Last month saw the announcement of the millionth word in the English language as 'Web 2.0'. This is notable as the term is quite new (despite 'slumdog' also being a contender) although not too surprising since the use of Web 2.0 is so ubiquitous. The term may imply an update to the World Wide Web but in reality it means a different way of creating and sharing information. Among the most publicised uses of Web 2.0 are social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. The rise of these sites in recent years is astonishing with Facebook recently reporting its 250 millionth user worldwide. Twitter's user figures may be more modest at 25 million users it but has grown 1,689% in the UK alone from February 2008 to 2009, and boasts 10 Downing Street (twitter.com/downingstreet) and Barack Obama (twitter.com/barackobama) as members. Twitter especially has seen a rise in publicity due to its use by protesters in Iran and Moldova during recent election disputes. It has been reported that Twitter helped organise these rallies and disseminate information among protestors as well as the outside world.

The benefit to public participation initially seems obvious. Not only is the Web 2.0 platform massively popular but it is designed to involve users to create content themselves. The format is such that people can upload photos, videos and reply to what other members have posted. This ease of communication is greatly appealing for organisations and governments alike. However, the question as to whether social networking can fully engage the public, compared with face-to-face contact, is still open. In reference to Twitter, recent research has shown that 90% of the content is generated by only 10% of users, with most preferring to be "passive consumers". The opportunity that social networking affords by communicating to a mass, global audience should not be underestimated though, and the online/offline worlds could well complement each other. It is possible to utilise the two formats by having events solely organised and promoted through social networking at a low cost. Also, there is the opportunity to blend the two for public engagement. Examples of this already exist; in the 2008 US election a number of debates were held among candidates with questions uploaded by the public through YouTube. Social Networking could also help aid in written consultations as a wider number of people's opinions can be canvassed with relative ease. As the use of Web 2.0 becomes more frequent the ways it can be used as an aid, or in itself, for participation can only increase as well.

technorati claimer: z3ep8tudgb