Mark Drapeau researches social media for national security purposes and more generally in the government. He has been the AAAS Science & Technology Policy Fellow at the Department of Defense for two years. Currently, Mark works at the Center for Technology and National Security Policy at Fort McNair in Washington DC.  Prior to working in the government, he was a neuroscientist and animal behavior expert at New York University in New York.

We met Mark Drapeau at Tech Cocktail Conference in Chicago where he was on a nationwide tour of social networking events in order to learn about new technology of possible relevance to the military, understand the current trends, and meet thought leaders in the area.  Now a contributing writer to Mashable.com, Mark is becoming a focal point for information about the coming "Government 2.0."

BB: What do you think of government PR?

MD: It’s fair to say that that the government has a PR problem.  Many people distrust the government, yet have little understanding of its day-to-day workings.  One thing that PR 2.0 can do is help to put a face on the anonymous offices of the federal government.  Who at the FDA decides that your drugs are safe?  Who’s holding up that bill in the Senate?  Which office at USDA chooses "Prime" beef?  What’s a typical day like on a Naval ship? 

BB: How can social media change government communications?

MD: The government needs to communicate in a number of different ways.  There are internal communications and workings of the government, within offices, within agencies, and between agencies.  There are also communications with constituents and other government stakeholders, for example, government contractors.  Finally, there are communications with our partners around the world, whether those are huge foreign governments or tiny non-profit organizations.

Social media applies to all of these.  Collaborative software like wikis can help offices and agencies work better together, and leverage the intellectual assets they have much better.  There are already examples in the intelligence community and elsewhere of groups using wikis to plan events and write reports.  In communicating with stakeholders and citizens, PR tools like Qik and Twitter can be great; Congressman John Culberson from Texas is perhaps the most prominent single person doing this right now.  Regarding outside partnerships, there are mashups like Contacts Nearby from InSTEDD, which can connect (say) militaries, NGOs, and refugees for post-disaster or post-war relief efforts.

BB: What are your favorite government 2.0 initiatives?

MD: I really like what Congressman John Culberson is doing with new media.  He is such a good advocate for using social tools and new technology for simply doing his job - working on behalf of the people of Houston.  He has been successful in recruiting some of his peers to start using these services, as well.

In the national security arena, the Intelligence Community (IC) has built INTELINK, which includes Intellipedia and other tools that would remind you of sites like de.lic.ious, Flickr and so on.  They have also developed a government-wide enterprise email system called UGOV; currently every agency and even major subdivisions within agencies use their own email domains (for example, I have an ndu.edu email address), making it difficult to find people.

There are also some excellent blogs, as I pointed out in my recent Mashable articles.  Government agencies, which are highly criticized, are likely to benefit the most from this.  Probably the coolest one is Deliver Magazine, which is published by the U.S. Postal Service.  I believe it’s done in WordPress, and although it is an overt effort, you can barely tell that it’s a government-sponsored website.

BB: Tell us about your efforts to unify government 2.0 types.

MD: My mission is to conduct a research project about the applications of social tools in the government, with the ultimate goal being to influence policy.  I can’t do it alone, though, and "fixing the government" is like working with ExxonMobil + GE + Starbucks + Microsoft + Halliburton + Tata + Sony + … in its depth, scope, and global reach.

One way I am reaching out to people is through blogging.  By posting on Mashable and other sites, people working on 2.0 efforts throughout government are writing to me about what they are doing, or asking for advice about how they can 2.0 their office.  Through blogging, I can not only organize some of my thoughts for a policy document later on, but also highlight some of the great things going on in the government.

There are also an increasing number of government-focused conferences on 2.0 strategy and technology in the Washington DC area.  I am starting to play a role in that space as well, whether it is recommending speakers and invitees, or playing a more active role myself.  More informally, organizations like Tech Cocktail have local events that are terrific for informal networking among like-minded Washingtonians.

BB: How will the presidential transition affect these efforts?

MD: Flip the question, too: How might 2.0 affect the presidential transition?

The presidential transition period - the time between the election and the new president taking office - is a very important time in the government.  It is one of the relatively few periods when fresh minds work hard, important people can be influenced, and big ideas can take hold.  One thing we are looking at is using this as an opportunity for 2.0 to be more of a priority in the national security community, and more generally across the government. 

I work for the Department of Defense, and so that is my priority, but many things we might be studying (soldiers communicating with locals around the world) are applicable to diverse departments; for example, the Department of Education (policymakers communicating with teachers) and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (decision makers talking with low-income housing recipients).

Web 2.0 might also influence how the presidential transition occurs.  I will expand on this in an article I am working on for September, but a good deal of what happens in this period is information sharing between the current government agencies and representatives of the incoming president.  The "transition team" analyzes the information and works together to make recommendations about personnel, organization, and priorities.  Social tools can possibly help with some of these tasks.

BB: How much of the government 2.0 efforts are occurring internally?

MD: Security is a big deal in the government, and many people are concerned about the risks associated with social networking tools.  Hence, one strategy is to put everything behind a huge wall.  INTELINK is a good example of this - it is very good and hardly gets any publicity.  There are other examples, for instance within the State Department, of "private" 2.0 tools.  I think that the degree of secrecy depends on the mission; Public Affairs tends to be open, Intelligence not so much. I think that one debate that will eventually happen in government (and is already happening in the private sector) is, who owns the social tools?  Right now it seems like the CIO’s have the edge, but I tend to think that Public Affairs is the true home of this new technology.

BB: What’s next for Mark Drapeau?

MD: After my AAAS Fellowship ends this month, I will stay on at the Center for Technology and National Security Policy as an Associate Research Fellow.  I have gotten a lot of support for my efforts in the area of 2.0 and my work is feeding into other ongoing efforts in life sciences and global health, stability and reconstruction, information technology, and strategic communication.  I will also continue to contribute to Mashable on "Government 2.0".