Slashdot Mirror
Governmental Transparency?
CosmicDreams asks: "With our concern about transparency in business transactions these days, should we focus on what is arguably the largest business of all, government? Today, it is possible to build a system in which the official interactions (social, fiscal, and oral) of our elected officials can be presented to world in an uncensored, unspinned, and quick-to-market medium. Unlike talk radio, newspapers, and late night stand-up routines, only the internet can possibly supply the public which a near instantaneous collection of news in sheer bulk form. What would the effects of such a system be on America and the world? I would be interested in hearing opinions on this matter."
Today, it is possible to build a system in which the official interactions (social, fiscal, and oral) of our elected officials can be presented to world in an uncensored, unspinned, and quick-to-market medium.
... and we never heard from him again.
Why do you want this information? What are you -- some kind of terrorist?
"Please step aside, sir. We would like to ask you a few questions."
Software Wars
... but it will only ever happen if We The People (for those outside the US, insert patriotic identifier for yourself and your fellow citizens here) stand up and demand it. And the way to do that is by voting for politicians who have an understanding of the value of implementing such a technology. In 2000, we did vote for such a candidate -- to forestall any stupid "invented the internet" jokes, I'm going to say that yes, damn it, Al Gore did have as much as any politican possibly could to bring the internet into existence, at a time when George W. Bush probably barely had any idea what a computer was -- but legal machinations prevented him from taking the office to which he was rightfully elected.
Good luck changing things now. Once-free overnments all over the world are moving in the direction of less openness, not more. In the US, the Freedom of Information Act is just about dead as a consequence of the "War On (Drugs/Terror/Iraq/villain of the month)". The irony is, of course, that at least some repressive governments are opening up, just a bit; at this point, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if we see electronically open government in China before we see it in the US, or Great Britain, or France, or Germany, or Japan. (Depressed, but not surprised.)
Once upon a time, the US government was taking steps in this direction. FOIA requests, even by e-mail, were answered more often than not. Sites like FedStats still remain as monuments to a genuine initiative, during the last decade, to making the government's vast store of information a resoucre of the people, by the people, and for the people. Enjoy it while you can, folks, because right now the trend is toward taking this stuff away, not expanding it.
And for God's sake, keep voting. The fraud machinery that stole the 2000 election is powerful, but it's not unbeatable. Yet.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
This is basic information theory. A particular peice of information only has value when it is significantly different from other information. Since nobody has yet been able to develop technology that distinguishes "Dog Bites Man" from "Man Bites Dog" at the semantic level, you need people to sift through it for you. This is why you hire a lawyer, watch the nightly news, or read slashdot...because getting information in bulk form in bulk is way too time consuming.
Don't get me wrong here, I'm all for transparent government, but if nobody has the time or energy to sift through the mountians of info, it isn't going to do you a damn bit of good.
See opensecrets.org for a very nicely organized info on your elected officials. Very informative read. And it is not just to bulk data, but also the data summaries and presentment that really counts.
Code poet, espresso fiend, starter upper.
...only the internet can possibly supply the public [with] a near instantaneous collection of news in sheer bulk form. What would the effects of such a system be on America and the world?
"Also in the news, the Earth's first global YAWN preceded the fall of the worldwide vallium market today..."
Operator, give me the number for 911!
This much information is almost already available online, but there is way too much to absorb. The average idiot would just be confused by it all, and fall back on talk radio and the idiot box to spoonfeed beliefs and views. Money would still talk, bullshit would still walk. More freely flowing information would be no threat to American oligarchy.
How ya like dat?
In a democracy, allowing the electorate access
to raw information about the operations of government
is very counter-productive, because they will tend
to vote in an uncontrolled manner.
For example, could the Gulf War have been conducted
if it's pretextual deceits were not prominently
featured by the 5 major global media corporations?
Could it have been continued to a successful
conclusion if the massive extermination of the
Iraqis in the neutral zone and southern Iraq had
been covered in widely available press? Squeamish
elements would have militated vociferously against
the mass-live-burial in the neutral zone, and
the mass-incineration of the retreating, defeated
soldiers and thousands of civillians on the "road
of death".
It's crucially important that the organs of the
media which direct the attention of the masses
should be responsible to the authorities, or
the ability of the U.S. to subjugate the swarthy
people with oil is threatened, and if that is
threatened, the entire stock market is threatened.
-I like my women like I like my tea: green-
People would block out the information overload.
The majority of voters vote in herds, they have their own problems day-to-day, and instead of reading up on the issues, they follow the opinions of their friends, family, and church. Failing that they go based on the pictures of what people look like, or where a candidate is located on the card.
People who have an issue will go in to vote for that issue. But what happens when there are 50 unrelated issues on the ballot you haven't heard of?
The best solution might be electronic voting booths, where you can research the topics and look up words while voting (In a reasonable amount of time).
Unfortunately, Red Tape is like Spaghetti Code. It's very good at securing jobs for those who aren't confident in their competence.
This includes both career politicians of both major parties who survive by spin and civil service employees who surrender their political souls to the unions. It's not in the interest of these people for the legal voting population to understand what really goes on in the halls of government.
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
> What would the effects of such a system be on
> America and the world?
Such an improbable fantasy would result in the collapse of government (not that this would be a bad thing).
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Actually a this very election a number of people left due to term limits, not only from congress but also from leadership posts. Sure some of them *did* break their promises but they also tend not to have trouble at their next election over it.
I think we're getting the kind of accountability you describe, most critically through secondary sources with the expertise to put the facts in context; they're no longer as limited by funding in accessing and citing primary materials. There is also a quick-and-easy paper trail available that can be used to confront political flip-flops in nanoseconds.
.5% sales tax hike to fund transportation improvements. A combination of anti-tax conservatives and anti-sprawl activists successfully opposed it while spending about 1/7 as much as the real estate developers who favored passage, critically using web sites and email viral campaigning.
I think the market (desire) for information will provide what you want. A nice example here in Northern Virginia was the defeat of a
One element that will be harder to predict is the reaction of the public. Perhaps informatgion availability will encourage a desire to be informed. I sure appreciate having candidate white papers and such at my fingertips.
Finally, and I should have written this first, the gov't does need to lift all roadblacks to the information getting out. A glaring problem cited repeatedly in recent years is access to the proceedings of Congressional committees, as well as other documents (example). Another I care about is the declassification and digitization of secret documents. I don't know how much progress has been made on these fronts.
Most people just don't care. I've been reading a number of 'alternative' news sources for a while now, and trying to pass information on to other people. They are either uninterested, or find the subject fascinating but are still unwilling to make any changes to their lives. I've even been very careful to present 'information' rather than 'opinion', and encourage people to find out more for themselves and make up their own minds. Most just smile and nod and hope I will shut up soon.
Another part of the problem, more relevant to your question, is that the majority of people actually DO believe what they read in the papers, or see on television. Those media tell them what to do, how to think, and "we must be right because we have a guy in a white coat!". People WANT that. Anyone presenting a different opinion is a crackpot, troublemaker, or 'has a history of alcohol abuse' (a good way to totally destroy someone's credibility without any proof). And if you DO present a good argument, it upsets most peoples' balance and makes them uncomfortable. Thus, they would rather pretend you are not there.
Anyway, the 'pure facts' don't really help. We actually need the spin. It tells us the repercussions and consequences of whatever decision or report or committe finding means. The problem is - we only get one spin - the other spin usually unheard, classified, or debunked. Leading Edge is one, Nexus is another. There are others. These sources already give alternative descriptions for many events, but they are usually ignored, or belittled. Read them, with an open mind, then make your own decision.
Ho! Haha! Guard! Turn! Parry! Dodge! Spin! Ha! Thrust!
Tsk, tsk.
I would be interested in hearing opinions on this matter.Alas, even you want opinions!
Many of the facts are out there already. It's up to you to find them and come to your own conclusions about what they mean.
Are you any better than most of the population when you ask for opinions to help you distill down the vast mass of facts into a bite-sized nugget?
I'm sympathetic to the immense task of digesting the information, culling the facts from the chaff of lies and spin that flow freely in the marketplace of ideas. It's no picnic, but it's what each person must do for themselves. If you don't, someone will do it for you and will thereby control what you think.
"Provided by the management for your protection."