links for 2009-07-13
-
Comparison of TinyURL, tr.im, is.dg et al and discussion about the various features included or desired.
-
"Report on young people's media habits written for investment bank by teenage intern causes huge interest in the City"
-
Including Howard Rheingold at Civil Service Live 09
-
"Not everyone will find the same value in your product or service. For those that don’t, why not keep them as users and turn them into evangelists?"
links for 2009-07-12
-
14 to 18 year olds are now streaming music regularly online using services such as YouTube and Spotify rather than illegal filesharing.
-
An approach to rethinking enquiries for the digital age (as applied to the forthcoming Iraq enquiry.)
-
Wow. Things have changed since my day.
-
Seguing nicely from my blog post about the barriers to innovation: this is so that we can "gossip without fear of public exposure and ridicule" apparently. A Mail report which says that "'Civil Pages' site has reportedly been dubbed 'the Facebook of the Civil Service'" and says it's costing £1m.
July 13, 2009 at 10:18 am
Could you clarify what is inaccurate?
Apparently the ‘Facebook of the Civil Service’ appears to be an actual quote taken from here:
http://www.civilservicenetwork.com/latest-news/news-article/newsarticle/civil-pages-launched/
and the ‘official’ blog here:
http://www.amplified09.com/2009/07/engaging-your-audiences-through-digital-participation-alex-butler-coi/
If it’s even costing £500K as the quote from the press office suggests, that’s way too much for what sounds like a Buddypress clone.
One overcomes gossip and speculation by being open with information. What is it, in fact, costing?
What should have happened is COI should have issued a press release to announce this so that media didn’t have to rely on third-party reports.
Cheers.
July 13, 2009 at 2:11 pm
You’re right, the “inaccurate and biased” phrase was intemperate and incorrect of me.
I thought it was referring to CivilTalk and CivilBlog (mentioned in the article) which are quite different, but after tagging this in del.icio.us it became clear there were other, bigger projects involved that I knew nothing about. However I forgot to amend/update the initial del.icio.us tag and it got cross-posted here later in the day: I’ve amended it now, not to cover my tracks but so as not to perpetuate the error.
It’s me that’s inaccurate and lacking information in this case, and I’m sorry for adding to the ‘noise’ which isn’t helping. If I’d known more at the outset I wouldn’t have fallen into this, which I guess rather backs your point about being open with information in the first place.
July 13, 2009 at 4:26 pm
No worries, sorry for the unintentionally stern tone of the comment!
All the best.
July 13, 2009 at 7:41 pm
No problem, esp. given the snarky tone of my original post!
I think it was the quote “What they don’t want is people idly wasting their time indulging in meaningless gossip” that got me irked so much. It’s frustrating when trying new ways of sharing information more efficiently are dismissed with such disdain, and is the sort of thing I was going on about in my post about “risky innovation“.
BTW, thanks for those links you posted in your original comment, hadn’t seen those till you referenced them and they’re most interesting.