Google For The Government

from the looks-who's-looking-at-who dept

With all the recent moves to make it easier for our government to spy on us, someone finally got the idea to set up a system to make it easier to spy back at them. Some folks at MIT are setting up a project, they jokingly refer to as the "Google for government", that hopefully will let citizens better track what their own leaders are doing. The system is officially called the Government Information Awareness system, which is a clear tweak at the proposed Total (now Terrorist) Information Awareness system the Pentagon keeps trying to push forward with. It's unclear how well this particular system will work, but the idea is to get more information out there for people to use. While the initial site is seeded with various political info, they're hoping that it will grow based on user contributions. Of course, when you think "user contributions" and "politics", you know that there's going to be all sorts of misleading and absolutely false information listed on the site. So, the creators of the site are trying to build a credibility system, that will help more credible info rise to the top. It will also let people build a "circle of trust", where items people they trust find credible are more likely to be found credible for them as well. Finally, the system also tries to connect directly with anyone that is being talked about to let that original source weigh in on the credibility of the info. It sounds like a fascinating experiment - and it will be interesting to see whether or not it takes off. I hope it does well, but, in my experience, most people involved in politics (no matter what their views are) don't like to hear open and balanced information. They like living in a world that is spun entirely to their own politics, and don't even want to hear the opposition's take. I think people get more value out of a real debate, but many people don't seem to have the stomach for it. So, I'm afraid many people will stay away from such a system, because it forces them to confront real issues, rather than surrounding themselves completely with misleading stories.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    Chad, 5 Jul 2003 @ 4:06pm

    No Subject Given

    It seems like its worth a try, theres obviously too little information about what the government is up to available to common citizens. But the reputation system better be really good because there definitely will be people trying to game the system.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  2. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 6 Jul 2003 @ 4:44am

    Lobbyist Paradise

    Won't this be a gold rush for lobbying firms seeking to spread misinformation? Lobbying firms often make themselves sound like branches of the government, so will the MIT nerds building this stuff know the difference?

    link to this | view in thread ]

  3. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2003 @ 7:56pm

    No Subject Given

    The more eyes watching the government, the better.

    The site looks promising, I hope it expands beyond bio type data (like age/religion/education) and covers more stuff like their vote on bills, which bills they authored or co-sponsered, changed or killed in committees, what amendments they added, etc.

    The reputation system is critical - its gotta be difficult to seperate out an anonymous whistleblower from a anonymous partisan lobbyist from an anonymous disgruntled crank. Good luck.

    link to this | view in thread ]


Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.