Less than a week away to Sunshine Week , a surprise attack on transparency in Kentucky is threatening to change... View ArticleContinue reading
As Sunlight has covered before, California is one of the many states that is in dire need of transparency. A... View ArticleContinue reading
Yesterday I had the pleasure of sitting on a Sunshine Week panel moderated by Patrice McDermott, along with CRP's Sheila Krumholz, Pro Publica's Jennifer LaFleur and Todd Park of HHS. We touched on a lot of different topics, including one that by now is probably familiar to anyone who's followed the progress of the Open Government Directive: frustration with the vagueness of the term "high value datasets." Various organizations--Sunlight included--have criticized the administration for releasing "high value" datasets that seem to actually be of questionable usefulness.
Jennifer coined a formulation of what she considers to be a high value dataset, and it attracted some support on the panel:
Information on anything that's inspected, spent, enforced, or licensed. That's what I want, and that's what the public wants.
I don't think this is a bad formulation. But while I'm not anxious to tie myself into knots of relativism, we should keep in mind the degree to which "high value" is in the eye of the beholder. It's clear how Jennifer's criteria map to the needs of journalists like those at Pro Publica. But if you consider the needs of someone working with weather data, or someone constructing a GIS application--two uses of government data that have spawned thriving industries, and generated a lot of wealth--it's obvious that the definition isn't complete. To use a more melodramatic example, if World War III broke out tomorrow, a KML inventory of fallout shelters could quickly go from being an anachronism to a vital asset.
The point isn't that Jennifer's definition is bad, but rather that any definition is going to be incomplete. The problem isn't that agencies did a bad job of interpreting "high value" (though to be clear, some did do a bad job); rather, it's that formulating their task in this way was bound to produce unsatisfactory results.
We're going about this backward. Ideally, we'd be able to start by talking about what the available datasets are, not by trying to figure out what we hope they'll turn out to be. Government should audit its data holdings, publish the list, then ask the public to identify what we want and need. This won't be easy, but it's far from impossible. And any other approach will inevitably leave the public wondering what we're not being told.Continue reading
After launching Sunshine Week with yesterday’s successful Advisory Committee on Transparency event, it’s a good time to reflect on positive... View ArticleContinue reading
Next week, the nation will be celebrating the 7th annual Sunshine Week. Started by the American Society of Newspaper Editors... View ArticleContinue reading
This Sunshine Week was a particularly successful (and busy!) time for Sunlight. We helped usher in new transparency legislation, launched... View ArticleContinue reading
(Note: this post has been updated since it was first published—see below) It’s Sunshine Week again, and in that spirit... View ArticleContinue reading
On the occasion of Sunlight Week, our colleagues (and grantees) at the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) and OpenTheGovernment.org... View ArticleContinue reading
I’m delighted to have had an OpEd piece published in USA Today today: How powerful is the Internet in getting... View ArticleContinue reading