Skip to main content

Differences between transparency and disclosure.

Understanding when disclosure satisfies the notion of transparency assists in adequately analyzing efforts of public officials to increase transparency by demanding more disclosure.

In the middle of town, in a tiny room sits a person watching a screen for an important message which they should immediately give to the general public. In designing the room public officials considered two possibilities for achieving the end goal of informing the public as to the contents of the message.
In a first option the watch-person, upon seeing the message, should leave their seat, exit the room, and personally inform the public of the message's contents.
In a second option officials install a window behind the watch-person, allowing passers by to look in to the room and read the message for themselves, and when a message appears the watch-person should also personally inform the public.

Both options satisfy the notion of disclosure, with the same possible effect of important information achieving public dissemination, but only the second option provides transparency.

In option 1 we cannot verify the extent to which the message delivered matches the contents on the computer screen. The public relies on the watch-person. but we can quickly develop criticisms on the efficacy in such a practice. What if our watch-person's brain jumbles words, resulting in their misunderstanding the message and delivering it inaccurately; what if a neighboring town bribed the watch-person to either fail to deliver the message or deliver a false message?

Let me more essentially compare the important difference between the options.

Option 1. Someone may voluntarily provide information which the public cannot verify
Option 2. Someone may voluntarily provide information which the public can verify regardless of disclosure

To achieve transparency requires all parties in question have verifiable access to necessary information. Any time the news reports incorrectly they disclose falsities. How inconvenient then that they rarely provide, in their reporting, access to the evidence they use to proclaim facts. Could a student turn in a research paper without properly presented citations?

In a society which proclaims the virtue of transparency, I wonder why we practice imperfect disclosure rather than necessitating any actual transparency. Technology, particularly software, renders trivial the solutions to this transparency problem.  The problem must lie somewhere else.  One need only watch a commission meeting on purported transparency legislation to clearly see that Commissioners don't want transparency, or that they value their privileges more than their responsibilities.

Transparency in government necessitates public access to information despite the voluntary participation of the bodies or individuals involved.

Any questions?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

To Be or Not to Be, Part 1: WHEREAS

I remembered quickly in the last weeks...
As stories about the Beckham group soccer deal coalesced around a last minute vote of the City of Miami Commission to approve a referendum on leasing public land. A soccer stadium deal, eventually revealed as a gigantic real estate deal for a local hotshot.
I remembered: No matter what happens it seems the people will lose.

Much closer to home, the County Commission voted in June for a referendum in my neck of the woods, North East Municipal Service Area, an unincorporated sector of the county, will get to choose to become a city. However this offer comes with many strings, and lots of loopholes. Citizens beware.
I continue my series with an extensive analysis of the June 5th, 2018 resolution. I plan at least two more posts on this county law, with a particular concern for responsibilities or debts the proposed city would owe the county from the start.


June 5, 2018 Resolution calling special election in Miami-Dade County, Florida, to be held in conjunction with the General Election on November 6, 2018, for the purpose of submitting to the electors residing within the proposed new municipality in unincorporated Northeast Miami-Dade the question of whether the BCC should be authorized to create the new municipality with the following general outermost boundaries: County line to the north; the city limits of the City of Aventura to the east; the city limits of the City of North Miami Beach to the south; and Interstate 95 to the west; and designating Greynolds Park, Water and Sewer pump stations, and the Ojus Urban Area District as areas of countywide significance.

If you found the title too long to read then society may have bigger issues than whether NE unincorporated Dade should incorporate into a city. However that title, dear readers, serves as the title of a June 5th ordinance before the Miami-Dade Board of County Commissioners, proposed by District 4 Commissioner Heyman, to decide whether or not to give the voters of the affected area an election to incorporate. (form a new city)

While on face I like the idea of a smaller, more local government implementing policy in my neighborhood, my initial enthusiasm made way for more long-term critical thinking. As an idealist I regularly forget that other opinions exist in the universe, and likewise other concepts of local governance. What conditions would exist in this new municipality? What debts and responsibilities would it have before existing? And what would might it look like if we voted Yes to the ballot question in November on incorporation?

I have to wonder how anyone could make a reasona…

To Be or Not to Be, Part 2: Resolution

I continue my analysis of R-576-18, picking up here I left off yesterday. Luckily I don't have nearly as much to say today.