COMMITTEE PARTICIPATION: A MULTIMEDIA APPROACH
by the Standing Committee on the Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund to enhance public viewership and engagement at its 2011 and 2012 annual public meetings may be considered a qualified success. The multimedia approach has proven to be a cost-effective method to reach larger audiences than in the past. As such, a basic goal of the
committee, increased attendance at the public meeting, has been accomplished. Moreover, the addition of the
online chat has allowed for greater interactive participation. Chat participation has enhanced the traditional means of interactivity, and it has meant that the objective of
increased interactive engagement in meeting proceedings, albeit on a small scale, has been achieved. In addition, the chat feature
has been the source of additional questions and commentary, which have contributed to and enlivened meeting discussions.
Endnotes
1. Livestream is the software that was used. It allows the user to stream live events over the Internet. It transmits video from a camera into a live feed over the Internet in real time. Content can be distributed in a variety of ways; e.g., embedded in a website or through mobile applications. 2. Note that viewership is estimated for
the Calgary and Edmonton areas alone and that Shaw Communications Inc. broadcast to approximately 70 per cent and 50 per cent of the Alberta population in 2011 and 2012, respectively. 3. The questions from both the 2011 and 2012 meetings included questions on the investment strategies of the Fund; on reinvest- ment in the Fund to more rapidly grow it instead of putting returns into general revenues; and questions asking for comparisons between the Fund and other similar sovereign wealth Funds such as Norway’s. 4. At the time of writing, the committee had not yet met to evaluate the 2012 meeting. 5. As indicated in endnote 2 above, Shaw Communications Inc. broadcast to approximate- ly 70 per cent and 50 per cent of the Alberta population in 2011 and 2012 respectively.
6. It should be noted that no demographic data on chatters were collected, so no analysis in this area may be completed. 7. A corollary of this is that no demographic information on chat room participants was gathered. Because demographic profiling is not possible, questions relating to the age, gender or even the geographic origins (e.g., Calgary or Edmonton, urban or rural, et cetera) cannot be answered. Therefore, it cannot be known whether the multimedia approach achieved the oft-articulated goals of parliamentarians of engaging a wider spectrum of the populace, for instance a younger demographic, in legislative proceedings. 8. Of course, chatters could still subvert the purpose of this process by providing false infor- mation; however, one hopes that chatters would not engage in this kind of dishonesty.
The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue One | 57
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92