Twitter forces a discipline in writing. With only 140 characters, I have learned to review my tweets, removing extraneous words like “that” or future perfect sentence structures. There are some who write tweets that read like old classified ads; I lack the patience to decipher these. Others who write extended tweets marking them 1/4, 2/4… as though we follow them – and only them.
So I have an appreciation for Tweets that are especially concise in expressing a thought, such as Karen Selick’s exchange last night with Jesse Kline:
@accessd Govt can’t leave anything alone. If they’re not subsidizing something, they’re prohibiting it.
— Karen Selick (@kselick) July 8, 2012
I have precisely this concern with the national digital strategy.
Over the past few years, I have written about the potential for unintended consequences when government tries to pick winners, such as: “Weaning Canadians from government intervention“; and, “Toronto ICT plans“. I am continually troubled by the inequities of government handouts to certain businesses, which inevitably mean that one industry participant is receiving a subsidy from their competitors. I hate seeing Ministers flying coast to coast handing out cheques, while spending as much (if not more) on the photo op itself.
What are the areas that truly need the leadership role or guiding hand of government? Will government be able to resist the temptation to intervene in areas that should be left alone? Can we see leadership without increased spending?