Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Policy

The State Department Spent $630,000 of Your Money Trying to Get "Likes" on Facebook

Mike Riggs | 7.3.2013 10:12 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Callthemarketingguy.com

Between 2011 and 2013 the State Department spent $630,000 trying to get more Facebook users to "like" the Bureau of International Information Programs' Facebook page, according to an Inspector General's report. Foreign Policy's Jon Hudson reports: 

The IG report stings -- especially because the Bureau of International Information and Programs is supposed to be Foggy Bottom's epicenter of online savvy. The bureau includes groovy-sounding divisions such as the Office of Innovative Engagement, which evangelizes on the "importance of using online engagement to drive offline, person-to-person activities and events." The bureau's stated mission is to be Foggy Bottom's "foreign-facing public diplomacy communications bureau" and supports its "growing social media community that numbers over 22 million followers."

Easier said than done. According to the report, first flagged by the Diplopundit, overlap and coordination issues trouble the various bureau's 150 social media accounts. The report also mentions a "pervasive perception of cronyism" exacerbating its already "serious morale problem."

Some of the issues are rather tedious, like whether embassy staffers should go to the Office of Web Engagement or the Office of Innovative Engagement for advice on social media. A section of the report is devoted to telling employees, hey, the "Office of Innovative Engagement is the proper place for this function."

Then there's the issue of "overlapping" Farsi outreach efforts. Apparently, both IIP and the Bureau of Near Eastern Affiars have Persian-language Facebook and Twitter accounts. "It is not efficient for the Department to have competing Persian-language Facebook and Twitter sites," reads the report. It suggests NEA take the lead given its closeness to actual "policymakers."

Other recommendations include boilerplate McKinsey-esque recommendations like consolidating weekly staff meetings and formalizing a process for "sharing research results." Total IIP funding since fiscal year 2011 is more than $71 million with almost $55 million spent on contracting. The State Department did not respond to a request for comment. Perhaps we'll post one to their Facebook page.

Compared to what various agencies currently spend on junkets and conferences, $630,000 is small potatoes. Nevertheless, bad things should happen to whoever signed off on the expenditure. 

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Is a Temperature Indexed Carbon Tax the Real Solution to Global Warming?

Mike Riggs is a contributing editor at Reason.

PolicyCultureSocial MediaDepartment of StateFree SpeechTechnology
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (22)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

    Now that's some foreign policy. What was this, that brilliant former SoS' idea? Or her brilliant successor's?

  2. Bardas Phocas   12 years ago

    +Like

  3. MiloMinderbinder   12 years ago

    Nothing left to cut.

    1. Matrix   12 years ago

      damned right there isn't!

    2. Doctor Whom   12 years ago

      We're one dime in the budget away from becoming Somalia.

  4. Hugh Akston   12 years ago

    Compared to what various agencies currently spend on junkets and conferences, $630,000 is small potatoes.

    I know this is the standard catechism when discussing any federal budget outrages short of a trillion dollars, but I would like to point out that I could live quite comfortably for 15 years on that money, even assuming I didn't invest any of it.

    1. Rich   12 years ago

      Moreover, small potatoes should be the easiest to cut.

    2. wwhorton   12 years ago

      Also, it's small potatoes if taken in isolation. But when you consider it as one of hundreds if not thousands of similarly wasteful budget items across the government as a whole, it adds up.

      And the people who'll say that this doesn't really amount to much in the way of waste are the same people who'll tell you with a straight face that no significant cuts need to be made because eliminating "waste, fraud, and abuse" will result in adequate savings.

    3. MJGreen   12 years ago

      Yep, live comfortably for 15 years, and I'd even put in a few hours every day trying to get people to Like the State Department.

  5. Rich   12 years ago

    The State Department did not respond to a request for comment.

    Ah, but did you ask 'em in *Farsi*?

    1. Number 2   12 years ago

      "Farce-y" is a good description of the whole mess.

  6. Number 2   12 years ago

    "Office of Innovative Engagement"

    Are you kidding me? Is it located near the Bureau of Traditional Isolation?

    I mean seriously...is there no one there who could have said, "you know guys, I am really not sure about this name..."?

    1. Doctor Whom   12 years ago

      I'm sure Martin Lukes liked the name.

  7. Fist of Etiquette   12 years ago

    Social media apparently got this administration elected. I can see them thinking it's the key to a compliant populace.

  8. Somalian Road Corporation   12 years ago

    Meanwhile, your tax dollars are hard at work producing quality PBS projects like Are Bronies Changing the Definition of Masculinity?

    cut to the bone, I tell you, to the bone

    1. Auric Demonocles   12 years ago

      Why would a bunch of girls have any effect on the definition of masculinity?

    2. Rasilio   12 years ago

      Hey, don't you be talking bad about bronies, my 10 year old son is one.

      Of course my wife and I are already placing bets on how old he will be before he comes out of the closet

  9. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

    I wonder if they paint "Like the U.S. Department of State" on the side of our drones?

    1. Tonio   12 years ago

      That's brilliant, ProL.

      1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

        Perhaps I could be the next SoS? I mean, I'm as qualified in foreign policy as the last couple of secretaries. Though I prefer the title, Administrative Professional of State.

    2. jesse.in.mb   12 years ago

      Like!

  10. Sevo   12 years ago

    Related:
    Now that Obozocare's been 'delayed', what happens to the PR campaign to put lipstick on that pig?
    How about the Obozo-jurgen to sell it to their mommies and daddies?
    Do both budgets need an increase for the change orders?
    Oh, and even better, did they take in the grill at the Pelosi household?
    "Next week when we celebrate Independence Day we'll also be observing health independence."
    Well, she just missed by a year or so....
    http://reason.com/blog/2013/07.....ets-celebr

  11. Auric Demonocles   12 years ago

    How many likes are they looking for? Give me that money and I'll get you 500,000 likes.

    $1 per like (maybe add a couple of requirements that it remains there for a year or something). The rest goes to my administrative fee.

  12. wingnutx   12 years ago

    Meanwhile, sequester cuts are deliberately made to be as public & painful as possible.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Brickbat: Friends in High Places

Charles Oliver | 7.4.2025 4:00 AM

The Fourth of July Is a Celebration of Freedom—From Government

John Stossel | 7.4.2025 12:01 AM

A Broad Ruling Against Trump's Immigration Policies Illustrates Alternatives to Universal Injunctions

Jacob Sullum | 7.3.2025 4:40 PM

Environmental Regulations Are Literally Baking Europeans to Death

Jack Nicastro | 7.3.2025 3:38 PM

Federal Prison Guards Allegedly Beat an Inmate to a Pulp. The Supreme Court Says He Can't Sue.

Billy Binion | 7.3.2025 2:48 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!