Change Dept.: White House Web site

President Barack Obama’s revolutionary campaign Web site,, which lived for three months as, has now morphed into Or put another way, the old of the Bush administration has taken on a new identity – if not yet a new look and feel – under the new occupant of the Oval Office.

At first glance, the new White House Web site does not seem all that much different from the old one, especially in functionality. The most obvious addition was a blog by Macon Phillips, director of new media in the Obama administration.

And although there are promises of much more to come — particularly in the use of Web 2.0 technologies to make the site more interactive and accessible to comments from average citizens — the online pathfinders in the new administration may soon confront some knotty legal, constitutional and practical hurdles.

Phillips’ first blog post on the new site detailed three priorities: communication, transparency and participation.

Phillips wrote that the White House site — like the Internet more broadly — will play an important role in encouraging citizen participation.

For example, the White House will publish all nonemergency legislation on the site, giving anyone interested five days to read and comment on it before the president signs it, Phillips wrote. The administration will also post executive orders and proclamations on the site, he added, making these documents much easier to find than when they were buried on the site of the Office of Management and Budget.

Although the site looks similar to the previous incarnation, there are clues to suggest changes are on the way, said Sarah Granger, a contributing editor at techPresident and the Personal Democracy Forum.

One such clue is the site’s notice that all third-party content posted by visitors to the site will be searchable under a Creative Commons license, Granger said. That means anyone may copy, distribute and transmit work under the license, and its inclusion shows that Obama’s team has laid the groundwork for user comments.

But that also means the White House webmasters may encounter more difficult hurdles soon, said Peter Townshend, a partner in the McDermott Will and Emery law firm’s San Diego office.

Inevitably, some users will post obscene or libelous comments, Townshend said, creating a whole new set of problems in deciding what to keep and what to delete.

“If this were a private site, then there would be little issue with removing any sort of content for almost whatever reason,” Townshend said. “But as a government site, particularly the White House, whoever runs the site will need to be very, very careful when they remove content from the site.” Site administrators will have to consider First Amendment concerns that administrators of commercial sites do not, Townshend said. A post that is just profane ranting is an easy call, but a post that contains objectionable language while also making legitimate political arguments falls into a gray area.

“Should the site remove the entire posting or edit the foul language?” Townshend asked. “It is a tough call. I’m just glad I don’t have to make it."

Administrators will probably police the posting themselves and provide a mechanism for general users to report abuse, he said.

Online strategist Steven Clift, who maintains a blog covering e-democracy at, said Phillips and his team will have to experiment with features that government officials have so far not needed to consider.

One feature Clift recommends is a system that requires users to post under their real names. The use of real names would encourage decorum without censorship and also give the comments more credibility in the eyes of other readers, he said.

“If they want to give real people power, they need to encourage people to use real names and cities and states,” he said.

TechPresident’s Granger expects to see further changes on and other federal agency sites as they figure out what works and what doesn’t.

It’s possible that other agencies will feel challenged to beef up the interactivity of their own sites, but itself needs to grow some first, she said.

“We need to give the new administration some time to settle in and figure out what else they are doing with and give the other government offices some time to look at the example being set and determine what else they can do to augment their current efforts,” she said.

On Obama’s first full day in office, Jan. 21, the executive orders and press pool reports sent out in e-mail were not yet posted on the Web site. But give them time, Granger said.

“They will undoubtedly need to move faster on this sort of thing as soon as they get everything squared away for the White House staff,” she said.


  • Cybersecurity

    DHS floats 'collective defense' model for cybersecurity

    Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen wants her department to have a more direct role in defending the private sector and critical infrastructure entities from cyberthreats.

  • Defense
    Defense Secretary James Mattis testifies at an April 12 hearing of the House Armed Services Committee.

    Mattis: Cloud deal not tailored for Amazon

    On Capitol Hill, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis sought to quell "rumors" that the Pentagon's planned single-award cloud acquisition was designed with Amazon Web Services in mind.

  • Census
    shutterstock image

    2020 Census to include citizenship question

    The Department of Commerce is breaking with recent practice and restoring a question about respondent citizenship last used in 1950, despite being urged not to by former Census directors and outside experts.

Stay Connected

FCW Update

Sign up for our newsletter.

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.