As reported in many newspapers today, Mayor Michael Bloomberg had some antithetical views on the use of social media that many Gov 3.0 advocates take. According to the NY Times:
"The mayor noted that technology, despite its benefits, can add new pitfalls to an already grueling process. “Social media is going to make it even more difficult to make long-term investments” in cities, Mr. Bloomberg said.
“We are basically having a referendum on every single thing that we do every day,” he said. “And it’s very hard for people to stand up to that and say, ‘No, no, this is what we’re going to do,’ when there’s constant criticism, and an election process that you have to look forward to and face periodically.”"
I truly agree with Mayor Bloomberg when it comes to elections (which hasn't happened lately--my protest driven Dunkin Donuts' styrofoam cup of coffee as evidence).
In today's culture of 24/7 news cycles, short attention spans, and 140 characters, it may be difficult to focus on the long term of society rather than the here and now. If funding was decided day to day or only funded like we do in spaces such as Kickstarter, new libraries may be funded, but what of sanitation plants or garbage dumps? There are those ugly sides of running an organized society that many people don't want to look to or even acknowledge (prisons), but are necessary for our prosperity. So an election process on a yearly basis allows people, on the whole, to say whether society is going in the right or wrong direction instead of being dictated by the pet projects people think up day to day, hour to hour, or minute to minute.