<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Simon Wakeman: Local gov shoudn&#8217;t be on Facebook</title>
	<atom:link href="http://davepress.net/2009/02/26/simon-wakeman-local-gov-shoudnt-be-on-facebook/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://davepress.net/2009/02/26/simon-wakeman-local-gov-shoudnt-be-on-facebook/</link>
	<description>Open government and everything else</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 15:15:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin Campbell-Wright</title>
		<link>http://davepress.net/2009/02/26/simon-wakeman-local-gov-shoudnt-be-on-facebook/comment-page-1/#comment-2770</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin Campbell-Wright</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2009 11:32:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://davepress.net/?p=1374#comment-2770</guid>
		<description>The key point for me was the same argument I blogged about a few weeks back (Shameless plug there noted) - it isn&#039;t about using Web2.0, but about embracing it.  

A Council page with a feed may mean people can view &quot;the same old *&quot; on facebook, but actually whats important is that Council&#039;s activiely use facebook to interact with their audience.  Much as your blog around Boris using Twitter.

I&#039;ve seen a number of PR blogs in the past that slate &quot;Chief Exec&#039;s Blog&quot; and I have the same issue - while a blog is ideally suited for a Chief Exec to communicate ideas and have them commented upon, a blog which doesn&#039;t allow comments or where staff are too nervous to comment on is really nor more effective than sending out a memo by email every week.

I think Council&#039;s should be on facebook and I suppose having a page is better than nothing - but there&#039;s a real danger that these pages will be seen as (and in some cases will be) tokenistic efforts that will undermine the whole concept of what they are trying to do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The key point for me was the same argument I blogged about a few weeks back (Shameless plug there noted) &#8211; it isn&#8217;t about using Web2.0, but about embracing it.  </p>
<p>A Council page with a feed may mean people can view &#8220;the same old *&#8221; on facebook, but actually whats important is that Council&#8217;s activiely use facebook to interact with their audience.  Much as your blog around Boris using Twitter.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve seen a number of PR blogs in the past that slate &#8220;Chief Exec&#8217;s Blog&#8221; and I have the same issue &#8211; while a blog is ideally suited for a Chief Exec to communicate ideas and have them commented upon, a blog which doesn&#8217;t allow comments or where staff are too nervous to comment on is really nor more effective than sending out a memo by email every week.</p>
<p>I think Council&#8217;s should be on facebook and I suppose having a page is better than nothing &#8211; but there&#8217;s a real danger that these pages will be seen as (and in some cases will be) tokenistic efforts that will undermine the whole concept of what they are trying to do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

