With you all the way, Torey. Diocese after diocese misses the opportunity to raise the visibility of our small and shrinking church by overly restrictive media policies during bishop's elections. We should be inviting press coverage of walkabouts, trying to get candidates before editorial boards, or at least reporters. But we seldom make the effort.

What Jim Naughton said, and ...

Here in Los Angeles when we elected two bishops suffragan in 2009 our diocesan server kept crashing as folks refreshed the election page over and over. Tweeting the ballot results was the most reliable way to get information out to those watching and praying for our election process.

It's the 21st Century, folks. Let's embrace the technology and use it to tell the Good News of God in Christ Jesus AND the Episcopal Church, lest we end up being a what NOT to do parable illustation (see also: hiding your light under a bushel.)

The light is Christ. The lampstand is Twitter. Or Facebook. Or Episcopal Cafe. Or ... something we haven't thought of yet.

(The Reverend Canon) Susan Russell
Senior Associate for (big surprise!) COMMUNICATIONS
All Saints Church, Pasadena

Not to mention that such bans have no effect whatsoever on social media practice outside of such events. Imagine the value of projecting the tweeted backchannel conversation during an election. We'd all get to see not just how candidates are positioned, or how people are voting, but what people think about the whole thing as it's unfolding. Wouldn't it be useful to have this knowledge available openly, rather than in the whispered way it's going to happen anyway, rules or not?

Jim, when you mention having candidates in front of editorial boards, you highlight an interesting gap that we should be thinking about in a more expansive fashion. I can imagine a few scenarios in which such things could go wrong, but in the main, the amount of good generated would be fantastic.

Walkabouts are supposed to be a chance for dioceses to show that (a) they know their own story well and (b) they know which people, and which skills, will best help to facilitate the transfer of Good News in their time and place. In other words, at least in this one narrow sense, elections - in the public perception - are more about dioceses than filling open positions in some grandiose way. Why not shine a light on all the good work they've done to prepare for this moment of transition?

For proof, look no further than yesterday's election. I don't know if the three finalists met with local/regional media, and I am happy to be proven wrong, but I doubt they did. Even so, judging by the online material, all three candidates on offer have compelling stories, solid faith lives, and major leadership skills; on top of which, they all had strong connections to the electing diocese. Placing them before the media would have been a chance to say how seriously we take the question of good leadership, and how well led a diocese can be even its moments of transition.

Torey Lightcap

I agree with the comments thus far about allowing social media to do its thing. I do hope that those who disagree will feel comfortable saying so.

I do wonder if getting the media interested in a local episcopal election is a pipe dream. A potential angle, however, is how it differs from the selection of bishops in other denominations -- in particular, Catholic.

In the area of unintended consequences, does turning a media spotlight on the candidates risk overemphasizing some skills relative to others?

We need to stop treating social media as something to fight against or something that irresponsible kids do when they should be paying attention to the important stuff. Perhaps if those in the HOB could see an actual series of tweets from a meeting or event, they might see it as another way to get our message out to the world about who we are and what we are doing instead of treating social media as a social ill.

Penny Nash

The idea of being open and transparent about our electoral process (and other aspects of church polity) by way of connecting with our natural constituency and extending it, through contrast with other denominational practices is brilliant. You know, the reason all of the Anglican Covenant "nastiness" keeps making news is because we do, in fact, talk about things openly, even unpleasant things. That's a powerful contrast to other churches whose "difficulties" have been made significantly worse because their culture is locked in hierarchy and mired in secrecy. Social media participation gives us the opportunity to be more fully ourselves--warts and all--in a very public, very social way that builds relationship far more than it generates controversy.

There's a certain leveling effect of banning tweeting, handicapping the race to the news so that those without access to twitter learn at the same time as the rest of us. Like chaining ballerinas so they dance no better than me.

I know, that's add another condition for the election of bishop. Let's not ban tweeting, and if the bishop-elect doesn't already know the result when you phone then void the results and start over.

I am for as much transparency as possible even at HoB meetings. Welcome to the 21st century - today in church I was preaching the Ascension - I mentioned the Dali "Ascension" painting and before I knew it someone had googled it on their iPhone and was passing it around!!

I'll take a stab (somewhat reluctantly) at a partially opposing point of view. Perhaps this comes from a rare, leisurely afternoon in the backyard with the "Italian-American Music Hour" on the radio - old time, even corny music - while sipping a scotch.

We in Rhode Island have just begun the process towards electing our next bishop; the Search Committe and Transition Committee were gathered and commissioned this weekend.

There hasn't been any conversation yet about tweeting or laptops or cell phone calls during the electing convention. I hadn't even thought about that, and I have no automatic desire to restrict that. But...I know how important this election will be to our diocese. I appreciate the need to be respectful to those who offer themselves for that election, and for the process of that election. And I frankly resist, even resent, the notion that I hear in the original post, that, "we don't care about your internal needs and concerns, we must have information, even incomplete or inaccurate information, right now."

And I wonder, why?

As I say, I can't imagine deciding to forbid communication of any kind during our process, but on this late Sunday afternoon, I wonder about the urgency, and even more interestingly, the anxiety, of needing to know "right now", no matter what.

Bill Locke

1. @John Chilton, So only techno obsessed people should be bishop? Any candidate who knows the selection is going on but decides to pray and leave it in God's hands and go about serving his family,friends, etc. is unfit? Sounds like a great reason to ban it.

2. Are they only going to let the those voting etc. tweet? Without receiving tweets back? 'Cause the biggest reason I can see for outsiders to receive information is to send their opinions/influence back. Or to cause the next uproar like Slee's memo. I doubt the regular media really cares enough to need minute by minute playback, unless it's juicy like the stuff Slee wrote about. That'll make the church look wonderful in the secular media for sure.

3. Consider the mess for the new bishop in England that Slee wrote about. He didn't do anything wrong himself, but, the attitude in some blogs has been,
"Congratulations Bishop. People think you incompetent and nobody wanted you. You just got the job to stop someone else who's much better than you and the whole world knows it. Enjoy the pointy hat."
How many here could even name who was elected without looking?(It's Chessun) Nobody cares who was chosen, just who wasn't. Just think what comments wil be said after the next contentious election that's twittered.

Chris H, I think John was kidding.

Some of the concerns about notification can be alleviated simply by informing the nominees before the results of an individual ballot are announced.