Hi,
This is an interesting debate and I am so sorry if my question seems terribly naïve, but how would accessing facebook and other similar sites compromise security more than say, surfing the internet for holidays and registering with such sites?
Thanks
Angela Nicholls
Audience Research Executive
Teachers TV
Direct Line: +44 (0)20 7182 7446
Fax: +44 (0)20 7580 3656
Email: [log in to unmask]
16-18 Berners Street
London W1T 3LN
www.teachers.tv
-----Original Message-----
From: UKEIG: the UK eInformation Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Wendy Warr
Sent: 01 October 2007 12:41
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: To Every Technology There Is A Season ...[!] [?]
Phil,
Bandwidth and security are two of the "obvious reasons" that closed
organizations such as pharmaceutical companies tend to use for avoiding
various Web 2.0 technologies.
Wendy
Dr. Wendy A. Warr
Wendy Warr & Associates
6 Berwick Court, Holmes Chapel
Cheshire, CW4 7HZ, England
Tel./fax +44 (0)1477 533837
[log in to unmask] http://www.warr.com
-----Original Message-----
From: UKEIG: the UK eInformation Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Phil Bradley
Sent: 01 October 2007 12:25
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: To Every Technology There Is A Season ...[!] [?]
I'm not really sure what the 'obvious reasons' are, you know. I've just
spent a few minutes looking through Facebook groups for this subject
area,
and found some interesting stuff.
Firstly there IS a Facebook group for English Heritage members of staff,
which currently only has 14 people in it, but that's a start I suppose.
So
clearly there's some interest that staff have in being able to talk to
each
other outside the confines of the EH intranet (presuming you have one).
Perhaps one of the 'obvious reasons' is that the EH doesn't want this to
happen?
Anyway, let's continue... there are groups that cover English history,
and
there are also local/regional groups. Presumably EH doesn't want staff
getting involved in discussions on subjects like this? Presumably they
feel
that it's better that their staff expertise isn't shared in a way that's
helpful to people? Perhaps they want to try and control the
conversations?
How about the National Trust - not exactly the same type of organization
I'll agree, but a close enough match. There's the group "I'm a proud
member
of the National Trust and I don't yet draw a pension" which currently
has
over 200 members, 161 photographs, discussions and 50+ wall postings.
Seems
to be quite lively, and a really good way to share information back and
forth. Wouldn't it be nice if there was such a group for English
Heritage,
where staff could get involved, show their interest, enthusiasm and
knowledge for their subject, and help their members? Apparently not.
There's a "National Trust working holidays" group with 94 members,
photographs and discussions. Not forgetting the "I work for the National
Trust" group with 50+ members, with some interesting conversations
taking
place. There's a small student study group about the NT as well. Then we
have the "National Trust staff past and present" group, and the
"National Trust Working Holiday - Brecon 2007" group. In fact, I found
another 4 groups before I got bored.
Clearly there is a real interest - both in the organization itself and
its
subject coverage, and I can't believe that there isn't for the English
Heritage. I'm not convinced the "obvious reasons" actually exist - what
I
see is that English Heritage isn't interested in having conversations
with
members outside of their website, that they're not encouraging their
staff
to get involved with subjects of interest where they could really make a
difference.
I assume what you might mean by "obvious reasons" are that staff might
spend
time using Facebook, when they should be doing other things. If that's
the
case, the obvious way of looking at that is to assume that the
organization
don't actually trust their staff to use such resources sensibly. Perhaps
they ought not allow them access to computers at all in that case?
Moreover,
surely it's the job of everyone in an organization to get involved, to
learn
and develop? Apparently not, if you're in English Heritage. Surely as an
organization it should want to foster interest in the organisation
itself,
and for it's subject coverage? But if your organization prevents you
doing
that, clearly that isn't actually the case. Surely an organization
should
want to help educate, inform, entertain and involve members of the
public?
In the case of English Heritage, apparently not.
And that's really sad. Because the "obvious reasons" actually aren't
obvious
reasons at all. What a ban like this is actually saying is that English
Heritage doesn't trust its staff, isn't interested in getting involved
in
conversations with the very people it needs to engage with, and quite
simply
just doesn't care.
Suddenly those "obvious reasons" seem a bit silly to me.
Phil.
Internet Trainer, Web designer, SEO, Speaker, Author
Visit http://www.philb.com for free articles on many aspects of the
Internet.
My weblogs: http://www.philbradley.typepad.com/
*** How to use Web 2.0 in your library is now available ***
-----Original Message-----
From: UKEIG: the UK eInformation Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On
Behalf Of SIMS, Diana
Some employers prevent their staff from accessing Facebook, as ours does
and for obvious reasons!
Diana Sims
Librarian
English Heritage
National Monuments Record
Kemble Drive
Swindon
SN2 2GZ
01793 414632
[log in to unmask]
Ever been inspired by a great book? Get involved in our Great Books survey and let us know your favourite: visit www.teachers.tv/greatbooks
Think before you print. Consider the environment and only print emails when really necessary.
This email and any attached files may contain views or opinions which, unless specifically stated, do not necessarily represent those of Teachers TV, Educational Digital Management Ltd, or EducationDigital Ltd. This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify us immediately.
