2015_0812_Ethics Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

officials need to set the example. Online and real-time, they must communicate efficiently and responsibly, handle crisis communications deftly, and be assertive in posting the facts, ensuring they are consistent throughout. *Communication vs. Debate The social media tooll�it offers an "embarrassment of riches" for communicating local news and updates. But is it appropriate for elected officials to go beyond that and debate constituents online? Opinions varied on the value and appropriateness of extended engagement. Government officials should and indeed must convey credibility, authenticity, and clariry on the issues and respond to their constituents' needs, without getting mired in over communication and giving in to social media's Achilles HeeL• the ease of publishing without permissions or filters. *Quality vs. Quantity "With social media, you can get too plugged in...you still need to talk to people," commented Baker, leading to discussion of the 3 C's introduced by Raicu: "Are we sacrificing 'Conversation' for mere 'Connection?"' she aslced. And where is Communication in all this, which was the point in the first place? Social media, some experts argue, has made us superficial, resulting in distraction over discourse, and a disturbing new trend in online aggression, with bullying and – dare we say—lying, becoming increasingly commonplace. "If social media allows us to listen better, then it's profoundly ethical. Otherwise, we are wasting it," added Raicu. *Social Policies vs. First Amendment When staff inembers post on social media, are they representing themselves or their agencies? Administratively, it's a fine but critical distinction. We have the right to our opinions, but there are guardrails and increasingly sophisticated frameworks for behavior. In governinent offices, management is fine-tuning disclaimers and social policies on everything from tweets, to email retention procedures, to dual functioning digital gadgets for work and home, to record-keeping in public meetings --particularly in light of The BNown Act. Vossbrink, for example, keeps the distinction between public and private clear, only posting on his organization's social networks and cautioning against any blurring of the public-private persona. *Consistency vs. Access The silent majority can easily be displaced by the noisy minority when it comes to social media, creating a distorted political landscape in which the opinions of very few can dominate. Consistency in message and in two-way dialogue with constituents, both online and offline, is key to balanced communication in government affairs and in crossing the digital divide. Tronically, even in this age of inemes, hash tags, and vlogs, a surprising number of voices are not being heard--at least not in the latest tweet, blog post, or Facebook update. Many individuals and entire communities do not have or may not want access to social media. And so the age-old question in government still reigns: how do we become a more �ep�esentative democracy if the majority don't participate? In looking toward the future of real world politics, we need to