Suchergebnisse

The new media have been argued to strengthen the coproduction of safety by reducing the costs of interactions between government and citizens and providing new communicative potential. Does that lead to relevant additional input from citizens in police work? Or are preexisting interactions reproduced online? This empirical study of police practices in the Netherlands shows that new media indeed strengthen the coproduction of safety by enabling the police to reach more citizens and contact them 24/7. The police build new connections to citizens: mediated citizen networks form an important addition to offline networks. The costs are reduced most in a situation where new media replace face-to-face contacts between police and citizens, that is, in the coproduction of police patrol work. The article concludes that new media support the trend of responsibilization: the police use new media to build virtual networks with citizens and engage them anywhere and anytime in the coproduction of safety.

Research on and practical attention for the coproduction of public services is increasing. Coproduction is seen as a way to strengthen the quality and legitimacy of public service and reduce costs. Scholarship on coproduction of public services repeatedly ignores the role of the new media. This is surprising since many proponents highlight its potential for changing traditional, government‐centric approaches to delivering public services. This article shows that digital communities form an important addition to the government‐centric form of public service provision since they foster both an exchange of experiential information and social‐emotional support.

Do social media de-bureaucratize the organization of government communications? Key features of the bureaucratic ideal-type are centralized and formalized external communications and disconnection of internal and external communications. Some authors argue that this organizational model is being replaced by a less bureaucratic model that better fits the communication demands of the information society. To explore this argument empirically, the use of twitter by Dutch police departments is investigated through an analysis of 982 accounts and 22 interviews. The empirical analysis shows that most twitter communication takes place through decentralized channels. While a minority of police officers use personal names on twitter, most use their formal identity. Twitter is mostly used for external communication but the mutual interest in the twitter communications of other police officers is substantial. The study nuances the idea of transformative change: the old bureaucratic and the new models manifest themselves in the hybrid organization of social media communications.

Do social media de-bureaucratize the organization of government communications? Key features of the bureaucratic ideal-type are centralized and formalized external communications and disconnection of internal and external communications. Some authors argue that this organizational model is being replaced by a less bureaucratic model that better fits the communication demands of the information society. To explore this argument empirically, the use of twitter by Dutch police departments is investigated through an analysis of 982 accounts and 22 interviews. The empirical analysis shows that most twitter communication takes place through decentralized channels. While a minority of police officers use personal names on twitter, most use their formal identity. Twitter is mostly used for external communication but the mutual interest in the twitter communications of other police officers is substantial. The study nuances the idea of transformative change: the old bureaucratic and the new models manifest themselves in the hybrid organization of social media communications.

Government 2.0 is often presented as a means to reinforce the relation between state and citizens in an information age. The promise of Government 2.0 is impressive but its potential has not or hardly been realized yet in practice. This paper uses insights from various disciplines to understand Government 2.0 as an institutional transformation. It focuses on three key issues ‑ leadership in government, incentives for citizens and mutual trust ‑ and our analysis shows that Government 2.0 efforts are too often guided by overly optimistic and simplified ideas about these issues. Our discussion suggests that there are no easy, one‑size‑fits‑all ways to address challenges of leadership, citizen incentives and trust: a contextual approach and hard work is needed to tackle these challenges. Realizing Government 2.0 means looking beyond the technology and understanding its potential in a specific situation.