ICO issues guidelines on #FOI #requests through Twitter, Facebook The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has issued new guidelines for public authorities around how they can respond to freedom of information (FOI) requests made via social media. The watchdog confirmed that FOI requests made via messages to accounts operated by public bodies on sites such as Twitter or Facebook can …
Surely by releasing something under the Freedom of Information Act they are telling us that it is suitable for publishing it online? Otherwise what are they doing releasing the information in the first place?
This just sounds like a get out clause that they've added for authorities that don't want to release anything embarrassing or incriminating via sites like whatdotheyknow.com. A bit too convenient if you ask me...
Except FOI responses arent always as black and white as you seem to believe.
Its entirely possible that an FOI response might contain the personal data or the requestor which would be disclosed to them (albeit under S7 of the DPA) but not to anyone else under FOI.
Your view is far too simplistic and doesnt reflect the often conflicting realities of responding to FOI requests.
And yes I do have a vested interest here as I am a FOI officer who oftens spends his days butting heads with Service Directors to get information released, mainly because they have an ingrained bias against disclosure.
FWIW although technically right in law i think allowing FOI requests via twitter is a fundamentally daft idea unless the request is very simple.
This post has been deleted by its author
Part of my work involves being the FOI officer for a the NHS (small area too) we get almost 800 requests a year for information, each one using up dozens of hours of investigative effort from the very unpopular back room management team, meaning we need more management to fullfil their roles.
well over half of our request are from journalists from various small scale news websites who just want to fill an inch on a column, but that costs us thousands of pounds, costs them nothing. We get less than 2 requests from a genuine member of the public a month and the rest are from MPs/MSP/MEPs for various reasons.
Whilst you may think it's a get out clause, it's there to help reduce the insane amount of time doing this, we answer all of our FOIs as quickly as we can and fullfil them if we actually hold the information or can compile the information from a reliable data set, although that's not always the case but people don't always realise that we don't measure every statistic going and can't supply GP data (we don't have it).Then we're punted to the ICO and have to explain ourselves, who have always come back in agreement with us.
We need to be accountable - but there has to be a controlled channel to ensure it's not abused, although we rarely have any time wasting requests and we treat them all very seriously. The public sector has a bad reputation but frankly it does a hell of a lot which the private sector would scream about and does it without complaint.
Whilst I can get the sentiment, waste of resources etc, you are missing the point. People have the right to ask for information. It doesn't really matter WHAT the use is (more or less). The right to ask the questions is one that is enshrined in law.
If it where not for journo's using FOI requests, we would still be in the dark about Duck houses and other MP claims that were plainly not related to their dealings as an MP.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
