Paid "Classified" Sections on Government Websites
Tag this idea as crazy. Or maybe not. Allow government websites to have appropriate paid classifieds for materially related goods and services. ...more »
Tag this idea as crazy. Or maybe not.
Allow government websites to have appropriate paid classifieds for materially related goods and services. These classifieds would be organized like a yellow book where basic listings are free or affordable and larger adds cost more.
Personally, I find it silly that government web sites are hesitant to link to non-government websites lest there is the appearance of endorsing a third party.
Currently, the Federal Government--and the taxpayer--has poured trillions of dollars into the private sector to protect specific companies and private assets. Ostensibly, this is being done to help the entire economy. But there is no questions that certain companies, industries, and private citizens are benefiting.
Moreover, the United States has auctioned spectrum and leased land to private parties for grazing, mining, and right of way. Our tax dollars go to build roads for main street business, and sometimes for roads that benefit only a few commercial interests. Government makes puts out bids and makes purchases from software to airplanes that makes (or breaks) whole companies. And I'm not even touching on government subsidies or earmarks.
Considering all this, it is rather parochial to be concerned about government web site links to third parties web sites creating an unethical endorsement. Pshaw. The web itself is about linking. Moreover, it is many times easier (and costless) to rotate different links to make any particularly prime piece of web real-estate (or ordering) equitably available. Ordering could even be changed with each user coming to the page.
Another way to make things equitable, not to mention revenue positive, is to charge for placement along the lines of classified ads. Each agency website could have a "directory" or "classified" section clearly labeled. Vendors listed on the site would be contractually required to not describe such listing as an endorsement.
Ultimately, this is a service for citizen. If I'm on the IRS site and I have a specific tax issue, why shouldn't the IRS point me in the direction of licensed, qualified individuals in my area? If I'm on CDC's site, why shouldn't I be able to find out vaccine locations? If I'm on Recovery.gov, why shouldn't I learn about other websites providing information about stimulus spending?
Collaboration, especially on the web, is bi-directional. When the government spends trillions to support private financial interests, it is silly we preserve our ethics by avoiding web links.
Greg Elin
« less full details »
Social Web