For video accessibility, there are many ways of providing captions and also audio annotations to content. I think the government is doing far too little on this today. For example the recently released Social Inclusion Website at http://www.socialinclusion.gov.au/Pages/default.aspx provides videos and transcripts in text documents, but not captions that actually play at the same time as the video. This is not a difficult technical problem to solve, but needs to be made part of requirements for publishing video on government websites.
An in-depth analysis of the different types of public interaction methods needs to be undertaken. Not every tool is good for every situation. Not every tool by itself will achieve the required effect. Some tools achieve higher engagement with ordinary people (e.g. video), other with highly engaged people (e.g. twitter).
(by the way, there is a type in the videos section: s/of/or/ ).
It is not just about favouring the disclosure of public sector information. It is also about empowering public servants with the ability to interact with the public through online tools. This is not done by telling them what *not* to do, but mostly by providing training and room to experiment safely – by building trust and confidence.
I agree with the “how” question – it is important to analyse what tool works best in which situation. Twitter, for example, is a good tool to use for requesting immediate and short feedback on topics. Comments are good for when there is a longer consultation process. Videos are good for communicating complicated things or for “training” type issues.