Panelists were:

• Brent Colburn, Director of External Affairs for the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
• Roxie Merritt, Director of New Media at the U.S. Department of Defense
• Richard Boly, Director of eDipomacy at the U.S. Department of State

It’s difficult to sum up over an hour of panel conversation. Throughout the course of the presentation, much of the discussion focused on challenges the government is facing to get into social media and take advantage of it in order to perform better in their respective functions as government agencies. So I’ll focus on that here, as well. Here’s, from what I heard, the three biggest challenges for government right now and how their working to overcome them.

1. Getting over the bureaucratic “hump”

One of the first and most memorable quotes of the morning came from Brent Colburn, at FEMA.

“Government needs to realize it’s not always the smartest person in the room,” he said. He said that sometimes the most innovative person in government is being the one to make a memo teaching everyone else how to understand things coming from the private sector–like social media.

Later on, he spoke about how, although it’s easier at a smaller agency like FEMA, the public needs to continue to push government for interaction. Roxie Merritt, at DoD, concurred, as did Richard Boly. Merritt said the first task is to convince the leadership, something that, surprisingly, has gone particularly well for DoD and State.

At DoD, Merritt said that Secretary Gates has made communications a priority. Looking at things like social media from a tactical standpoint, they’re being used by the enemy in the Middle East, and all over the world. If we don’t have a handle on it, we’re losing. Boly spoke about the priority Secretary Clinton has placed on new media with the Department of State. Failures in communication such as the Christmas Day underwear bomber obviously indicate they aren’t quite there yet, but they’re making progress.

2. Convincing the “middle”

The leadership is on board with social media. The new people coming into these agencies are already tech-savvy naturals with Facebook, Twitter, etc. So what’s the problem?

According to the panelists, it’s in the middle. Middle managers have been there the longest–even longer than the leadership, obviously. They’ve got the most at stake, and they’re typically the most reluctant and resistant to change. They see this technology, and they’re skeptics.

The trick is how to convince them of its value. As Richard Boly said, “[Social media] is not a passing fad, it’s crucial to the way we do business and we avoid it at our peril.”

State has already gone a long way towards convincing its employers. With the creation of an internal “e-suggestion box”, they’re already showing employees the power of crowdsourcing and social media. They’re made the suggestion system a true two-way conversation and used it effectively to enact some worthwhile changes at the department.

Take, for example, their bike-lending program, which came out of a suggestion from the e-suggestion box. After complaints that it took too long to travel the city via taxi, public transit, and personal vehicles, employees suggested bikes as a quick, easy and healthy means to get from place to place. The State Department took it to heart and started a program, even putting in showers for employees to use.

“What used to be water cooler discussion,” said Boly, “has become the crowdsourcing of solutions.” In one fell swoop, the e-suggestion box helped improve employees work atmosphere, empowered them as forces for change within the organization, and shown them the power of social media. Merritt suggested emphasizing communications tools in training courses for employees, to start them out with this mindset.

And for those afraid of social media? The Department of Defense has come up with a clever solution for that.

Many have feared the technology for national security concerns, and due to the fact that it’s often difficult to tell a legitimate source from an illegitimate one. At the Department of Defense they’ve created a registration system that registers all official DoD Web sites, accounts and social media presences. If it’s not on the list, it’s not cleared by DoD.

Colburn, at FEMA, made a good point about the issue, too. The old media isn’t dead, their role is just changing a little. He said it’s essential to maintain a good relationship and balance between old and new media, particularly for maintaining legitimacy. The “watchdog role” the old media play still applies, and like it or not they still serve as a credible source of information. By maintaining a good relationship with the old media, they can act as a legitimizing force.

Finally, Richard Boly at State had a great point to make, too. Part of credibility is about the relationships you already have. If you get followed, linked to, or re-tweeted by someone else influential, particularly in the technology and Web community, you gain credibility that way. It’s “credibility by association,” he said.

3. Creating a two-way conversation

The final challenge is, without a doubt, the largest. It’s a problem not just for government but for all users of social media–private corporations, individual people and government departments alike. How do you create that two-way flow of information? What if your reputation becomes tarnished by comments on your Facebook feed? How do you monitor it? How do you convince people you are real? Isn’t it easy to be overwhelmed?

All valid questions. But also, solvable ones.

Colburn said he didn’t have a lot of answers for those kinds of questions yet, but then he went on to prove that he actually has some pretty good ideas. He talked about social media presences having to pass the “smell test”–they have to prove they’re human. He said that expectation of ghost-twitterers and ghost-bloggers for important people has to be overcome. It’s all about the two-way interaction, he said, that will help build the trust.

Providing employees with the right tools is part of it. Colburn talked about how, on the ground in Haiti, the only form of communication FEMA employees had at first was texting via AT&T’s network. By having as many tools for communication as possible at their disposal–whether it’s texting, social media, or something else–they can do their job better. They can also be more actively present on social media and in the conversation.

Roxie Merritt at Defense said they’ve actually already had huge success reaching out to bloggers. Communications people at DoD have even started considering some bloggers part of the mainstream media! By reaching out to “chronic posters,” as she called them (people who reach out constantly and act as a force multiplier for spreading information), they’ve been successful at spreading word and creating a conversation.

The feedback to their social media presence is huge, said Merritt. She spoke of how there’s more tolerance for “less perfect” being built into the culture–I see it as a humanizing effect. It breaks down those traditional psychological barriers between “normal people” and important leaders.

As for concerns about comments, re-tweets, etc., Merritt was blunt: “You have to be pretty hard-skulled,” she admitted. They pretty much take it all. She said the screen on a limited extent, for sensitive information and possible national security threats, but for the most part they just try to respond to as much as possible. They take criticism and run with it, trying to improve as much as they can.

Moving from need-to-know to need-to-share

Overall, I obviously came away extremely impressed by the panelists. Not only did they know their stuff, but they had concrete accomplishments to show for their efforts. Many of these things I’d never even heard of, but they’re clearly having an effect.

One of the things that truly stuck with me from the panel discussion came from Richard Boly, at the State Department. He talked about how, during the Cold War, everything was on a need-to-know basis. Everyone was so paranoid and afraid of leaks and security issues that communication was absolutely kept to a minimum.

We’re living in very different times. No longer is it need-to-know, Boly said. We’re moving on to a “need-to-share” phase of government.

There are a lot of pros to this. Empowered employees, increased collaboration, greater openness and transparency, increased interaction with the public, bridging the divide between private industry innovation and government advances–the list could go on and on.

I’m excited to see what they come up with next.

Thanks so much to Gibraltar Associates and especially James Davis for inviting me to the event. Already looking forward to the next one!

Could he save 2010 for the Democrats? Two things that have happened in the past 24 hours suggest, to me, that he may be figuring out the strategies it takes to salvage these midterms. Simply put, he’s figuring out the winning issues (hint: health care is not one of them).

Don’t Ask Don’t Tell

“Don’t ask, don’t tell” has been a divisive issue for a long time. For years, it was accepted by the majority, while it infuriated gays and allies behind the scenes. Upon Obama’s election, he pledged to repeal the policy, but last year saw little action on that front. This week we’ve seen the action liberals have been waiting for and it’s making the GOP look petty, homophobic and, especially in the case of Senator John McCain, lacking convictions on the issue. Three things that make this one a winner for Obama and the democrats:

1. Public opinion has shifted and a majority now favor repealing the policy
2. Top defense officials support an end to the policy
3. Republicans can’t make up their mind–John McCain, in particular, flip-flopping on the issue since October 2006

Keep pushing this until it happens, Obama. This shifts focus away from the economy a bit, gives you a lot of support from your liberal base (which you desperately need if you want to mobilize voters come November), and will make for plenty of heart-warming stories about gays being able to be “themselves” when the policy is finally ended.

AIG Bonuses

Now this could really go either way, but with Obama holding the momentum and public approval on the rise since the State of the Union, I’m feeling confident this will, ultimately, work in democrats favor.

As most of us know, AIG is readying another $100 million round of bonuses for its executives. Naturally, this infuriates about 99% of all Americans. Here’s the deal, three things to remember for this one:

1. Obama didn’t start the bank bailouts, Bush did, way back in 2008
2. Everyone hates AIG, and democrats have been doing a better job showing outrage over this issue than Republicans have–Republicans have to worry about losing wealthy, corporate donors and voters for November
3. This adds support for Obama’s proposed financial regulations–regulations Republicans have been pretty adamantly opposed to thus far

Keep up Obama. If you can show that this is your issue and that you’re willing to tackle it head on–as opposed to the Republican skirting around the issue–you can make this a real winner and start pulling around your approval rating on economic issues.

Behind the Scenes: Demonizing Las Vegas

Now this is pure conjecture on my part, but I’ve got a feeling Obama’s recent flap on Las Vegas, and subsequent apology in response to Senator Harry Reid’s outrage, are very planned events

First of all, this isn’t the first time this has happened. Now I’m not about to suggest Obama is above making the same mistake twice, but this is a tense political climate and he knows his good friend Harry Reid is up for re-election. Now what could possibly help Senator Reid at this juncture in the race…?

How about a show of strength? A little bravado from our fearless Senate Majority Leader? Well that’s what he got. Obama’s comment on Las Vegas gave Senator Reid an excellent opportunity to complain–loudly–and Obama immediately issued a formal apology for the comment.

Not only does this help Senator Reid immensely–now he can say he fights hard for his state’s largest city, and he’s willing to stand up to President Obama, and he understands the pain Nevadans are feeling and wants to help fix it–but it’s an event that, outside of Nevada, will only last in this news cycle for about two hours. The majority of Americans will ignore the story altogether, and even less will care. Nevadans are the only ones who will hear it, the only ones who will care, and Reid’s approval rating will go up. This might not help Obama’s approval in the state, but really, who cares? Politics is a short-term game, and Obama’s got almost three years before Nevada voters go back to the polls for him. There’s time.