The biggest hype of the last few years is the emergence of so-called Web 2.0 tools, networking and collaboration applications that were supposed to change our lives (supposedly for the better). Is this essentially a youth game, or is Web v2 ready for prime time? Does the interconnectivity and interactivity of web-delivered content mean courts will look and act differently, and if so when?

First, let’s look at some of the most visible features of Web 2.0 …

BLOGS

Please correct me if I’m wrong, but few courts have active blogs. The Hillsborough County (FL) clerk of court has one, although it doesn’t have an RSS feed. Many more courts have RSS feeds, but these usually provide newsletter content, rule/form change information and appellate rulings that lawyers and others can subscribe to. The NACM Website Committee is considering a blog, but no decision is likely in the near term.

SOCIAL NETWORKS

Facebook, MySpace and Linkedin are the three biggest online social and business networks, and Linkedin actually added a NACM member contact group to promote social and business interaction among court manager types. I have heard of some government agencies using Facebook to advertise job openings, and only heard it in the context of court IT managers disallowing Internet access to these sites, but having to reverse the decision for business reasons.

GROUPS AND CONTENT SHARING

Yahoo and Google are the standard bearers for groups to gather online for information exchange, sharing of files and development of databases. Sites such as Flickr and Utube promote the sharing of media files such as videos and pictures.

So, has Web 2.0 reached the point where it is changing how courts conduct their business and provide services? I think the answer is no. Will Web 2.0 tools and features gain popularity and eventually have a profound impact? You bet!

Consider, for instance, an interesting article from InternetNews that predicted the demise of the press conference attributable to the advent of blogs  … the crux of the story is that the US State Department’s blog recently made breaking news available directly to the public instead of exclusively to the media. The author asked: On what basis should our government grant exclusive or early information to media organizations while deliberately concealing or delaying information to the citizens to which it’s answerable? In an age where the government can talk directly to the public, shouldn’t it do so (then of course allow the media to ask questions about that information afterwards)?

Consider, too, how slowly courts implemented something as simple as fax machines back in the 1980s. Similarly, how the Internet and websites are still only beginning to pervade court service delivery. Trust me, when we slog through more than 4,000 sites to judge the Top 10 Court Websites Awards, way less than 1/2 have any sort of interactive content.

In my view, there are two phenomena that will drive the increased use of Web 2.0 features in court. First, the workforce is getting younger - like it or not, these Web features have higher acceptance and general use among youth. Second, is fear - in my view, the chief reason that courts have websites (same as they started using fax machines) is that judges and court managers don’t want to get left behind. But just plugging in a fax machine doesn’t mean a court accepts fax filings unless they have the leadership and vision to use the tool to its highest potential. Ditto on court websites, where e-filing and online fine payments are still the exception and not the rule.

I’m sure the Jetson’s will look back at us agonizing over these decisions and laugh.

Chris Crawford

www.justiceserved.com

Photo credit = The Jetson’s Unofficial Home

This entry was posted on Sunday, September 14th, 2008 at 8:11 am and is filed under Court Management, Technology, The Future.You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.