With the launch of Data.gov we are seeing significant efforts by the Obama Administration to finally start bridging the technology divide between government 1.0 and government 2.0, but when it’s all said and done there’s a lot more to web 2.0 than mere technology. After all, it’s really about the conversation that the technology is supposed to help facilitate. Conversation is something that the government seems less apt at than even the most archaic corporations for many reasons, and in the end I fear many conversations will end with “because it’s the law that’s why”. (Read point number 20 on Steve Radick’s 20 thesis for Gov 2.0)

Whether the EPA, OMB, or IRS is using YouTube, Flickr, XML, Google Maps, etc. the real value for citizens is getting the information we need in a timely and accurate manner. APIs can be expected to enable a better digital user experience by leaps and bounds for citizens. Nevertheless, the most crucial element to citizen engagement is not the information we receive from the government, but how the government reacts to the information it’s getting from us. Will our questions, comments, and concerns to the executive branch be aggregated, considered, and responded to? Or, will bureaucrats treat citizen comments with little regard? Will this alter the way we interact with the Executive Branch? Instead of being administered by the Office of the Presidency with oversight by Congress, will the Executive come under increasing account to the people? Finally, as citizens and watchdogs are able to evaluate government performance under a better microscope, how will this effect the Legislative Branch’s constituent services?

I look forward to this “change” and what it can bring, but I don’t believe that a website can’t replace a community. Nor can it replace the neceessary conversation between the people and our government. In the meantime Data.gov is a great first step to rebuilding our social capital.