Social Media Use by Governments

Abstract

This working paper takes a comparative snapshot of social media use in and by OECD governments. The focus is on government institutions, as opposed to personalities, and how they manage to capture the opportunities of new social media platforms to deliver better public services and to create more open policy processes. The analysis is based on a large amount of empirical data, including a survey of OECD governments on policies and objectives in this area. Major challenges are discussed, notably those related to the uncertainty of institutions on how to best leverage social media beyond "corporate" communications. The paper proposes tools to guide decision makers: a checklist of issues to be considered by government institutions, a set of potential indicators to appraise impacts, and a range of options for more in-depth policy analysis. 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARYPresence and activity on social media is no longer a question of choice for most governments as those new platforms empower individuals and non-traditional interest groups. Politicians were first to react to these changes by using platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and blogs to rally support. Government institutions are slowly catching up and increasingly experiment with social media. Governments are witnessing how social media empower individuals, as well as traditional and newly-formed interest groups to influence political agendas and policy processes. Most prominent topics discussed on social media include elections and political campaigns, disaster and emergency situations, political unrest. But social media are more than just a global place for discussions, they have become a vehicle for the organisation of collective action.

The OECD digital government policy framework

“…A proactive government pre-empts requests from citizens, instead providing answers or solutions to their needs through the adoption of push vs pull delivery models (Linders, Liao and Wang, 2018 [29]) that limit to the minimum the burdens and frictions of interacting with public sector organisations. 6 Proactiveness builds upon the five previous dimensions and aims to offer a seamless and convenient service delivery experience to citizens, shaped around their needs, preferences, circumstances and location, on the basis that governments are equipped to anticipate and address problems end-to-end rather than through a fractured and reactive approach.…”

Governance responses to disinformation

“…Governments may, therefore, consider embedding the use of the tools in efforts to interact with citizens and businesses, and thereby include citizens in decision-making processes and allow them to inform public services, policies, and processes (OECD, 2018a). Ultimately, the goal is to ensure that these new channels influence decision-making processes and that the initiatives and tools are targeted and purpose-oriented (Mickoleit, 2014).…”

Social Media Impact on Social Life of Public Servant in Mari Mansa District, Dawuro Zone, Southern Region, Ethiopia

“…In social media politicians were first to react to these changes by using platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, Telegram, Twitter and blogs to rally support. Public institutions are slowly catching up and increasingly experiment with social media in last five years (Mickoleit, 2014).…”