There are other technologies that could further build an effective two way communication between a government and its citizens. Bluetooth marketing can be a great alternative to the internet. It used to be the case that due to security fears, or a desire to save battery life, many users keep their Bluetooth devices in OFF mode, or ON but not set to be ‘discoverable’. Because of this, often regions where Bluetooth proximity marketing is in operation it is accompanied by advising via traditional media – such as posters, television screens or field marketing teams – suggesting people make their Bluetooth handsets ‘discoverable’ in order to receive free content. A ‘discoverable’ Bluetooth device within range of the server is automatically sent a message asking if the user would like to receive the free content. Perhaps this could be useful for governments as well.

I found a company on the internet that has software for just that. Its called SITmobile.  According to the website, “SITmobile gov is a tool for any level of government to maintain a communications channel with its citizens. This could be invaluable for distributing information, but also for receiving ideas,complaints or comments.”

They even have a feature that allows a citizen to send an SMS to the city council and share an idea or complaint, as well as a City council to citizen feature that allows a citizen to give their mobile number and indicate any subjects of interests and th city council keeps the citizen precisely informed. oh finally no more lines!

SITBluetooth provides a service for tourists to download information and maps about key places of interest via bluetooth. This seems quite convenient to me.   for more information you can check the website @ http://www.sitmobile.com/ingles/standardsolutions.php

I read an article today that got me thinking about the effects of the world wide web on the government. What is the role of hackers? Surely they will not just stick to banks and corporations when potentially taking down governments could be so much more fun.

according to the BBC, “Cyber attacks are not new- websites were being hacked into and brought down during the kosovo war 10 years ago.”  However it is much more prevalent now.  Even NATO is under attack. “Nato officials have told the BBC their computers are under constant attack from organizations and individuals bent on trying to hack into their secrets.

A cyber attack can potentially bring down a complete national service, banking, media, etc … and worst of all, even if it is certain where the attacks are originating, it would be hard to prove it. 

All it takes is opening an attachment for a sophisticated “worm” or “Trojan” to take over the computer, scan its files, send them, delete them or alter them without being detected. Quite scary indeed!!!! Is cyber warfare the future of war??

 My last few posts have only really discussed E-government in a positive light; However there are many people out there that would argue that putting government online isn’t democracy at all. There are some that would even consider it a hoax, our very own 21st century loch-ness monster.

The world bank and amnesty international define Democracy as a collection of civil, human and market rights. Yet through out the world we have laws that take them away. The Patriot act in the United States allows for surveillance of all internet usage in the name of terrorism, could that possibly mean that one day a terrorist will mean someone that disagrees with the government they thought they could complain to? China made deals with Yahoo to limit its citizens access to information…couldnt western societies potentially do something similar? We can communicate much more efficiently over the web, however we can also be much more easily monitored. Everything is faster and more direct, but at what cost?  Will we come to a day where we have tax subsidized e-mail accounts? With all of these “what if’s” will we ever find democracy on the web? or is it something we hope to achieve…like finding the holy grail perhaps?

  The new millennium came in the midst of fear. Not fear that the world would end per se, but that the world as we knew it  would end. Experts in technology couldn’t sleep. Questions arose about the worlds computers working past the number 1999 stirred in their heads…and this is when the world finally got it..we are completely and utterly dependent on technology. The world hasn’t been the same since..dun dun dun

While this intro may be a tiny bit dramatic, its undeniably true.  According to an article by Francesco Amerotti on ICT policies in e-government and e-democracy, Innovation through ICTs–social and economic advancement has become more and more bound to technology creation, dissemination, and utilization and is at the core of the renewed focus on the role of the state and state institutions in this process. 

ICT’s are redefining the way the state functions, its responsibility, and powers in addition to sparking interest in political agenda and public debate. The 2008 US presidential election showed just how powerful these can be. More people voted than had in the previous elections. More people debated  the issues. More people cared! There were countless groups for Obama and MCain on social networks like facebook and myspace, and both candidates had blogs and podcasts. As a result people felt like their opinions counted, like their feedback mattered. People are starting to feel like the government works for them. 

Even the World Bank  and the OECD have adapted their strategies in the direction of a state-friendly and holistic approach as well as a unique opportunity for achieving higher standards of living and greater economic and social empowerment for millions of citizens around the world. E-health, E-democracy and E-education are all essential in such a technocratic world and this is particularly why ICT’s work in government.

“e-Participation is about reconnecting ordinary people with politics and policy-making and making the decision-making processes easier to understand and follow through the use of new Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs).”(European Union)

E-participation can be seen as a part of E-democracy as E-democracy is the use of IT’s by governments. It can be used  by elected officials, media, political parties and interest groups, civil society organizations, international governmental organizations, or citizens/voters within any of the political processes of states/regions, nations, and local and global communities. E-participation results in a large number of people participating in policy making thus creating more active citizens.

An electronic election or referendum established mainly by governments that involves the use of electronic means in at least the casting of the vote hereby enabling faster counting for administrations and increasing accessibility for citizens.

It is a system that promises faster counting and increased accessibility in elections. The overall aim is to increase participation amongst citizens and is estimated to last for more than just one electoral period. The focus is to make use mainly internet-voting, e-registration and to use electronic voting machines only part of the time.

Electronic voting is still in the early stages of development, and is thus still open for malfunctions of the system and other technical problems. According to the UK-based open rights group, the lack of testing and insufficient attention to the system design leaves elections open to big errors and fraud. However I think it is definitely worth the work to fix if it could reduce tabulation time and increase voter turnout through the internet.

Countries like Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Estonia, the European Union, France, Germany, India Switzerland and Norway have all switched to electronic voting systems and haven’t reported any major problems thus far. However, there was big controversy during the US presidential election in 2008. The machines were said to give Mccain the vote whether his name was selected or not. This posed the question of whether or not there could ever be a system designed that would be free from interference of hackers and others wanting to “fix” the election outcome.

I don’t think electronic voting is any more susceptible to errors or unfair outcome than that of voting done with ballots. (I am sure we all remember when votes from Florida were not counted in Bush’s First term.)

E-Democracy is another example of information technology spreading to the government. The concept its self comprises the use of electronic communication technology like the internet to make government more accessible to citizens, and thus create more active citizens. The main objectives are to make citizen participation in public policy decision making more direct, as a way to increase transparency and accountability.

This includes but is not limited to, electronic voting, and perhaps even cell phones. Using the internet as a political campaigning tool has become a cheaper and more convenient alternative for many politicians in comparison to traditional door-to-door knocking or telephone campaigning. Candidates are also beginning to use social networking sites to reach younger audiences, in turn, creating potential supporters to campaigns. E-mail chains and political blogs also have had a major impact with online campaigning.

There are obstacles to making a government “E-ready.” The idea of secure citizen identification for elections and other citizen to government transactions still poses an issue of privacy. Another obstacle is that there are many vested interests that would be harmed by a more direct democracy. Amongst these are politicians, media moguls and some interests in big business and trade unions.

For more information check out http://e-democracy.org/?gclid=CK2CnpqqnZgCFQjgZgodrGS6ng

]]> http://cmetoyer.wordpress.com/2009/01/20/youve-gotdemocracy/feed/ 0 candacemetoyer 84504259_b0a1c7040a http://cmetoyer.wordpress.com/2009/01/10/its-in-government/ http://cmetoyer.wordpress.com/2009/01/10/its-in-government/#comments Sat, 10 Jan 2009 17:15:35 +0000 candacemetoyer http://cmetoyer.wordpress.com/?p=11 ]]> “A widely separated family inherits a house in which they have to live together.” (Martin Luther King) It does not matter whether people are black or white, from the east or the west or if they happen to practice Christianity, Judaism, Islam or Buddhism. This family must learn to get along because they have no choice but to live with each other under the same roof.

As a result of scientific and industrial revolutions, it is as if the entire world has moved in next door to each other and have become neighbors. With one press of a button a person can have an item shipped from China to Brazil in a matter of days. The internet has made it possible for a person living in New York to visit Egypt without ever having to leave his or her home. Antarctica is accessible to everyone interested, even to those who hate the cold. Now even governments are embracing new technology in an attempt to further connect its people and policies with the creation of an E-government” This house is becoming more and more integrated as we speak.

According to the World Bank,  E-government refers to the use by government agencies of information technologies (such as Wide area networks, the internet, and mobile computing) that have the ability to transform relations with citizens, businesses, and other arms of government. These technologies can serve a variety of different use ends: better delivery of government services to citizens, improved interactions with buisnesses and industry, citizen empowerment through access to information, or more efficient government management. The resulting benefits can be less corruption, increased transparency, greater convenience, revenue growth, and or cost reductions.” (web.worldbank.org) Yet I have to ask…what does this all mean???

As we move into an era that is entirely centered around technology and convienience ,do we give up a degree of our personal freedoms; rights to privacy perhaps??? Are we entering in to an age of enlightment and freedom of information and better communication, or are we willingly walking ourselves into a world quite similar to George Orwells 1984??  I do not have the answers to these questions but the course of this blog will explore the possibilities.