Reference Hub1
Local Governments and Social Networking: Do You Speak Our Language?

Local Governments and Social Networking: Do You Speak Our Language?

Gerald A. Merwin, J. Scott McDonald, Keith A. Merwin, Maureen McDonald, John R. Bennett
ISBN13: 9781466600713|ISBN10: 1466600713|EISBN13: 9781466600720
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-0071-3.ch006
Cite Chapter Cite Chapter

MLA

Merwin, Gerald A., et al. "Local Governments and Social Networking: Do You Speak Our Language?." Public Service, Governance and Web 2.0 Technologies: Future Trends in Social Media, edited by Ed Downey and Matthew A. Jones, IGI Global, 2012, pp. 84-98. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-0071-3.ch006

APA

Merwin, G. A., McDonald, J. S., Merwin, K. A., McDonald, M., & Bennett, J. R. (2012). Local Governments and Social Networking: Do You Speak Our Language?. In E. Downey & M. Jones (Eds.), Public Service, Governance and Web 2.0 Technologies: Future Trends in Social Media (pp. 84-98). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-0071-3.ch006

Chicago

Merwin, Gerald A., et al. "Local Governments and Social Networking: Do You Speak Our Language?." In Public Service, Governance and Web 2.0 Technologies: Future Trends in Social Media, edited by Ed Downey and Matthew A. Jones, 84-98. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2012. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-0071-3.ch006

Export Reference

Mendeley
Favorite

Abstract

This chapter argues that Web 2.0, a valuable tool used to expand government-citizen communication opportunities and bring citizens as a group closer to government, widens a communication opportunity divide between local government and its citizens. Web 2.0 access is almost exclusively English-language based, benefiting that segment of the population and leaving others behind, especially the fastest growing language minority, Spanish speakers. While local governments continue to take advantage of the ability to interact with citizens through social networking (Aikins, 2009; Vogel, 2009), McDonald, Merwin, Merwin, Morris, & Brannen (2010) found a majority of counties with significant populations of citizens with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) did not provide for the translation needs of these citizens on their Websites. The chapter finds that Web 2.0-based communication is almost exclusively in English and that cities are missing opportunities to communicate. It concludes with recommendations based on observations of communities employing Web 2.0 to engage non-English speaking populations.

Request Access

You do not own this content. Please login to recommend this title to your institution's librarian or purchase it from the IGI Global bookstore.