With the wildfire growth of social media tools the buzz out there around any person/institution/company/product/etc is growing. Given this, the promotion ways of the past need to be reexamined. Simply pushing your company/product/institution/self out there without room for feedback, engagement, or participation doesn't work as well as it did in years past when the public had little to no real voice. What companies/individuals/institutions seem to be finding is that what does work, on the other hand is actually more of an "un-marketing" type approach. This un-marketing type of approach includes considerably more listening, participation, and collaboration, all the while relaxing the previous white knuckle grip.
I've seen, for example, many companies do this on Twitter. Rather than blabbing out their corporate song and dance, oblivious to what is going on around them, some are genuinely taking the time to listen to what their customers are saying and respond with real action.
Naturally, with the movement to Gov 2.0, it seems like many agencies are demonstrating many of these same "un-marketing" practices. Rather than standing stubbornly still, closed-up and unwavering, agencies appear to be making measurable efforts to be more collaborative, open, eager to listen, and participative in their communities.
Perhaps the interesting thing, however, is that for this collaboration, listening and participation to happen, there has to be enough buzz to stimulate the conversation. While in the commercial space this occurs fairly naturally because there are plenty of chatty consumers, the Gov 2.0 landscape seemingly has the reputation of evolving slower as the adoption rate is seemingly lower. Yet, to the surprise of perhaps many, this Gov 2.0 adoption rate may be moving faster than thought, and in some areas may actually be leading the curve. Perhaps the question is, how can this adoption rate be measured? And, is the previous viewpoint of Gov 2.0 being slower to the punch still entirely in tact?