Conexus Indiana is hosting a series of round tables throughout the state this fall to address some of the key issues facing Indiana. The goal of each discussion will be to examine and brainstorm with professional experts in order to learn how Indiana can become a logistical stronghold in the various industries that impact different parts of the state.

"It’s a chance to provide insight on the infrastructure needs, policy challenges and workforce gaps that must be tackled to put Indiana on the map as a global logistics hub," says spokesman Luke LaBeau.

Here is the upcoming schedule, with each round table discussing issues that impact the corresponding area of the state. For more information, call the listed contact:

Sept. 25 - Portage, 4-6 p.m. EST
Northwest Indiana Forum Auditorium
Contact: Karen Lauerman - (219) 763-6303 ext. 181

Oct. 2 - Fort Wayne, 3-5 p.m. EST
Summit Club
Contact: Kathleen Randolph - (260) 459-1400 ext. 4502

Oct. 10 - Muncie, 9-11 a.m. EST
Ball State Alumni Center
Contact: Roy Bud - (765) 254-1420

Oct. 14 - Evansville, 11 a.m. - 1 p.m. EST
Ivy Tech
Contact: Greg Wathen - (812) 423-2020

Nov. 14 - Plainfield, 9-11 a.m. EST
Brightpoint
Contact: Joyce Zwierlein - (317) 707-2382

Nov. 19 - Notre Dame, 10 a.m. - 12 p.m. EST
Center for Continuing Education
Contact: Robert Bernhard - (574) 631-1862

Ben Smith of Politico blogged today about Joe Biden’s remarks in Ohio regarding coal plants in America. That is, that there shouldn’t be any. This seems to back up what he said last year during the primaries, according to Smith’s blog:

"I don’t think there’s much of a role for clean coal in energy independence, but I do think there’s a significant role for clean coal in the bigger picture of climate change," (Biden said) last year. "Clean-coal technology is not the route to go in the United States, because we have other, cleaner alternatives," he said, but added that America should push for a "fundamental change in technology" to clean up China’s plants.

Meanwhile, as if on cue, the McCain campaign countered today by issuing a press release insisting their candidate will protect coal-based jobs in the U.S. via a new coalition:

The coalition will help spread the message about the importance of clean coal technology and the advantages of tapping the country’s vast coal reserves. As part of John McCain’s "all of the above" energy plan, the Lexington Project, clean coal will be a strong component of the drive to energy independence. In addition to providing domestic energy, the coal industry is a key part of the economy in several states.

This is topical for me as I was in Crawfordsville just last week interviewing the manager of Crawfordsville Electric Light & Power – the city’s public utility company – for an upcoming member spotlight in BizVoice. He stressed to me the importance of clean coal as a future energy source in Indiana. He explained that our best minds need to be working on this in the future for the good of both the state and the nation. It’s also worth noting that the Indiana Chamber has a longstanding position that clean coal needs to be part of the energy mix in our state.

Obviously, this is just one of many issues voters will base their support on this election season and just a minor point/counterpoint in the grander scheme of the 2008 electoral dance. However, it seems the two tickets have drastically different opinions on these matters — or at least different rhetoric.

The National Conference of State Legislatures’ blog has a post explaining how some folks, who may lack free speech privileges in their countries, are using Facebook as a way to broadcast their political messages:

This ‘Facebook political movement’ has also taken off in Egypt. One blogger, Sandmonkey, talks about how new media are being used to promote political activism. The LA Times wrote an op-ed on how the Egyptian government has threatened to shut down Facebook, after it was credited for helping to mobilize protests against food prices earlier this year. Moroccans used YouTube to capture protesters clashing with security forces, because sights like this would not be shown on state-run TV. Activists in Lebanon used text messaging to organize an anti-Syria rally.

And as I’ve posted before, Congress has gotten in on the social media action via Twitter. In fact, Indiana’s gubernatorial candidates — Governor Mitch Daniels and challenger Jill Long Thompson — currently have their own feeds (as best I can tell, these are official campaign feeds and not just orchestrated by fans).

Two expert studies resulted in the following headline: "Web sites of both presidential candidates fail to connect with users." After a quick review of the Barack Obama and John McCain Internet homes, I agree with the people who do this work and analysis for a living.  

Clutter, lack of clear labels and the ability to easily navigate to some common tasks are among the challenges. Given the fact that more web sites than not struggle with some of those same issues, the results are not surprising.

The Obama campaign has been lauded for raising money and reaching people. But if you want to learn more about the Democrat’s positions on the issues, it takes a little searching. I’m also troubled by the labels attached to different groups under the "People" header.

The ongoing Republican convention only added to the McCain clutter. Are there really 15 or more Photos of the Week that deserve front page placement? While the overall site might be more user-friendly than Obama’s, the poor first impression undoubtely turns away many visitors.

Government Executive.com has the overview and the expert comments. 

The Thicket blog recently took a look at how state legislators are dealing with email volume. The writer explains some of the responses were encouraging, while some likely won’t be received too well by constituents.

Some of the legislators who have their own staff had maladroit messages like, "I won’t be able to respond to your message myself, but one of my staff will get back to you" or, perhaps worse, the automated message came from a staff person, not the legislator, in the first place.  Staff may in fact be the ones who respond, but there are more graceful ways to explain this to constituents.  Announcing in advance that staff will respond seems gratuitous at best and patronizing at worst.

While some have been negotiating the world of email, folks like Congressman John Culberson of Texas have been pioneering constituent relations by using Twitter — the latest and greatest way to communicate using "micro-blogging." Check out Culberson’s Twitter feed here.

I admit to some mixed reactions in reading a Midwest Business.com column. It referenced a Forbes article on 10 dying cities in America. Four — Canton, Cleveland, Dayton and Youngstown — in Ohio were joined by Detroit and Flint, Michigan.

I was happy to see no Indiana cities on the list, but disappointed as the Midwest took a beating. If we’re to believe that regional economic impact that everyone keeps talking about, dying cities to our east and north can’t be a good thing.

The mixed thoughts went away as the writer went on to contrast Fort Wayne with the "dying 10." He noted that the city experienced similar challenges in job losses and corporate moves, but that "the political leaders saw what was coming and they got out of a traditional mode of approaching economic development." He detailed some of the expansion and efficiency measures and also cited the fiber-to-the-premises investment by Verizon as critical.

The Chamber’s BizVoice magazine captured these stories last year as former Fort Wayne Mayor Graham Richard was our Government Leader of the Year and Verizon regional chief Gale Given a Chamber volunteer of the year.

Congrats, Fort Wayne. It’s nice to see others recognize the accomplishments.

If your communications team has gone round and round about your public relations initiatives, this article by Reuters UK might give you some insight into how valuable messaging can be in the midst of crisis. This piece explains how Russia and Georgia are fighting not just with weapons, but with PR strategies:

Russia wants to convince the world of its role as an honest broker, reluctantly intervening against an out-of-control Georgian president whose forces have carried out ethnic cleansing against the Ossetian people.

 Georgia in turn portrays itself as a plucky little country fighting off the resurgent Russian bear and suffering unfair Kremlin punishment on account of its drive to become a Western democracy and NATO ally.