Knowledge Networks at Space Telescope Science Institute:

A Case Study









Anne Gonnella

Spring 2010
University of Maryland, Baltimore County



Introduction

Organizations everywhere are flocking to new social media technologies for use in their
business, both as marketing and customer service tools (Stewart, 2009) and internally for
supporting communication and knowledge sharing amongst employees. Non-profits such
as the American Red Cross and the National Wildlife Federation are enjoying successful
implementations of social media technologies (Southerland, 2009). Even the U.S. De-
fense Department is considering how to use social media to strengthen national security
("Social-media tools could," 2009). Social media is not a trend that will be replaced with
something new tomorrow. (Perez, 2008) It is a routine part of how many people connect
with each other and the world. (Southerland, 2009) Using these tools is now an estab-
lished part of every successful company's communication strategy and should be consid-
ered just another essential service like email and telephones.

Last year, NASA itself conducted an experiment in social networking among staff at all
of its centers using a service called Socialcast (Merryman, 2008). "NASAsphere allowed
NASA employees and contractors, though separated physically by geography, to feel
united and have a sense of belonging in the NASA community" (Merryman, 2008).

This case study presents the history of communication at Space Telescope Science Insti-
tute and the problems identified with various methods used currently and in the past. It
goes on to investigate whether or not the introduction of a social networking service con-
tributes to successful sharing of knowledge and formation of knowledge networks.
Network Knowledge

Alavi (2000) identifies two models of knowledge management: the repository model and
the network model. The network model is based on the connections made between peo-
ple through which information is exchanged.

While tacit knowledge is known to be the most valuable kind of knowledge to an organi-
zation, it is also the most difficult to capture. The network model, therefore, is the one to
explore when coming to terms with how to capitalize on the tacit knowledge held by in-
dividuals. Dalkir (2005) posits that since tacit knowledge is usually shared through in-
formal networks, an organization should foster an environment conducive to sharing sto-
ries in order to make best use of that knowledge. One means for sharing is through story-
telling, a method that Dalkir (2005) describes as a cathartic process through which em-
ployees can share experiences and build social capital and networks. The problem with
many knowledge sharing activities in an organization is that an individuals knowledge
network often consists of just their immediate coworkers with whom they have regular
contact. In order to increase the likelihood of gaining new knowledge from networking, it
can be helpful to extend the individuals reach across routine communication lines and
across organizational boundaries. (Alavi 2001) Providing tools such as online forums for
communication can facilitate the formation of more extended knowledge networks.
(Alavi 2000)

Nonaka, too, emphasizes the important of

Our ndings conrm that knowledge creation is associated with cultural factors such as
collaboration, trust, and learning. For instance, groups are most creative when their
members collaborate; members stop holding back when they have mutual trust [54].
Shaping cultural factors is crucial for a rm's ability to manage its knowledge effectively
The executive pointed out that their employees did not just use the manual or other codi-
ed supports. It was noted that they preferred to depend on their own experiences and
networking relationships. A trust-based culture is the foundation for their knowledge
management initiative. Lee and Choi


A social network is a social structure made of individuals or organizations, referred to as
nodes that are tied together by one or more definable relationships. Social network analy-
sis defines social relationships in terms of nodes and ties. Nodes are the individuals with-
in the network, and ties are the relationships between individuals or groups. In its sim-
plest form, a social network is a map of all of the relevant ties between the nodes being
studied. The network can also be used to determine the social capital of individuals.
These concepts are often displayed in a social network diagram, where nodes are the
points and ties are the lines.

A social network service focuses on building online communities of people who share
interests and/or activities, or who are interested in exploring the interests and activities of
others. Most social network services are web based and provide a variety of ways for
users to interact, such as e-mail and instant messaging services. Social networking has
encouraged new ways to communicate and share information. Social networking web-
sites are being used regularly by millions of people. Colloquially, many social network-
ing services are referred to simply as social networks, but it is important to remember that
the technology is merely a tool that supports the formation and continuation of networks
between individuals and groups. A corkboard in the hallway where employees
can post notices of events, items for sale, or photos of their pets serves the same function
as an online social networking service, by giving people a means to share and connect.
An online social networking service merely allows for more people to connect more easi-
ly from more places on more topics.

Social capital is a concept developed in sociology that refers to connections within and
between social networks as well as connections among individuals. "Social networks
have value. Just as a screwdriver (physical capital) or a college education (human capital)
can increase productivity (both individual and collective), so do social contacts affect the
productivity of individuals and groups" (Putnam, 2000). In social capital theory, social
capital provides the conditions necessary for knowledge exchange to occur. (K)

History of Networking at Space Telescope

Results of research indicate that information communication is critical to workplace col-
laboration (Nardi, Whittaker, & Bradner, 2000). Unlike formal dissemination of informa-
tion through channels, informal communication supports joint problem solving, coordina-
tion, social bonding and social learning, all of which are critical for effective collabora-
tion.

Space Telescope has recognized the need for better communication for many years. The
Institute Visiting Committee (IVC), an oversight group that investigates the workings of
the Institute every year, cites in nearly every report that communication needs to be im-
proved. While in-person communication and telephones have always been options, there
are barriers to this kind of sharing. The physical location of the Institute is a five-story
building. Workgroups are often clustered on the same floor, and this combined with the
actual process of walking to another floor has contributed to a kind of floor-culture in
which people from the fourth floor identify with that floor and dont often associate with
first-floor employees. The Institute is also staffed by a very large number of highly tech-
nical and academic people whose personality types and style of work lead to very inde-
pendent and solitary existences in the building. Being a highly technical workplace, how-
ever, some networking aids were adopted early with some success.

In the mid-80s, bulletin boards were well used at the Institute. They hosted classifieds
listings and discussion topics of all kinds. They suffered a complete collapse in 1988
when some political and religious discussions ran rampant and the system was shut down
by management. These controversial and energetic arguments are still cited today by the
people who are still here as reasons why any kind of discussion forum should be moder-
ated, and there is a lingering fear of allowing anything but work to be discussed online.

After their cataclysmic demise, bulletin boards were later replaced by usenet. These
were never as actively used and didnt see the same kind of high profile discussion.
They were most actively used for classified ads and general announcements of in-
terest to all employees, but also hosted a few special interest groups such as soft-
ware programming. Usenet died out slowly over a decade of natural decline.


Figure 1: Usenet Example, circa 2003


In the meantime, email was used all along for both work and personal communication,
and email lists filled in where bulletin boards and usenet had once served. The problem
with email lists is that for many years they were never archived, and more recently when
some were, those archives are hard to find and search. Also, most lists are difficult to find
out about and mot of them are assumed closed even when they are not. They do not en-
courage growth in membership or sharing. Some, in fact, end up being just places for
people to complain about processes that arent working to their satisfaction in a public
way, and people in charge of those processes try to squelch the discussion.

Wikis cropped up in the mid 90s, and the Institute adopted them. They were used for col-
laborative work processes and knowledge stores. The advantage to them was that it was
easy to create new ones and the content was always there to be seen. There was also noth-
ing else out there at the time that supported that kind of collaborative work. Wikis had big
drawbacks to knowledge sharing, however. They were not easy to use, though that was
supposedly their biggest advantage. It was very easy for people to accidentally delete
large volumes of content, and there was no versioning or archival options of any worth.
Content was not tagged and therefore nearly impossible to find, and after many years any
knowledge that was stored in wikis was effectively useless.

In 2007, after a long gap where usenet was not available, online discussions forums were
introduced. They were intended to revive the classifieds ads, and be used for some scien-
tific discussion groups. Two years later they were removed when a security hole was
identified and there was not enough use to warrant patching the software. There were
several reasons cited in interviews for why they were not used. Because of the long gap
between usenets disappearance and the introduction of the forums, the sense of need had
diminished. The forums were web based and were difficult for people to find on the web
site, if they even knew they existed. They required a separate username and password
which people had to request and remember. All of these reasons prevented a critical mass
of participation from forming. Thus, it was not worthwhile for anyone to seek them out.

Individuals across the Institute make use of instant messaging, including some group
chats, but this is done in an ad hoc way using a variety of services that are not always
compatible, such as AOL, Yahoo and Google Talk. These facilitate communication and
collaboration, but not the formation of knowledge networks.

The Institute has always had mechanisms in place for formal communication, such as all
hands meetings, all staff emails, memos, and web sites. These have a definite place in the
communication infrastructure. They are one-to-many interactions in which information
from one source is meant to be consumed by others. These methods do not, however,
support interactive communication. For that, the Institute needs many-to-many interac-
tions and tools to support them. Conversations in this mode happen already, in hallways,
at the director's tea, in some meetings and somewhat inefficiently through email. But with
the removal of the forums and the difficulty with email lists and wikis, there was again a
significant lack of suitable tools for knowledge sharing and the formation of networks.

Social Networks

A social networking service provides a suite of communication tools all in one package,
such as blogs, status updates, live chat, and discussion forums. They are designed to sup-
port informal communication, information discovery, and the formation of social net-
works. Popular ones include MySpace and Facebook, so many people have some experi-
ence with how they work. A localized social networking service could fill the gap in tools
at the Institute, and address many of the shortcomings of previous solutions.

In a social network of people, the concepts of centrality and locality have been shown to
play a key role in building strong community when combined.14Centrality, or in this case,
shared interests in topics, be it sustainability at work or performance appraisal methods,
and our shared location both in the building and in the Baltimore area, have the potential
to enhance our sense of community at the Institute which can then lead to working better
together toward a shared purpose. Creating an online tool to enable more informal com-
munication around shared interests is a natural step toward building community, and in
establishing social capital and mutual trust.

Initial Challenges

Prior to implementing the social networking service, a number of issues and concerns
were identified and addressed.

Productivity
Institute management expressed concern that employee productivity would suffer as a
result of implementing a social networking service. Studies abound on water cooler talk
and its effect on productivity, and it is generally accepted now that employees who are
able to form social bonds inside and outside the confines of work are better able to coop-
erate, form teams, and be productive (Nardi, Whittaker, & Bradner, 2000). There are even
recent studies that indicate that some amount of web browsing and engaging with others
on social networks allows workers to be more productive by providing breaks for the
mind to renew itself. (Skinner, 2009) (Rhodes, 2008) Other research into collaboration
and communication tools in the workplace show that providing other channels for em-
ployees to connect through during the work process can enable more efficient work
flows, direct peer-to-peer communication across organizational boundaries, and better
sharing and acquisition of knowledge, all of which lead to better productivity. (need
ref***) Communication channels that have been shown to enable work processes this
way include instant messaging, discussion forums and blogs. (need ref ***) Most social
networks contain a collection of tools such as these and others in one place, allowing
some extra efficiency in jumping between communication modes, and additional aware-
ness of information being shared among groups.

Security and Privacy
Security is how well a system can protect information it contains. Privacy is the ability of
individuals to control the terms under which their personal information is acquired and
used (Karat, Karat, & Brodie, 2008). It is easy to confuse the two concepts when voicing
our concerns, but they should be addressed separately.

Security
The first thing to determine when assessing the security of a system is how secure the
system needs to be. What data is being shared and how protected does it need to be? In
the case of a social network, that will depend on what it is used for. In the one extreme,
discussions of data that are restricted by International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR)
will require a high level of security. In the other, a collection of office cooler talk intend-
ed to create social bonds between employees probably doesn't require much security at
all. For the initial implementation of a social network at STScI, all highly classified forms
of discussion should be avoided in favor of workplace issues, peer communication on
daily work matters and the formation of social bonds to foster the sense of community at
the Institute. In the future if STScI decides to adopt social networking tools for team col-
laboration, a solution can be installed on a protected Institute server and use LDAP for
authentication and permissions management.

Ning claims to use "standard security measures to protect against the loss, misuse, and
alteration of Personal Information under our control" but also states in their official secu-
rity policy that Ning assumes no liability for information obtained illegally by hackers
and cautions users to protect their passwords and site keys (Ning, Inc., 2009). Hacks of
OpenSocial applications in Ning have occurred in the past, and there is no guarantee that
they won't occur again in the future.

Privacy
Social networks created in Ning can be made private by the network administrator. In the
most locked down mode, the members can only join the network if they receive an invita-
tion from another member and must be approved by an administrator. Individual mem-
bers have some control over their own information within the network; options are avail-
able to allow or disallow other members to view or comment on their profile and content.
A middle layer of privacy allows members to designate other members as 'friends' and
allow those friends to view or comment on content that all other members may not.

Controlled Network versus Open Communication
Because of the Institutes history with bulletin boards, STScI management were afraid
that having an un-moderated network would result in inappropriate behavior. Studies
have been done (Millen & Patterson, 2003) to show that when people are in a closed on-
line community and use their real names so that they may be identified by others, their
interactions are most often polite and friendly. When people are anonymous they feel no
accountability for their actions, trust is diminished along with cooperation, and poor so-
cial behavior results. By keeping the Institute social network closed to only staff and re-
quiring people to use their real identity in all exchanges it is predicted that people will
continue to build social capital by polite and civil engagements. Unlike email, phone or
face-to-face conversations, communication over the social network will be visible to
more people and this fact suggests that communication is even more likely to remain civil
and appropriate. Given this, the best way to encourage open communication to the benefit
of the Institute is to allow members to post, comment, and start groups without restriction
or moderation. In the event that inappropriate things are posted, they can be dealt with
according to Institute policy, but like as not the fact that a person is seen behaving inap-
propriately in public will only add to the ability of the community to self regulate.

Behavior Issues
Should inappropriate behavior become a problem on the network, managers wanted to be
clear about how this would be dealt with in advance. It was decided that there is no dif-
ference between behaving badly online and doing so in person. The Institute has stan-
dards in place for professional behavior in a diverse environment, and these apply to all
communications with colleagues, whether they are face to face, on the phone, in email, or
through other online tools. Should someone show disrespect or display other inappropri-
ate behaviors on the Institute social network, they will need to be dealt with through a
cooperation of their management and HR according to established procedures. The fact
that this behavior would be documented online would only help resolve the issue, since
any "he-said-she-said" interactions could be cut short.

Policies for Online Content and Computer Use
The Institute has had a policy in place since the advent of the web on individual home
pages and what content is appropriate and allowable. With the ever-expanding range of
online tools and publishing options available today, this needs to be updated. A new poli-
cy should be written that sets expectations for employees about what they may say online
or publish on public channels about the Institute, its employees, or data. There is a strict
one for ITAR-restricted information. For all other work related information, it is impor-
tant for employees of the Institute to understand what the implications are for content
they produce and distribute online, whether it is on a web page, their personal blog, or via
Twitter. While this will be important to have, it will not, however, affect the user of a
member-restricted internal social network.

Computer use policies will also need to be updated to reflect the use of a social network-
ing service and other technologies during work time from work equipment. There is al-
ready time allowed for a certain amount of personal business conducted at work, such as
personal phone calls, checking personal email, and limited web surfing, as well as SDAS
beer club, lunchtime meetings of hobby groups, and having CSA shares dropped off at
the Institute. It should be made clear that these privileges extend to all varieties of infor-
mal communication because of the well documented need to build social capital among
employees, but that reasonable limitations must always be observed and what conse-
quences come from abuse of these privileges.
The directorate and human resources will need to be coordinated in delivering these mes-
sages.

Social Networking Service Solution

Options
There are many options for hosted social networks. For Institute purposes, two services
were suitable for this pilot: Ning and SocialCast.

SocialCast (www.socialcast.com) is the social networking tool used by NASA in 2008 for
a social networking pilot for NASA centers (Merryman, 2008). SocialCast is free for 10
users, and costs $1 per month for each additional user. SocialCast advertises special rates
for non-profits and larger companies. The tools available in SocialCast include mi-
croblogging, status sharing, and shared connections between people. These are good
tools, but limited.

Ning, co-founded by Netscape founder Marc Andreessen, has been in the news a lot late-
ly for achieving 1 million social network sites (McCarthy, 2008). Ning has a much larger
suite of tools available, such as discussion groups, blogs, events, photo sharing, and a
wide range of third party applications that can be added for further functionality through
the Open Social standard. Ning is free for an unlimited number of members, but offers
upgrades for additional features.

Ning was a good choice for the Institute because 1) it is free at the base level of service
for as many users as the Institute has 2) it provides a good mix of tools that would be well
suited to many communication needs and 3) it would be very fast and easy to deploy as a
pilot. And while NASA used SocialCast, another social network dedicated specifically to
scientists was built in Ning (Bradley, 2008), providing a demonstrated use case.

Implementation
The social network was created, configured and tested in the early months of 2009 by a
dozen people at various levels and in different organizational units. Once testing was
complete, test participants who were already registered and a few others chosen for their
proven willingness to participate in new initiatives, were asked to help seed new discus-
sions, invite new members, create groups, and respond to topics initiated by others. They
were asked to comment on at least three posts by others in the first week. They were also
asked to complete their online profiles and to personally invite five other people to join.
In three of the initial discussion groups, a curator was designated and asked to post every
day for the first month to stimulate discussion and promote growth of the community. Ar-
eas that received this initial focus were groups dedicated to workplace issues, Institute
sustainability, mobile apps, personal productivity, pets, and community supported agri-
culture (CSA). A community manager was appointed to facilitate participation at all lev-
els. This was meant to be a daily and ongoing task. The community manager is also re-
sponsible for helping people use the service, manage the testing and addition of new fea-
tures, and assemble data and findings on the use of the service. Several support staff were
assigned to the task of approving new members.

The service was made available to the entire staff in July of 2009. It was announced in an
email sent to all staff by the Chief of Staff. Having the invitation come from this position
was intentional and meant to give it credibility and importance. Information on how to
sign up and use the service was posted on an internal support web site, and more detailed
articles about how to use various features were posted on the social network itself by the
community manager. A presentation was given three months later by Institute leaders in
an open meeting to a relatively small audience.

All new members were required to provide a real name and valid Institute email address,
along with a profile picture, office number and extension, job title and organizational
unit. As of this case study, 177 people have joined the social network, out of approxi-
mately 450 employees. Only 32 people post at least once each month. Another 20 or so
post less frequently, while most members have not logged in since their initial account
setup.

Findings and Conclusions

Future Direction

Based on the feedback from employees who were interviewed during this study, and the
observations of the community manager over the past year, I offer the following recom-
mendations. In order to increase participation and thereby raise the levels of communica-
tion and knowledge sharing, increased awareness of the system should be encouraged
through short demonstrations during monthly technical update meetings, which are given
to a wide audience. Second, training sessions should also be offered, to help those people
who are interested but need help getting started or learning about the features. These ses-
sions should be both about passing on technical skills, as well as giving hesitant people
the confidence they need by helping them understand how a social network service works
and how to participate. Third, more community facilitators should be recruited to initiate
and respond to discussions and encourage individuals to log in and contribute by exam-
ple. These techniques will address the issues of inexperience, lack of awareness or inter-
est, and habitual use. To further battle lack of awareness and interest, physical events and
activities that can be tied to online activity and discussion should be sought to create a
richer experience and increase the number of channels available for knowledge sharing.

Issues of trust and malaise must be addressed by Institute leaders. This can be done by
creating an incentive program for top contributors. This could take two forms. In the one,
participation is measured in some way and formal rewards are bestowed, such as special
parking places, virtual honorific titles or badges, or even monetary rewards. Another form
of incentive is for leaders to demonstrate that they will address issues that arise in the fo-
rums in a timely and open manner. By communicating openly, listening to issues without
judgment, and taking action by answering questions or taking good suggestions, they can
demonstrate that participation is worthwhile and therefore desirable.






References


Al avi , M. and D. E. Lei dner (2001). Knowl edge management and knowl-
edge management syst ems: Concept ual foundat i ons and research i ssues.
MIS Quart erl y 25(1): 107-136.

Bradl ey, Davi d. (2008, November 5). Soci al medi a f or sci ent i st s. Re-
t ri eved from ht t p: / / www. sci encebase. com/ sci ence-bl og/ soci al -medi a-
for-sci ent i st s. ht ml

Dal ki r, Ki mi z (2005). Int roduct i on t o Knowl edge Management i n Theory
and Pract i ce. Knowl edge Management i n Theory and Pract i ce. p. 1-2 1.

Kankanhal l i , At reyi ; Tan, Bernard C. Y. ; and Wei , Kwok-Kee. 2005. "Con-
t ri but i ng Knowl edge t o El ect roni c Reposi t ori es: An Empi ri cal Invest i -
gat i on, " MIS Quart erl y, (29: 1).

IVC Report 2009 (Space Tel escope Sci ence Inst i t ut e Vi si t i ng Commi t t ee,
2009, p. 6)

IVC Report 2007 (Space Tel escope Sci ence Inst i t ut e Vi si t i ng Commi t t ee,
2007, p. 8)

Karat , John, Karat , Cl are-Mari e, & Brodi e, Carol yn. (2008). Human-com-
put er i nt eract i on vi ewed from t he i nt ersect i on of pri vacy, securi t y, and
t rust . In A Sears (Ed. ), The Human-Comput er Int eract i on Handbook
(pp. 639-658). New York: Lawrence Erl baum Associ at es.

Lut t ers, Wayne G. and Ackerman, Mark S. 2003. Joi ni ng t he backst age:
l ocal i t y and cent ral i t y i n an onl i ne communi t y. Informat i on Technol ogy
& Peopl e Vol . 16 No. 2, 2003 pp. 157-182

McCart hy, Carol i ne. (2009, Apri l 16). Ni ng hi t s 1 mi l l i on soci al net works.
Ret ri eved from ht t p: / / news. cnet . com/ 8301-13577_3-10220136-36. ht ml

Merryman, Cel est e. (2008, August 20). Fi ndi ngs f rom t he nasasphere pi -
l ot . Ret ri eved from ht t p: / / www. scri bd. com/ doc/ 12759868/ NASAsphere-
Pi l ot -Report -2008-Publ i c

Mi l l en, D. R. and Pat t erson, J. F. 2003. Ident i t y di scl osure and t he cre-
at i on of soci al capi t al . In CHI ' 03 Ext ended Abst ract s on Human Fac-
t ors i n Comput i ng Syst ems (Ft . Lauderdal e, Fl ori da, USA, Apri l 05 -
10, 2003). CHI ' 03. ACM, New York, NY, 720-721. DOI= ht t p: / /
doi . acm. org/ 10. 1145/ 765891. 765950

Nardi , B. A. , Whi t t aker, S. , and Bradner, E. 2000. Int eract i on and out erac-
t i on: i nst ant messagi ng i n act i on. In Proceedi ngs of t he 2000 ACM Con-
f erence on Comput er Support ed Cooperat i ve Work (Phi l adel phi a, Penn-
syl vani a, Uni t ed St at es). CSCW ' 00. ACM, New York, NY, 79-88.

Ni ng, Inc. (2009, December 22). Ni ng - l egal : pri vacy pol i cy. Ret ri eved
from ht t p: / / about . ni ng. com/ pri vacy. php

Nonaka, Inj ura. (1994). A Dynami c t heory of organi zat i onal knowl edge
creat i on. Organi zat i on Sci ence, 5(1), 14-37.

Perez, Sarah. (2008, Apri l 20). Ent erpri se 2. 0 t o become a $4. 6 bi l l i on i n-
dust ry by 2013. Ret ri eved from ht t p: / / www. readwri t eweb. com/ archi ves/
ent erpri se_20_t o_become_a_46_bi l l i on_i ndust ry. php

Put nam, Robert . (2000). Bowl i ng al one: t he col l apse and revi val of ameri-
can communi t y. Si mon and Schust er.

Rhodes, Mat t . (2008, November 13). So how does Soci al net worki ng i m-
prove ef f i ci ency at work?. Ret ri eved from ht t p: / / www. freshnet works. -
com/ bl og/ 2008/ 11/ so-how-does-soci al -net worki ng-i mprove-effi ci ency-
at -work/

Ski nner, Carri er-Ann. (2009, Apri l 2). Twi t t er, facebook can i mprove work
product i vi t y. PC Worl d, Ret ri eved from ht t p: / / www. pcworl d. com/ busi-
nesscent er/ art i cl e/ 162478/ t wi t t er_facebook_can_i mprove_work_produc-
t i vi t y. ht ml

Soci al -medi a t ool s coul d support securi t y. (2009, Apri l 16). Ret ri eved
from ht t p: / / www. upi . com/ Emergi ng_Threat s/ 2009/ 04/ 16/ Soci al -medi a-
t ool s-coul d-support -securi t y/ UPI-74281239924717/

Sout herl and, Amy. (2009, Jan 15). Why every Nonprof i t needs a soci al
medi a st rat egy. Ret ri eved from ht t p: / / spurspect i ves. com/ why-every-
nonprofi t -needs-a-soci al -medi a-st rat egy/

St ewart , Mart i na. (2009, March 30). Li brary of congress t o st ep up use of
soci al net worki ng si t es. Ret ri eved from ht t p: / / pol i t i cal t i cker. bl ogs. cn-
n. com/ 2009/ 03/ 30/ l i brary-of-congress-t o-st ep-up-use-of-soci al -net-
worki ng-si t es/