We had a lively discussion in class today re: pros and cons of using Social Media in govt. and non-profit organizations.
I have a fundamental question: If I run a govt. agency, and the services my agency provides are a monopoly (exg. Border Patrol or Treasury Dept.), what would be the real downside to choosing not to use social media outlets beyond just simply having a presence? I have no competitors in my sector who may or may not be using social media.
I understand the argument from the private sector perspective--that if your company is not using social media outlets, your competitors will, thus putting your company at a competitive disadvantage.
If I view social media as posing more risk than reward to my organization, and I am a monopoly in my field with no competitors, can you make the argument for why I should consider using (or using more) social media options?
Thoughts?
My dear friend, what I think is that the purpose of the social media for the government is information sharing and getting the views of the citizen on various developmental aspects, policies, programs etc. it is not a question of the competition. Even in case of substitute service provider by and large government do not compete. However, it definitely try to improve its service. I fully appreciate your view regarding risk of sharing information on social media. In that case you should exercise caution as to what extent you should share the information on social media. You have to strike a balance. Further, I am of the opinion that all the government policies, programs, schemes etc. is for the citizens of the country and not for anybody else, therefore, govt. must share much information to the public subject to the condition that it do not compromise security and sovereignty of the nation.
ReplyDeleteNeeraj Srivastava