Sunlight Foundation

Should Ambassadors Tweet? U.S. Embassies and Social Media

By Daniel Schuman, Cassandra LaRussa, and Ryan Sibley with Daniel Cloud, Kevin Koehler, Andrew Pendleton, Matt Rumsey, and Bridget Todd.

Twitter has become an important tool for social revolutions and civilian mobilization across the world, from Egypt to London to Iran, and has been increasingly embraced by the U.S. government. A Sunlight Foundation investigation looked at Twitter use by U.S. embassies and found that approximately 69 percent of embassies have official or semi-official Twitter accounts as of March 2012.

See our results here.

The U.S. State Department encourages the use of social media and actively tweets as part of a new “21st Century Statecraft” initiative, with diplomats required to undergo Twitter training. But why do 121 U.S. embassies have Twitter accounts, and 54 do not? What do they say through these accounts? And who listens?

Speaking in 140 Characters

Each of the 121 different embassies on Twitter has its own approach to communications. Some accounts are purely official, while others link to the personal Twitter account of the ambassador. Some embassies primarily share news articles about foreign affairs and circulate embassy newsletters, while others focus on cultural events in America and in their respective countries. Many “re-tweet” messages from the State Department and other government agencies, and some -- such as the U.S. Embassy in Afghanistan -- post information about violence and safety precautions.

Most Twitter feeds have more outgoing content than interactions with their followers. Occasionally, people will tweet “at” an embassy, but embassies are not always able to answer specific questions. The U.S. Embassy in Dublin,  for example, responded to a visa inquiry by telling the tweeter to call instead.

The Egyptian Embassy, however, demonstrates how social media can be used for active engagement. Individuals and organizations regularly tweet “at” the embassy, and the embassy consistently tweets back. For instance, the embassy replied to a critical tweet with “sorry you feel that way, happy to talk with you if you like to discuss anything in particular.”  It also shows instances of policy discussions between individuals and embassy officials. For example, an Egyptian tweeted “America would never want a smooth democratic transition for an Arab country knowing that said nations are anti Israel.” The embassy tweeted back “Not true. We think that democratic transition in #Egypt is good for #Egypt, region, United States, and whole world.” It may be 140 characters, but it is dialogue.

 

You Speak My Language

Many embassies make an effort to connect in local languages. A fair number of U.S. embassy Twitter accounts post messages in languages other than English, including China and Spain.

Take for instance the Twitter feed for the US embassy in Athens, which happens to post to the account in both English and Greek. According Marie Blanchard, a spokesperson for the embassy, they use the twitter feed to broadcast news related to the U.S. government and Greece in addition to features about Greece. This Greece-focused Twitter feed is handled by a writer employed by the embassy, but Blanchard said that the ambassador himself might start tweeting soon, adding that the importance of Twitter to the embassy is growing.

While many of these Twitter accounts are aimed at both citizens in their host country and Americans abroad, some pick one or the other. The account of the U.S. Ambassador to Macedonia, “American Corner,” is aimed almost exclusively at Macedonians and educates Macedonians about American government and culture and offers information about opportunities to get an education in the U.S. The “American Corner” is broadcast in English, however, which likely limits its reach.

Oddly enough, of the 121 embassies that tweet, only 99 have their Twitter accounts linked to from their official websites, although there are at least 119 official Twitter accounts. Ten embassy websites link to the Ambassador’s personal account, including two embassies (Japan and Bulgaria) that link to the ambassador’s personal account but do not maintain a separate account of their own. (It’s unclear whether the ambassador to Japan’s account is official.) When we started researching this story in December, we could not find a U.S. State Department list of embassy Twitter accounts, but there is now a list of 99 embassy accounts. This incomplete list suggests that embassy adoption of Twitter is a largely an organic process, and one that has outpaced headquarters.

Why Aren’t More Embassies Tweeting?

There does not seem to be a clear answer as to why more embassies aren’t using Twitter. We did find a weak correlation between how free a country is (as judged by Freedom House) and the local embassy’s use of Twitter. Of the “free” countries with U.S. embassies, 51 embassies are tweeting, and only 22 are not. Of the countries labeled “partly free,” 39 embassies tweet while 13 do not. Only 27 embassies in “not free” countries have Twitter accounts, while 16 do not.

We tried to examine whether Twitter use by an embassy correlated with Twitter adoption in a country, but we were unable to obtain reliable numbers of the number of people in a country using Twitter. (Neither Twitter nor comScore, a digital marketing intelligence firm, would release their data on Twitter usage rates.) The U.S. embassies in the top 10 countries identified by comScore for Twitter penetration all maintain Twitter accounts.  We did not look at Internet penetration rates as a proxy for Twitter penetration because some countries use a Twitter alternative.

It could be that social media activity by U.S. ambassadors could itself inhibit its adoption by embassies. (Some ambassadors maintain a separate non-embassy Twitter account.) In February for example, officials in Russia accused the recently appointed U.S. Ambassador and Twitter enthusiast Michael McFaul of “promoting regime change”  in Russia. McFaul has used both Twitter and Facebook accounts to defend himself on a large and direct scale in both Russian and English.

Although U.S. Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford was forced to leave that country in early February, he continues to use social media to communicate with Syrians and bring international attention to the violence taking place in his former host country. The official embassy Twitter account frequently links to messages from Ford via his Facebook page. The use of Twitter is unique in that it offers a way to bypass traditional media avenues and communicate directly on a large scale.

The challenges that Ambassador McFaul is facing in Russia demonstrate how U.S. embassies that participate in social media are vulnerable to backlash from their host country. However, it is clear that Twitter is has become a valuable mechanism to circumvent traditional media channels and foster a direct dialogue between foreign individuals and the U.S. government.

Methodology: To determine whether an embassy tweeted, we examined the official embassy page for a link to a twitter account and performed a Google search for "US Embassy {country name} twitter."

This article arose out of Sunlight Olympics, where staff from different departments were given a few days to come up with unique projects that drew upon their particular skills.

Image: Twitter Bird, a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 image from Creative Tools' photostream.

Powered by Socrata

The News Without Transparency: Records not so Open with Obama

The Department of Justice’s recently proposed changes for the way it executes Freedom of Information Act requests have inspired a flurry of media attention from various news outlets and criticism from government watchdogs.

The groups criticizing the DOJ, which includes the Sunlight Foundation, are concerned that the new rules are too restrictive and threaten the federal law’s usefulness and fairness to the regular citizens and journalists it is meant to serve.

Here at Sunlight, we compared the new and old regulations, and discussed how the changes would be a huge step back for transparency. But we’re not the only organization writing about FOIA problems and setbacks. The backlog of FOIA requests and agencies taking much longer than allowed by the statute to fill requests are examples of the frequently discussed issues over the past few years.

Based on data gathered by government entities responsible for collection of FOIA statistics, and despite the presidential promise to do better, it appears things have only gotten worse. In March 2010 the Associated Press assessed how well President Obama's promises to comply more fully with FOIA had been carried out after a year.

The article found that agencies were more frequently citing exemptions to avoid complying with requests. Similarly, in July 2011 iWatch News vented frustration with the State Department for neglecting to respond to FOIA requests for four years.

These articles, as well as others that look at the administration's compliance with FOIA, frequently begin with holding agency practices to the standard set by President Obama's memo to the heads of executive departments and agencies. The memo states, "The Freedom of Information Act should be administered with a clear presumption: In the face of doubt, openness prevails." The text of this memo is available from the Briefing Room on WhiteHouse.gov. It is located under "Presidential Memoranda" under January 2009.

In general, agencies are required to submit annual reports detailing their interaction with FOIA requests. FOIA.gov links to At-a-Glance reports that highlight the major findings from each agency. FOIA.gov also allows you to search the data submitted as part of agency reports and create acustom-made report. The Office of Information Policy also generates specific reports to emphasize interesting FOIA statistics.

The AP article states that agencies cited the "deliberative process" exemption - one that the president's memo specifically directed agencies to avoid using so frequently - 70,779 times in 2009. This is up from the 47,395 times it was cited under George W. Bush in 2008.

The article also states that agencies overall cited exemptions at least 466,872 times in 2009, again up from 312,683 times in 2008. Meanwhile requests are declining, down by 11 percent - 493,610 in 2008 to 444,924 in 2009.

The AP also claims that the "majority of agencies - 12 out of the 17, or 70 percent of those surveyed - increased FOIA requests granted in full, in part or both."

On what could be a positive note for the administration,  the AP notes that the number of backlogged requests had dropped from 124,019 in 2008 to 67,764 in 2009.

These facts and statistics about the number of FOIA requests filed and completed can be found using the "Advanced Report" function on the FOIA website. This function allows you to select the specific data you would like included in your report as well as which agencies you would like included in a comparison. Unlike the basic report function, "all agencies" is an option using this tool. Specific data choices include exemptions, requests, appeals, processing time, requests granted, and backlog.

Much of this information could also be obtained by looking individually at each agency's annual report. The AP article only looked at 17 agencies, but the FOIA data tool allows you to look at many more if you so choose.

The iWatch News story states that for the State Department, "the median response for complex FOIA requests is 228 days." The State Department makes available its annual FOIA reports from 1998 through the present. The 2010 report provides the statistic used in the article.

The story also states that for fiscal year 2012 the State Department has requested "$166,000 in new money to depend the department in FOIA-related lawsuits." The department's budget requests are available from 2002 through the present. The 2012 "Department of State Operations Congressional Budget Justification" includes the numbers cited in the article.


"The News Without Transparency" shows you what the news would look like without public access to information. Laws and regulations that force the government to make the data it has publicly available are absolutely vital, along with services that take that raw data and make it easy for reporters to write sentences like the ones we've redacted in the piece above. If you have an article you'd like us to put through the redaction machine, please send us an email at mbuck@sunlightfoundation.com.

Quick Links in the Morning

CQ Politics reports that health care related PACs accounted for the top or second highest source of contributions for 15 of the top 18 congressional leaders in the House involved in the health care debate.

Apparently, the $80 billion cost savings that the pharmaceutical industry agreed to with the Obama administration came with a price. In return, the White House promised to protect the industry from further attempts to extract cost savings from them including allowing the government to negotiate drug prices. Now we know what those trips to the White House were all about.

The House Selecte Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming is investigating the forged letters sent to three congressmen by a grassroots lobbying firm on behalf of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE). ACCCE has been trying to distance themselves from Bonner & Associates, the firm in question, and has denounced the letters. In a new letter sent by Chair Ed Markey, ACCCE is questioned as to why they did not act on the forged letters after they discovered their existence on June 24, two days prior to the vote on the cap and trade bill.

A new hire by the State Department may exploit a loophole in the administration's lobbying ban.

The Washington Post has a useful interactive graphic to compare the various versions of health care reform in Congress.