The government shutdown, which began October 1, has caused hundreds of thousands of government employees to be furloughed without pay. Among those furloughed in non-essential government organizations were many of the employees responsible for maintaing organizations’ web presences.
On the social media front, many of the shutdown organizations have suspended Twitter activity for the time being, posting notices for constituents that the accounts will be inactive and unresponsive until further notice. While this may present an inconvenience for constituents hoping to get the latest update from a shutdown organization, it’s probably not as detrimental as what’s happening on government websites. The agencies may not be updating, but their accounts are still intact and haven’t been deleted (at least not yet.)
While some websites of non-essential government agencies are now static, others have disappeared entirely for the time being. Websites such as census.gov, fcc.gov, and nps.gov (among others) now display a message informing visitors that due to the federal government shutdown and lapse of funding, the webpages are inaccessible. These inaccessible pages baffle me. .
The Sunlight Foundation, which uses source data from government sites, cites OMB Memo M-13-22 in their explanation of What Happens to .gov in a Shutdown : “The mere benefit of continued access by the public to information about the agency’s activities would not warrant the retention of personnel or the obligation of funds to maintain (or update) the agency’s website during such a lapse.” And even further, “The determination of which services continue during an appropriations lapse is not affected by whether the costs of shutdown exceed the costs of maintaining services.” This means that non-essential government agencies are not only being told to abandon their online presence during the shutdown, but also to take their presence offline entirely in some cases, even if the cost of doing so would be greater than maintaining it. This seems frustrating and ironic to me, considering that the shutdown was caused by the inability for Congress to come to an agreement on the budget.
Forbes interviewed Gabe Shaoolian, a digital trends expert, who notes, “Besides the negative impact on SEO, the government is discrediting their own authority and making other sites more of an authority because people looking for information will go elsewhere.” Shaoolian goes on to say that, “It’s instinctual to quiet down in times of crisis, but in actuality you should be doing the opposite. Take advantage of the opportunity to shape dialogue and stimulate discussion and debate around issues.” Instead of using this opportunity to include constituents in the conversation of what’s happening in Washington and gather input, the government’s policies have systematically prohibited it, at least in the digital realm.
Perhaps if more value had been placed on digital communications to make them essential, we’d be seeing a slew of new ideas coming in every minute. A democracy is supposed to be participatory. The government has not only diminished the American public’s ability to communicate with the government, but they’ve also restricted access to information. How can the public be informed and form opinions about which organizations they value (which in theory should tell lawmakers which organizations to budget for) if they don’t have access to the information about what those organizations do and what services they provide?
The last time the government shutdown was 18 years ago, and websites and social media accounts, understandably, weren’t a major concern at the time. Hopefully, government officials learn from this debacle and adjust their policies so that if another government shutdown occurs in the future, online communication with and information for constituents is a priority, instead of being deemed as a non-essential “service” of the government.