<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sensible Strategies for Open Government and Online Hubs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.knightcomm.org/press-release-sensible-strategies-for-open-government-and-online-hubs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.knightcomm.org/press-release-sensible-strategies-for-open-government-and-online-hubs/</link>
	<description>A project of the Aspen Institute and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 09:37:31 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: @socialcap</title>
		<link>http://www.knightcomm.org/press-release-sensible-strategies-for-open-government-and-online-hubs/#comment-4128</link>
		<dc:creator>@socialcap</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Mar 2011 13:50:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.knightcomm.org/?p=5680#comment-4128</guid>
		<description>The Creating Local Online Hubs provides a helpful framework for moving forward on these recommendations.  Our experience at Social Capital Inc. resonates with much of the paper&#039;s ideas; however, I did find three items I would add as being important 1) including content from local nonprofits; 2) focusing on the ongoing capacity needed to make the sites a success; and 3) linking this strategy to the &quot;Geek Corps&quot; recommendation.  I elaborated on these comments on my blog here: &lt;a href=&quot;http://socialcapitalinc.org/node/663&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://socialcapitalinc.org/node/663&lt;/a&gt; </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Creating Local Online Hubs provides a helpful framework for moving forward on these recommendations.  Our experience at Social Capital Inc. resonates with much of the paper&#39;s ideas; however, I did find three items I would add as being important 1) including content from local nonprofits; 2) focusing on the ongoing capacity needed to make the sites a success; and 3) linking this strategy to the &quot;Geek Corps&quot; recommendation.  I elaborated on these comments on my blog here: <a href="http://socialcapitalinc.org/node/663" rel="nofollow">http://socialcapitalinc.org/node/663</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrea Schneider</title>
		<link>http://www.knightcomm.org/press-release-sensible-strategies-for-open-government-and-online-hubs/#comment-3979</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrea Schneider</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Feb 2011 23:19:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.knightcomm.org/?p=5680#comment-3979</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s wonderful to see papers which create a solid framework for action in Open Gov.  I am disappointed the emphasis remains on transparency and technology, and not on the broader opportunity the entire directive frames. 
While technology is central, it does not address organizational design/change, the integration of open government principles into everyday work, the nature of collaboration, citizen participation and sustainable and practical models of implementation, or the need to develop, on the ground capacity, to create a &quot;new normal&quot;. 
I hope this is moving towards our need to reduce duplication of effort and funding through organizational collaboration, changes in core design functions in federal grant making, creating multiple sector stakeholders in public and private allocations and other practical ways to re-fresh the entire system. 
Thanks for these new ideas. 
 </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#39;s wonderful to see papers which create a solid framework for action in Open Gov.  I am disappointed the emphasis remains on transparency and technology, and not on the broader opportunity the entire directive frames.<br />
While technology is central, it does not address organizational design/change, the integration of open government principles into everyday work, the nature of collaboration, citizen participation and sustainable and practical models of implementation, or the need to develop, on the ground capacity, to create a &quot;new normal&quot;.<br />
I hope this is moving towards our need to reduce duplication of effort and funding through organizational collaboration, changes in core design functions in federal grant making, creating multiple sector stakeholders in public and private allocations and other practical ways to re-fresh the entire system.<br />
Thanks for these new ideas.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
