With this 'interruption' model in mind, I started thinking about online PR in terms of getting bloggers to blog about our projects or websites to mention and link to us. But my conversations with various 'experts' in digital PR have led me to think that I've been looking at this the wrong way round. I've forgotten that the really clever thing about the web is how easy it is to find stuff. This means that it's possible to build a following and audience relatively quickly, as long as you are offering interesting content.
But if you're trying to reach a wide cross-section of citizens, then waiting for someone to google 'nanotechnology consultation' is likely to skew your feedback somewhat. I touched upon this issue in my last blog when I questioned the existence of such 'interest free' citizens. My digital guru colleague argues that while you can't target 'everyone except those who are likely to be interested', one way around it might be to target 'everyone who wants to have a say'. This would mean creating a place where online government dialgoue takes place - a kind of digital debating chamber, so that anyone who felt they had something to say can browse and comment on the debates of interest - maybe even starting some of their own.
Added to that, alerts and RSS feeds could allow people to register their interests and be alerted when a discussion that they'd like to take part in begins - all the kind of thing that's happening in the blogosphere already, but formalised so that it feeds into policymaking rather than just goes into the ether.
Good, bad or mad idea?