It is definitely amazing how brilliant and successful every decision on a project turns out to be when you only interview the people who made those decisions!

I didn't just interview the people who made those decisions. I've talked to dozens of federal and state CIOs over the years, along with many contractors and Web developers. The consensus amongst insiders and industry observers is that this approach and outcome are genuinely novel and innovative in the government space, which is why I wrote the feature to begin with, starting months ago.

This would have been more evident if any of those people had been quoted in the story. It also would have made the story more compelling -- as it stands, it reads like a bunch of colleagues congratulating each other on what fine work they have done.

Fair point. And ouch, I think. Just so it's clear, I'm not their colleague -- and the contractors in question weren't obligated to praise CMS. I'd hoped that readers would find the perspective of the writer useful, in addition to the comments of the principals, whose interests are obvious. Thank you for the feedback.

"and the contractors in question weren't obligated to praise CMS"

If you are a government contractor and some reporter asks you about a government project, the response is going to be positive (or at least obfuscated) unless you would like to have no more government contracts.

Is educating the uninsured about the provisions of a law that applied to them "propaganda?"

Sure, propaganda can be educational. I read white papers, ads or other industrial propaganda just like anyone. My first word was promotion and I added propaganda afterward, maybe it added too much negativity, sorry.

On the other hand, when reading the article I was disappointed that the article wasn't about the actual exchanges to facilitate finding and purchasing insurance. It was about building a CMS to help the government communicate about [ vaporware (too negative) | something coming soon (rose colored glasses on)].

[Adding more:] Since you seem to be identifying as the author, thank you for sharing this information about the site. It must have been very interesting to see the modern web dev meet gov.

Adding/editing content by github pull request isn't tremendously impressive. I'm sure the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) will appreciate volunteer effort. However, pull requests aren't an avenue for contributions by people outside of a very limited population. It isn't a community/software moderated hive-mind like Wikipedia or StackExchange and I think that the difference goes back to the word propaganda.

Education takes many forms and propaganda is a description of education at its most one-sided and didactic. This website will have the information that the CMS thinks will (and wants to) use for many purposes including "educating the uninsured." As modern as the technology stack is, the human stack did not change. I'm sure there will be non-governmental initiated wikis and Q/A websites for people to cooperatively educate themselves about the real deal, so a fresh coat of paint on the status quo isn't so bad.

Thank you for the additional clarity on what you meant! Yes, I wrote this. I'd like to tackle a piece on the exchanges themselves too, at some point, but that would be another feature, not least because of the diversity of state approaches and the fact that the federal version isn't done yet.

tbf, there is a good social engineering function to propaganda. Propaganda is not necessarily false, it just can be. If you look at the roots of the word (which originates with the Jesuits) it has the same meaning as "to go viral" in modern Internet speak. To propagate, to organically spread and grow on its own.

My father, who worked with MLK and the SCLC referred to his work in the civil rights and union movements as being "a propagandist for the right reasons" -- a dry jest that should have made your brain trainwreck instantly if you are paying attention. He was an incredibly smart and funny -- and very ethical man. I inherited the family business, which is why I ended up as founding executive director of the Tor Project. You of course are welcome to judge that bit of work on its own basis. I didn't write the software, I just took it from a framing as a gray hat cypherpunk project to being the acclaimed champion of human rights, journalism, democracy rights activists, and apple pie in about six months flat along with seven figures of funding most of it from the US government without which we'd probably be dead meat from the NSA now (IMNSHO, and I don't speak for the current project's management -- only a volunteer these days).

Ultimately, my point is, I've worked with folks in government, and around Alex. And I've worked around these health care exchanges from RomneyCare here in MA.

The fact that they can relaunch, have a database like this work, even get this decision through, is pretty damn revolutionary. That it worked and they didn't get immediately hosed for it -- you have no idea how risky this was for them on an eGov basis, especially in "obamacare" where they have targets on their back for everything.

Give the dudes credit for a little excessive celebration. It's not propaganda -- and if it were...?

Triangulation sucks too.