Discussion rages on about how average Joe can make a difference in the small town of Jordan.

Meanwhile, elected officials watch from on high, lump your local newspaper into their complaints about insensitive big media, say they'd like to communicate better, and then fail to communicate using the most advantageous of media available to them -- the local newspaper and its Web site.

It doesn't make sense.

First, let's put credit where it is due:

- The Jordan Independent print edition and www.jordannews.com are informative products based on the highest journalistic standards. Both of them can, and should, also be used as vehicles for public discussion by whomever is willing to follow the guidelines set forth by the business providing them, Southwest Newspapers. A letter to the editor is an effective way to get your point across to as many local people as possible.

- Neither the newspaper nor its editor run the town, nor do they want to. Elected officials, business people, church officials and members, organizational leaders, voters, and residents run the town. What is regularly contained in the newspaper each week and its Web site each day reflects a small picture of your city and the nearby townships, and hopefully over time it offers a more and more accurate big picture of you, as well as the issues that affect you. 

- Web logging, or blogging, is new and controversial in Jordan. On your local newspaper's Web site, an individual can have her own blog or we can share a blog of comments. In some people's minds, blogging about local issues has the potential to be an open can of worms. A segment of the population will stay far away from blogging. Others, curious but also preferring anonymity, will read the blogs and not comment. Several others will freely comment and blog, using the Web site to its fullest advantage. It takes all kinds. But the more comments and blogs, the better, in my opinion. Please write.

So what do we do with the vehicles of public discussion with which Southwest Newspapers has so kindly provided us?

The answer is simple: Use all of the options.

Respectful, opinionated public discussion, preferably based on a few solid facts provided by the JI -- whether discussing politics with a coffee shop group, publicly speaking at a city council or school board meeting, stopping an elected official in the grocery store, at a sporting event, or on a street corner, or writing a letter to the editor or a blog -- is what local public policy is made of.

It behooves the public to be involved. Do so respectfully and in your own way.

For elected officials, it also would prove beneficial to be involved. The public is calling for your involvement. You're saying you want to communicate. And although it's unusual for a small town, it's completely valid to make calls for elected officials to participate in blogging or commenting on this Web site.

Blogging is not something that goes away if you ignore it.

Critics of blogging know that any distortion of the facts -- which of course the editor of your local newspaper does all that he can to avoid, clarify, and correct -- is detrimental to the local political climate. 

But an editor can only do so much. That is why I call for you to help.

The most pure picture of an issue can only be received through various sources. I believe the JI's print and online editions should be two of your sources -- they are different products and contain different facts and views. The more public involvement we have in each of those information sources, the better. The more public discussion, the better. The more elected officials refrain from isolating themselves on an island, the better their decisions will be.

The main reasons elected officials ought to be involved are these: They are in the know, and you deserve to know.

Why hold back information from the people? Why not fully discuss the topics on a government agenda in public, so the public can watch on TV and understand the background of a decision? Why limit public notices in the print edition of your local paper? Why close meetings when it is not necessary? Why give such limited information prior to and after closed meetings? Why, on a whim, purposely avoid publishing the dates and times of certain committee meetings so as to exclude the public? Why not answer our online questions? What could be the harm in communicating better with the voting public?

And they wonder why people in general distrust government in general. It has to do with a lack of communication.

Elected officials, though, still have our respect. We voted them into office. Once they are elected, they become privy to information that is not public or obtainable by the newspaper or the general public, and they become decision makers. They base their opinions on the factual information they receive, and they must balance good information with all of the public opinions they receive. That is their challenge.

Another challenge -- one at which many elected officials are notoriously bad or even completely skirt -- is communicating to the public.

Look at every list of goals made by the city and school district. Better communication is included on those lists.

But are the local elected officials making headway? Do they give you the information you want through the vehicle by which you receive information?

Clearly, no, they do not reach all of us. In a world of changing media, elected officials are challenged to get out their messages. Largely, they fail. 

It's not that elected officials don't have the information you want. It's not that if they don't have it, they can't get it. It's not that they don't tell people when they see them, or that they don't answer phone calls and e-mails.

Those who fail live in the past. They don't give you the information that you want through the media you prefer.

Thousands of people read your local newspaper. They read the letters to the editor. But elected officials, although allowed the same monthly privileges to the opinion page as anyone else, rarely write, except during election season. (And when they do, they rarely keep their points short and sweet -- requirements that ease in the public understanding most any issue.)

Thousands of people click on this Web site every month. (It's not just me -- believe me, I have better things to do than click a million times on my own blog.) Those who frequent the site read blogs and comments, as well as stories posted by journalists. Yet only a few members of the school board and city council regularly participate in the public discussion. Many of them have registered on the Web site, but except when an election is at stake, only the most resilient put their words online. 

Newspapers and Web sites -- public discussion takes place here. For what more can you ask? How would you better communicate with the public? How could possibly reach more people in such an efficient manner?

We have two great vehicles for disseminating good information to a large segment of Jordan and the surrounding townships. Elected officials should at least read them. Elected officials should also participate in the media, if only because you want information from them, on your terms. 

Elected officials -- please, please use the JI and its Web site. Better communication is at stake.