more transparency from Google.  Ah well, it’s a pilot; still, it’s hard to shake the impression that the Obama administration really doesn’t care about privacy.

Other than that, though, it continues to be a fascinating experiment in cognitive diversity — particularly in combination with change.org’s Ideas for Change.  Check it out, vote questions up or down, and submit your own.  The best way to understand democracy 2.0 is to participate in it!

http://change.gov/openforquestions

jon

PS: Speaking of participation, here’s my question, from Jon P in Seattle WA:

What concrete actions will you take to disclose and reduce government surveillance of Americans (bulk wiretapping, etc.) in your first hundred days?

It’s got about 100 votes so far in its first hour, which puts it in the top 10 of national security questions and probably the top 100 overall.  Encouragingly there are several other civil liberties questions doing better than mine; while not at the urgency or intensity of questions about the economy, it’s clearly one of the major issues on people’s minds.


Comments

13 responses to “Once again Open for Questions: the pilot continues”

  1. […] year from the motorcycle industry and the top ten feature bikes from our pages this year. … Once again Open for Questions: the pilot continues – talesfromthe.net 12/29/2008 Round two of change.gov’s Open for Questions is up … to react […]

  2. A couple of interesting dynamics. First of all, there’s a surge of

    LGBT questions dominate the “Additional topics” category. #1 is from Al in Texas:

    “You’ve stated during your campaign that you don’t support marriage rights for GLBT citizens. How will you ensure that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans have rights equal to those of married couples?”

    There are also questions about the US’s veto of the UN resolution, don’t ask don’t tell, tax benefits and responsibilities for couples, and Rick Warren — half of the top 10 in this category, at least in the initial reaction.

    Civil liberties questions show up as well, with Bill’s “Will the anti-Constitutional and poorly named “Patriot Act” be rescinded?” in #3 in “additional issues” , and there are a lot of drug war and legalization questions as well.

    In foreign policy, the #1 question is

    “What will President Obama do to bring about an independent Palestinian state and bring an end to the violence in the West Bank and Gaza?

    Other Israel/Palestine questions dominate the top 10. The tone of these questions is very different than you see in the mainstream media … interesting evidence that pro-Palestinian opinions may be held by a lot more Americans than is usually reported.

  3. Ari Melber’s BREAKING: Ask Obama For a Torture Special Prosecutor in The Nation links out to Bob Fertik, whose question about a special prosecutor (“ideally Patrick Fitzgerald”) finished #6 last time. Bob’s post on democrats.com has instructions for how to find the question by searching for “Fitzgerald”

    Unlike last time, though, there’s no way to include a link directly to the search results, which means it’ll take more work for people to follow through on it. Bob’s question only had 93 votes when I checked it, at least seven hours after it had been submitted … by contrast my own idea is up to 800 votes. How much of an impact will the story in The Nation (and whoever picks it up from Ari) have? The Obama campaign is presumably tracking this too, using it as an opportunity to gauge how broad-based the support for a special prosecutor idea is — and how much of the #6 finish last time was due to effective activism last time.

  4. Bob’s question, which also got mentioned in Nancy Scola’s Daily Digest on techPresident today, is up to 340 votes — more than tripling in the last 14 hours.

    Nancy comments

    As activist Jon Pincus notes, rallying your comrades around your query is made all the more difficult by the fact that Google Moderator has no provision for linking to specific questions — taking a good deal of the agency in the process away from the public, no? Organizing support for your interests is a hallmark of democracy, and Open for Questions would be well served by building in the potential to rally the troops.

    To which I responded, it depends. The ability to link to an individual question would give disproportionate power to bloggers and organizations with large email lists, so if the goal of Open for Questions is to get a measurement of who can organize most effectively, then this functionality would be useful. On the other hand, if the goal is to get relatively-unfiltered input from internet users as a whole (as a proxy for Americans’ opinion), then it’s a good choice not to allow linking.

    Even without the links, the pace of votes for Bob’s question — and the multiple copies that people have submitted in different categories — accelerated significantly after Ari’s piece and this post. If I were running OfQ, I’d be looking at the compare-and-contrast between this and other special prosecutor questions (for example, Kaija’s “Will you please have a special prosecutor investigate Bush and Cheney for the laws they have broken? Please don’t let this pass”, which has over 800 votes in the Economy section) as a way of assessing how broad the sentiment for a special prosecutor is. If Bob’s question once again shoots to the top at the expense of other questions, that’s potentially an indication of high-profile coverage and effective organizing rather than broad support.

  5. Bob’s special prosecutor question now dominates in Additional Issues, with 16,650 votes — marijuana decriminalization is second with 7250, followed by legalization with 5880, repealing the Patriot act with 5420, end the drug war with 5328, equal rights for GLBT with 5160, legalization again with 4900, the US’ veto of the UN resolution decriminalizing homosexuality, a nearly-word-for-word copy of the special prosecutor question, and medical marijuana.

    Meanwhile in National Security, my question about disclosing and reducing government surveillance is in #9 with 1880, and a question from Barry L about telecom immunity is at #10 with 1720. Above us, it’s warrantless wiretapping at #1 with 4640, drug war at #2, a word-for-word copy of the special prosecutor question, torture and extraordinary rendition, legalization, drug war, an independent commission to investigate Bush (with 2700), and changing TSA airport security procedures.

    What’s interesting to me is that while there’s significant organizing going on for the special prosecutor and drug war questions (see Radical Russ’ post on NORML’s Daily Audio Stash for an example), as far as I know there aren’t any similar efforts behind the other civil liberties questions — I sent something around to the GFR discussion list and that’s about it.

    It would be interesting to know whether there’s been any organizing on behalf of Dorothy’s question about bailout accountability which is at #1 in Economy with 15530 votes. There are different bailout accountability questions at #2 (10280) and #6 and so this issue as a whole seems to have a broader base of support than the special prosecutor. Of course Open for Questions user interface starts you off in the Economy category so you can’t really compare the vote totals, but the pattern is completely different: almost all the special prosecutor support is traceable back to Bob.

    Still, taken as a whole there’s clearly broad grassroots support online for civil liberties and civil rights issues (restoring checks and balances against the executive branch even shows up at #5 in Economy). This is consistent with change.org’s Ideas for Change in America and Rebuild the Party’s poll on the future of the Republican party … seems like a trend to me.

  6. The #1 ranking for my question is due in large part to the help of Ari Melber, Digby, McJoan, and other widely read bloggers.

    I agree completely there is “broad grassroots support online for civil liberties and civil rights issues.” This has always been true, but the Corporate Media refuses to address our concerns, so “serious” Democrats – even Obama – ignore us.

    Hopefully our efforts on Change.gov will bring some Change to our .gov. Trust me, we’re not going to stop until we get our Constitution back.

  7. […] than we were, sending mail out to existing networks and getting prominent blog posts.*  And as Open for Questions on change.gov has clearly shown, advocates for for drug reform and a special prosecutor are very well organized […]

  8. Bob, the #1 ranking of your idea also gives a good indication of the amount of influence that Ari, Digby, McJoan et al have when acting in concert. One key question is to how to apply that in the most-leveraged ways.

    And yeah, change.gov and change.org et al provide new paths to highlight these issues.

    Trust me, we’re not going to stop until we get our Constitution back.

    Agreed. Get FISA Right called our first video is called “Don’t let our Constitution die” because this is something that resonates across the political spectrum.

  9. […] than we were, sending mail out to existing networks and getting prominent blog posts.* And as Open for Questions on change.gov has clearly shown, advocates for for drug reform and a special prosecutor are very well […]

  10. Ari’s Torture Prosecutor Tops 70,000 Questions for Obama on Change.Gov tells the story, with links out to posts from digby, DailyKos, OpenLeft — and Wednesday’s coverage in the New York Times’ The Caucus blog.

    After Get FISA Right and 100,000 strong against Evan Bayh, it’s yet another piece of concrete evidence that progressive bloggers acting in concert can use social computing technologies to get attention on issues that are otherwise being overlooked. Maybe the lesson will sink in … “third time’s a charm”.

    What do you think the chances are Get FISA Right can get coverage for our Idea for Change?

    Update: after an extraordinarily bland response from the Obama administration to Bob’s question, George Stephanopolous asked it to President-elect Obama on ABC TV. Obama’s response, while not particularly encouraging, was explicit on a couple important fronts: Attorney General Holder will be the decision maker, and a critical question in Obama’s mind is whether investigations (or a special prosecutor) are forward-looking. So the net effect of Open for Questions was exactly as intended: a clear response to something that was an open question for a lot of people. I’d call that a success.

  11. […] The comments in Once again Open for Questions: the pilot continues have more details on this.  Ideally we will benefit from these effects in the change.org […]

  12. […] The basic idea is similar to Change.gov’s short-lived Open for Questions series [1, 2]: people submit potential questions and vote on what they think the best ones are.  It’s an […]

  13. […] basic idea is to provide a followon to Change.gov’s short-lived Open for Questions series [1, 2]: a way for people to submit potential questions and vote on what they think the best ones […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *