Category Archives: Civic Media

Talking Fast II: More CrisisMapper Ignite Sessions

Luis Capelo (@luiscape) of Digital Humanitarian Network loves volunteers. DH exists to stimulate more interaction between humanitarian volunteers and large humanitarian institutions.

There’s information overload in humanitarian responses. How do we collect and make sense of all this information? Luis credits humanitarian orgs with doing the hard work of adapting, but it’s a rough sea to navigate. Volunteer & Technical Communities thrive in this environment. They’re nimble, lightweight, and advanced, technically. Luis thinks its time to stop questioning whether VT&Cs can help, and begin to dive into how these groups can collaborate.

DH aims to create a consortium of groups that faciliates between the two worlds, and reduces the cost of collaboration
They have a simplified activation process: activate volunteers, triage the volume, and forward them to VT&Cs. They’ve produced a guide to manage the activation of VT&Cs.

July and August of this year saw the first two activations. OCHA and ACAPS came to the DH network for help. OCHA wanted to build a pre-crisis profile of every country. ACAPS wanted to include VT&Cs in the formal assessment process.

Join at digitalhumanitarians.com.


Cat Graham (@Peaceful_intent) of Humanity Road works in multinational crisismapping. They specialize in the first hours of an event (12, 24, 48 hour windows). Self-directed work teams with training and a mission come online.

Their forthcoming QuickNets microtasking platform is open source, free, and will stay that way. Each row of data has an ‘anonymize’ button. Its been tested at RIMPAC and Pacific Endeavor exercises. 20 volunteers from 8 nations stepped up to model communications for the tabletop exercise.


Ka-Ping Yee (@zestyping) is an engineer at Google’s Crisis Response team. He uses Stratomap, the open-source tool behind Google Crisis Map. It’s on Google Code, and there’s a hosted version available. There are important datasets for crisis response, but they’re all hosted on different websites, so it’s difficult to get them in front of the right decisionmakers. Some of these maps have crappy UI, or don’t allow the databases to be combined. Data publishers have tools to publish, but map curators could offer even greater value if they were able to mashup maps and databases between various providers. We gain great insight when we can synthesize various pieces of information.

The Google Crisis Map provides a range of useful layers, from traffic to weather to user-submitted YouTube videos. Your map mashup can point to live feeds around the web, and it will be updated in realtime as those data sources are updated.

Users can share a customized view of the map, with layers


Brian Root (@brian_root) of Human Rights Watch shows us a US map depicting ICE’s deportation patterns. The group produced a report on the human rights implications of the US Immigration department’s detainment and deportation policies. They needed data to show ICE’s movements, but only ICE had the data they wanted. Through Freedom of Information requests, they were able to procure some data.

After cleaning the data, they were able to show the number of facilities involved, the facilities sending the most cases, and identify problem cases, where a detainee has been transferred numerous times across the country. They were able to visualize findings about the costs, human and financial, of transferring detainees.

But maps and data do not effective advocacy make. Drilling down to the state level was more useful with getting the attention of local media and local politicians. In January of this year, ICE issued a directive to limit the number of transfers, in large part due to HRW’s report.

Brian asks the audience to consider the human rights research that could be done with the mapping experience sitting in this room.


Clarence Wardell (@cwardell) led a research team at University of Arkansas following the Social Media and Emergency Management conference. One of the main concerns highlighted in their summary report was high-level resistance to use data because of verification. They took the strategy of conceding the “is it perfect?” argument up front, and instead arguing that the data was still nevertheless useful. There is room between horseshoes and hand grenades.

They mapped the verified and unverified data points together, creating the Traveling Salesman problem for disaster responders. Which relief tour is the optimal use of time and ground covered? They tested the multiple approaches.


Munish Puri (@RecordedFuture / site)time travels by looking at data over time. Hindsight + insight leads to foresight. Text has a predictive power when it is loaded with temporal references.

They looked at temper, time, and tone in the Georgian Conflict. Volume and velocity didn’t equal veracity. Licklider’s Intelligence Amplification.

Discovery consits of seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobody has thought. Albert Szent-Györgyi


Clionadh Raleigh (@acledinfo) is Director of Armed Conflict Location and Event Dataset (ACLED). They report on all violent events across Africa. Dates, locations, actor types, event types, and territory exchanges are collected to produce trend reports for others.

What’s happening in Africa?
We can use SpatialKey to detect and investigate patterns. The agents of violence have changed drastically in the last few years. Civil wars are declining, but political militias increasingly threaten civilians. We can follow the movements and attacks of groups like the LRA and Boko Haram. Boko Haram, for instance, never attacks troops.

We’re seeing more trans-national threats from Islamist groups. We see Ethiopia’s increasing violence over the last 15 years.

Analysis sees increased urbanization and other factors driving today’s violence. The data informs policy, academic, and public research. They offer special reports on topics like Islamist violence.


Steven Livingston (@ICTlivingston) introduces Mapping the Maps and Crowdglobe, an Internews platform to visualize geospatial data. Different map themes emerge in different regions. Western Europe sees crowdmaps used for entertainment and leisure and media reports.

They also surveyed crowdmappers, 80% of whom were men at an average age of 40 years. Many of the dead maps are simply a result of users experimenting with no intention of creating a map to begin with.

Only 6% of respondents promoted their maps using traditional media.


Jonne Catshoek is a conflict analyst working in the Republic of Georgia. In 2008, Russia and Georgia battled over South Ossetia. Conflict continues despite the international community’s involvement. Jonne blames security strategies that are not responsive enough to the needs of local communities. The elva platform (code here) they developed allows community representatives to SMS in community needs, where the information is then put online for the wide range of non-community actors.

Jonne estimates they spend 20% of their time developing software, and 80% of their time understanding local community need. This local trust allows better information sharing, and more reliable information.

They use SMS because smartphone penetration remains low. Trained monitors code a lot of information into a single SMS.

They’re expanding beyond violence into weather and agricultural information feeds for communities. The community is also heavily reporting security incidents, helping security providers respond appropriately.


Patrick Vinck (@developmentdata) is at the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative. They conduct surveys on countries’ peace and conflict, the way we have regular reports on health and other human factors. KoBo Toolbox is a data collection instrument designed to assist in this effort. It helps surveyors create their forms and export the questions. It even has recommendation engines, to suggest questions based on the topic being queried.

The same tool can collect voice, written text, images, and videos in one place. It works offline.

KoBo Map links to a spreadsheet (Google, CSV, etc.) and visualizes the data it contains. It’s lightweight for slow connections.


Taylor Owen (@taylor_owen) did a PhD thesis to map the historical US bombing of Cambodia. He quotes Nixon telling Kissinger to “crack the hell out of them” with an unlimited budget. He demands it. The result is over 200,000 sorties over an 8-year period. The 115,000 records detailing the planes, bombs, and tonnage remained secret until President Clinton opened the records to Vietnam for the purposes of de-mining the land.

Taylor used the data to produce timelines and fact-check the official timeline. The data can change our understanding of history. The bombings started sooner than we’ve said, lasted after the peace treaties, and hit civilian areas where Kissinger said we wouldn’t. We can see Watergate’s effect on bombs dropped in Cambodia.

We can see how the US bombing pushed the Khmer Rouge east, into the Vietcong territory, where they developed from agrarian socialist revolution to an anti-imperialist group.

It doesn’t take much to radicalize a population, Taylor says. In one instance, a single bomb in a village drove 70 radicalized recruits.

Henry Kissinger’s record of claims on this issue, including Kissinger’s Second Rule of Engagement (We won’t bomb within a mile of a village) turns out to be wildly incorrect once we map the bombing patterns. The US bombed heavily populated areas near Phnom Penh, for example.

Government data is often deleted, or at least classified for long periods of time. We need to work with the data when it does get released, so we can understand its historical implications.


Patrick Florance is in town from Tufts University to talk about the Open Geoportal (OGP). It’s an open source project at Tufts to rapidly discover, preview geospatial data. It’s a collaborative effort to take on big geospatial datasets.

You can shop around for datasets and drop them into your virtual shopping cart. You can incorporate third party web services and share the data all over the web. It works with common web mapping tools and will have over 20,000 data layers available by December.


Josh Campbell (disruptivegeo) is a geographer at the Department of State. He’s working to link together the US government’s purchasing power of commercially available satellite imagery, and the need of VTCs for this imagery.

In a few weeks, Haiti went from being barely mapped at all, to being mapped in such great detail so as to support on-the-ground action. State attributes this incredible development to the existing OSM community, empowered by web-service satellite imagery.

The US government buys a LOT of satellite imagery, and is contractually required to share it. In the Horn of Africa crisis, they experimented with letting volunteer mappers map refugee camps. 29 volunteers produced 50,000 nodes of data on a previously blank refugee camp map. The volunteers provided not just roads and streets, but also footways, paths, hydrologic features, and other rich data.

The project showed that people would map where there is imagery. But they’re interested in mapping the human elements, as well. The Red Cross hosted a mapping party, and went to Uganda to train locals to use OSM and fire responders. Locals annotated data with places names and restaurants. The local community received a map of the density of grass huts (a fire hazard).


John Crowley (@jcrowley) works at Camp Roberts to connect the top-down and bottom-up aid groups.

1. In law, agencies are having trouble navigating the policies that govern their use of crowd data
2. Trust in data, and trust in processes of VTCs
3. Security – the Arab Spring and Anonymous have shown that we can’t secure all the voices in a system
4. Voice – We could have a bigger collective capacity than we’ve ever had in human history. But what happens when that moves faster than our governments?

Agencies ask, how can we control this? Bad news is, you can’t. Good news is, we can begin to see how we can coordinate in this space. But we need to step outside of bureaucracies that only allow information to flow down.

We need space to fail, where it won’t disrupt actual operations. That is the purpose of Camp Roberts. Crashing is allowed. They bring together the players in the space to bridge capability gaps.

How do we repeat Haiti?
A range of actors not traditionally in the same space were brought together. An 18-month exercise brought them up against many legal and policy walls, but they were able to show the process worked.

FEMA came and asked about doing the same with tornadoes. Civil Air Patrol and many VTCs came together and designed a new workflow, which was used in Hurricane Isaac two weeks after it was created.

Can we scale this innovation process to all the other agencies around the world? It’s an Open Humanitarian Initiative.

This process of bringing people together into safe spaces requires combining the wisdom of the old with the innovation of the new. How can we bring together the human race to learn to heal itself?

Talking fast at CrisisMappers: the Ignite Talks

#ICCM

Dr. Jen Ziemke (co-founder of CrisisMappers) welcomes a room packed with a wide variety of professionals and volunteers. CrisisMappers started in 2009 as a network, designed to stay in touch
The group has grown to 5,000 members, organized on a Google Group and Ning network.

For the newbies in the room, what is CrisisMapping?
Jen breaks it down into the data coming in, the visualization of the data, and the response: how does it affect decisions on the ground?

Changing technology is clearly a primary driver of crisis mapping. Mobile technology and the ability to crowdsource shared experiences and visualize it on a map, or elsewhere, has enabled crisis mapping. Beyond mapping, this community quickly becomes a broader group of digital humanitarians, using technology to help communities affected by crisis.


Patrick Meier (the other co-founder of CrisisMappers) hops on stage. He’s currently at the Qatar Foundation Computing Research Institute, where they’re researching how to gather information from social media
In 2009, the field of crisismapping was just beginning to take shape, and it was easy to know every project and get to know all of the people behind the projects, often over drinks. The field has exploded, and matured, and the problems the field faces have grown more difficult.

The community met last year in Geneva to begin tackling some of the challenges. The computer security behind emerging humanitarian technologies was an obvious area of concern. John Crowley spearheaded this effort at the Camp Roberts event. Phoebe Winpope* has taken on issues of data privacy and security, working with professionals in that space.

Wendy Harman and her team at the American Red Cross have launched the Digital Operations Center, driving home the point that social media for disaster response is here to stay.

Andrej Verity has launched the Digital Humanitarians Network to facilitate the space between volunteer technologists and large humanitarian organizations.

Geeks WIthout Bounds and Digital Hacks of Kindness are also driving forward innovation in this space.

Disaster-affected communities are increasingly the source of big data. When Japan was struck by earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear disaster, a TON of data was shared online. Patrick argues that we need hybrid methodologies that combine crowdsourcing and the speed and scalability of advanced machine learning algorithms. We need to use multiple channels to listen to communities.

Verification remains an important challenge for aid organizations looking to make use of social media. Media organizations are actually leading the way in this department. The BBC has had a User Generated Content hub in London since 2007.

Monitoring and Evaluation are also important. Our perception of digital humanitarian technologies is high, but the real evidence supporting them is pretty thin. We need strong, independent evaluations of these technologies’ impact.


CrisisMappers 2013 will be held in Nairobi, Kenya (applause). This will be the fifth annual conference, and Jen and Patrick have decided to step down as organizers, and adopt OpenStreetMap’s model, where members of the network pitch to host and organize the annual conference.

Patrick is also inspired by TEDx, and hopes to see the CrisisMappers brand, logo, and website repurposed to support far more local events in this space.


Ignite talks!

Lin Wells (@STAR_TIDES) gives an overview of the STAR-TIDES network and its 1500 nodes. It is public-private and trans-national. They work post-disaster, post-war, impoverished, and short term and long term (disaster vs. refugees). They work in domestic or foreign situations, whether military is involved, or not. Shelter, water, power, cooking, lighting, sanitation, and ICT technologies.

Lin says technology alone is never enough. Building social networks and developing trust, as well as understanding how policy is adapted in the field, all matter.

TIDES hosts annual technology demos at Fort McMayer. They’re also present at Camp Roberts. The real world events they’ve supported include floods, wildfires, election monitoring, and more.


Jakob Rogstadius (@JakobRogstadius) introduces Crisis Tracker to crowdsource the curation of information like tweets during a crisis. Twitter poses a challenge, in that 140 characters is too short for computers to understand, but the rate of incoming tweets is too voluminous for humans to cope with.

The Crisis Tracker platform helps people sift through the noise and identify the novel information pieces in the stream, reduce the inflow rate, and enable volunteers to act on the actionable content. Similar messages are clustered, junk is filtered out. 30,000 tweets become 2,000 stories, and then 7 unique pieces of information per hour. The system looks at metadata like the timestamp, and then the crowd annotates the information with stories.

Why human involvement?
Humans can process text and images in ways computers cannot. Humans are also adaptable to rapid changes.

The system is up and running for the Syrian civil war. You can drill down into individual stories and see who shared it, links to multimedia content, and similar stories.

Volunteers have appreciated the platform’s ability to aggregate and filter. The system picks up stories and ranks and auto-sorts and filters the top stories. A 6-8 volunteer team can pull out the top items. With 40-60 volunteers, you can have a detailed log of the event at a very local level.

The project is free and open source.


Mona Chalabi (@MonaChalabi) brings us back to the challenges brought up by both slow and sudden-onset challenges. Crisis maps were unable to stop delays in aid distribution in Haiti. Have we reached a plateau in the use of GPS? FedEx uses RFID to track packages. It’s a barcode on steroids. A chip stores coded data, an antenna transfers the signal, and a computer accepts it for processing. Many subway cards use this technology.

In Haiti, hundreds of containers arrived each day, and those that were recorded were tracked using manual processes like Excel spreadsheets, leaving plenty of room for error. RFID would be much more efficient at managing the supply chain. The chips can be re-used.

The private sector has used RFIDs to great effect. The effective distribution of resources in a crisis can be the difference between people being fed and people being tear-gassed by UN troops afraid of a large crowd. RFID also combats information asymmetry in the space because the information is automated rather than input by one group and verified by another.
Simple supply chain logistics remain a major challenge for aid agencies and governments in crisis.

The effective distribution of resources in a crisis can be the difference between people being fed and people being tear-gassed by UN troops afraid of a large crowd.

RFID also combats information asymmetry in the space because anyone can use the information.

Simple supply chain logistics remain a major challenge for governments in crisis, and make it more difficult for corrupt officials to interfere with the chain of supplies.


Nate Smith (@nas_smith) is with Development Seed and Mapbox. There are many factors in communicating the many complicated factors that go into a crisis situation.

Context is important, like the conditions in the Horn of Africa prior to the droughts.

The Sahel Food Crisis project was much more than mapping, Nate says. Getting access to the raw data and communicating it in an appropriate way was part of the challenge.

Workflow is a problem. How we access data, and do things with it, can slow things down. Fews Net maintains their data in PDFs, which slows down developers looking to do anything with it.

What are the right colors and pieces of information in a map to express information?

We must design for shareability. Tools must be equipped for people to use them. If you’re publishing a lot of maps, your website should have the map endpoint on your site, so others can take and use it.

MapBox is also looking at building large data browsers that will support applications. The Sahel Food Crisis site is open for collaboration on Github.


Richard Stronkman (@rstronkman) is founder of Twitcident, another service to listen to the voice of the community during incidents. So much information is produced, with 400 million tweets per day. It’s a lot of noise, but when there’s a crisis, the information rates go up.

Early warning to identify increased risks and potential incidents.
And when incidents occur, they do crisis management.

In the Netherlands, they’ve worked with police forces, event security company, and the Dutch railway operator. On Queen’s Day, the Utrecht police force asked them to produce a map of incidents in a real-time dashboard. The team was able to identify threats towards the Royal family, leading to police visits.

At summer carnaval, the team worked to intervene against false rumor propagation. They found rumors at an early stage, and helped the police publicly disprove rumors early in the process before the rumors took off.

The team was able to identify a lack of drinking water at a large scale water fight early in the event, and help organizers react.

The group publishes their findings as academic research and in the technical press.


Shadrock Roberts (@Shadrocker) works at USAID’s Geo Center. The USAID Development Credit Authority uses credit guarantees to encourage local banks to lend to underserved communities. They wanted to map their work to see how they could do it better. They had a beautiful dataset of 100,000 records over the program’s 12-year history, but the location information was all over the place.

The Geo Center team cleaned up the dataset with a hybrid human-computer method. An automatic process parsed the easy fixes, but they raised a lot of eyebrows when they suggested crowdsourcing the remainder. They built an application on Data.gov. The technical infrastructure was a hurdle, but so were the legal policies restraining how the agency could use the data. They cozied up to the lawyers and received help from VTCs to clarify what volunteers would do with the data.

Involving volunteers went beyond crowdsourced tasks. Volunteers began a much broader discussion about development and the Development Credit Authority. Social media mentions of the organization went up significantly. 300 volunteers took on 10,000 records in 16 hours with 85% accuracy.

The goal wasn’t just a map, but to make the data open for others. You can find it by Googling “USAID Crowdsourcing Transparency” or tweeting at @USAID_credit.


Jerri Husch is here to talk Action Intelligence. How do we make sense of the massive amounts of data. Like electrical outlets, we have competing standards and cultural influences in different places. Jerri argues that we need an adaptable standard. If we look at societies from afar, we might make the mistake of assuming everything’s objective. But the world doesn’t work that way. A cricket is a pest in one place, and a delicacy in another.

Action Intelligence allows us to manage and analyze multiple dimensions and link data. We need to know who’s doing what, where, when. We need the data immediately in a crisis, and we need it around for the long-term as legacy data.

They can link actors to one another, or link actors to actions.

The process goes like this:
1. Collect data, often with university teams, in standardized ways
2. Classify and code that data, by place and time, at micro or macro levels
3. Visualize the data. They use free, open source tools, which allows for an adaptable standard that works anywhere in the world.


Andrew Turner (@ajturner), formerly of GeoIQ, has joined ESRI as CTO of their Research & Development Center.

“Big Data” means different things to different people, but we know it’s huge. In a crisis, with very short, life-threatening situations, data can help. In Haiti, crowdsourced information was really good, but still needed someone on the ground to act on the information.

GIS analysis lets us count and look at geospatial analysis of information. We need to evolve and build learning algorithms, because our current techniques are pretty easily fooled. @Racerboy8 provided useful data from his house during the Colorado wildfires, but his house wasn’t actually in danger. He was just being helpful.

In the NYC Marathon last year, FEMA looked at sensors throughout the crowd to visualize the crowd’s movement over time and space.

We can model situations before they occur, and detect communities in advance of a crisis.


Anahi Ayala (@anahi_ayala) works for Internews, which supports local media across the globe to empower communities. Anahi’s at the Center for Innovation and Learning, looking at how to incorporate new technologies.

Merging crowdsourced data with official information has proven difficult because of the difficult of verification. In the Ukrainian elections, they’re collecting information not only from social media, but also trained electoral monitors and journalists. Users can see verified reports vs. untrusted sources on a map.

The team dissects all of the information that comes in in an attempt to verify. They look at the context, the content, and the source of the information. There are digital traces everywhere online. Who are you already friends with, followed by, directly engaging with?

The content itself can be verified. We can crowdsource, triangulate, follow up with the source, and look at the weather in the video you submitted.

Every event occurs in a context in a country. Reports can be verified based on knowledge of the existing situation in a place and time.

Everyone’s adopting their own verification methods. Yes, falsification of information is always possible. But so is verification. Machine learning makes verification faster and cheaper for organizations. The question today is not whether or not you can verify information, but how to make it of high enough quality and timely enough to be acted upon.


Kuo-Yu Slayer Chuang (@darkensiva) goes by Slayer. He brings us back to the Titanic, which sank in a time when SOS technology wasn’t standardized. Open GeoSMS is a standard that combines SMS and location. Smartphones can embed all sorts of geo information in messages. They are designing a user-centric application to make collaboration easier.


Lars Peter Nissen (@ACAPSproject)
How do we make sure the data we collect actually becomes useful for decisionmakers?
Mistakes happen in large-scale, multi-agency responses. Potential impact is stymied.
In Haiti, we only used 1/3 of the data gathered. That’s a waste of the effort exerted collecting that data.

Disasters are never what we expect. Decisions are made when they have to be made, not at some ideal point in time. And we’ll always have massive information gaps, with plenty of known unknowns and unknown unknowns.

Three principles:
1. Know what you need to know. It sounds obvious, but do you?
2. Make sense, not data. Don’t collect data if you don’t know what you’ll use it for.
3. Don’t be precisely right, be approximately right.

With Internews, they designed the GEO, Global Emergency Overview. A snapshot gives you a quick overview of what’s happening, globally. Short summaries provide a basic understanding of specific crises. Then, you can drill down into 20-page analyses that help you discriminate between different types of needs in the fields.


Sara Farmer (@bodaceacat) is a core team member at Standby Task Force. It’s 2 years old with 1,000 volunteers. They’re generally known for turning social media feeds into maps. But they’re not just about information; they’re also about knowledge and analysis. They support HXL and other standards.

Their Disaster Needs Analysis (DNA) reports provide information about locales before disasters occur. Teams investigated and mapped available data for countries. They created baseline indicator sets, and set up a workflow to collect, store, and distribute the data. A fleet of scrapers converted online data into machine-readable tables. The data was cleaned into standard formats for country names, dates, and geo references. Gaps are filled in with estimates and proxies. Expert (Hunchworks) also help fill in the data.


Phil Harris (@geofeedia) sees every demographic using social media more and more. It’s not just Facebook and Twitter – there are image-rich services that didn’t exist two years ago. Smartphones drive more user generated content.

They set geofences on London and monitored the Olympics, aggregating 175,000 posts from YouTube, Twitter, Flickr, Picasa, and Instagram. Instagram’s a surprisingly large source of posts (36%). Only 31% of the posts contain keywords like London or Olympics. The majority of these pots wouldn’t have been tracked by traditional keyword search methods. Geofeedia sells a service to monitor social media.


Colleen McCue (@geoeye) works in geospatial predictive analytics. Again, we can learn a lot from private sector marketers. Product positioning in the supermarket is critical. Location also matters when you’re talking about bad actors in the humanitarian world. The Lord’s Resistance Army has struck over the borders of several African nations. We can target them based on past behavior. And we can segment the population by crime types, like marketers. Looting, abduction, incidental homicides, and murders produce different geospatial patterns. Individual factors can influence violent crimes. Roads and porters are critical to a successful abduction. IDP camps and other population clusters are attractive to the LRA, just as banks are attractive to thieves.

“Distance from murders” turns out to be a major factor in instances of isolated murders, suggesting a key behavioral difference from incidental homicides that occur over the course of another crime. The group is compiling signature profiles of different behaviors, and using advanced analytics to produce actionable recommendations prior to events occurring.


Kalev Leetaru brings us back to 38,000 years ago, where we find the first written records. 550 years ago, we get the printing press. Today, we’re producing incredible amounts of information and written records as a species.

The history of conflict can teach us about the present. We can visualize NGO reports and the global media tone towards a nation like Egypt or a leader like Mubarak to see when they’ve lost global credibility. We can track geographic affinity for a leader like Osama bin Laden. We can map conflicts within a nation by various factors.


Dave Warner is “dangerously over-educated and works in a memo-free environment.” He wants to make smart people smarter and explode the dots on the map into more complicated pins that contain significantly more information. His maps look much more like something out of a strategy video game than GIS software.

Dave mapped an audience by their WIkipedia entries, and academics by geography across the country.

Social media as a giant human sensor network critical to the survival of the human race

“The tribe has grown,” Robert Kirkpatrick notes, looking out at the audience.

Robert’s the Director of UN Global Pulse. There’s been a lot of data in the crisis mapping community for some time, but it required pro-active collection. Now, we can observe in real time and on massive scale what people are already sharing with each other. And perhaps even more transformative is the “digital exhaust”, the data we generate just by using services around the world. We interact not just with each other, but with businesses and maps and search. The private sector has spent trillions of dollars building the cloud, and now we have human sensor networks that map immediately to human needs. We can passively observe collective human behavior in realtime.

This is not the world in which the United Nations was founded. Everything moves faster now. The pace of change has absolutely exploded, and I don’t think it’s ever going to slow down. Realtime isn’t just faster; it’s fundamentally different, and requires different rules.

2011 was a pretty significant year for data. More data was created last year than all of human existence before. Facebook hit a billion people last week. If social networks were countries, they’d be the top six populous countries in the world.

Mobiles, cloud, and social combine to produce ever larger amounts of data.

Jakarta is the tweeting-est city on earth. When we map the tweets, it’s clear that Indonesians spend a lot of time sitting in traffic. They take tons of photos, too.

The point of all this data?

Hopefully,
1. Better early warning to detect trends, anomalies, and allow earlier response
2. Real-time awareness, with a better picture of needs supporting more effective planning and implementation
3. Real-time feedback to understand sooner where needs are changing, or not being met, to allow for more rapid iteration

The point of real-time data is that we get the information in time to do something with it. The feedback loop allows us to intervene and change the story before it’s over. Months-old nutrition data does little to help hungry people.

There are many research areas to explore, from preparedness to migration to climate change adaptation. Huge populations are moving to urban slums. Program Monitoring and Evaluation keeps coming up — can we get faster feedback on whether our programs are having the desired effect, rather than wait until the 3 year program cycle is over? And can we use some of these data techniques to approximate statistics? Mobile providers have modeled phone usage and can project, with 80% accuracy, a user’s gender and age.

As an example, let’s look at how we can use mobile networks as drought sensors in the Sahel.

Problems, we’ve got
Privacy, validation, access to data, and that most existential of questions: does it actually change anything? If the organization responsible doesn’t act, does it matter if we have all of this data and its insights?

Big data is a huge human rights issue, but it’s a source of tremendous risk, as a raw public good. Three draft guidelines:

  1. Never analyze personally-identifiable data
  2. Never analyze confidential data
  3. Never seek to re-identify individuals

Rob finds a space between Mark Zuckerberg and the nation of Germany in the spectrum of whether data privacy is pointless or sacrosanct. It’s a public good, but it comes with risks.

User-generated data poses additional challenges. People lie. Dark areas on a social network map don’t represent areas not worth tweeting about; our sensor network is unevenly distributed.

NLP isn’t great at sentiment, particularly sarcasm or irony. A tweet can contain gigabytes of context instantly apparent to a brain with hundreds of thousands of neurons, and nothing to a computer.

Behavioral data has selection bias from the start.

Media coverage itself drives behavior change, so it’s tricky to measure cause and effect.

Apophenia: We sometimes think we see trends where there are none. Correlation is not causality.

This crowd data is faster. It’s not a replacement for the hard evidence and existing methods. But its speed can change outcomes.

Telescopes and macroscopes each have their own issues. 96% of the universe is dark energy or dark matter, which doesn’t reflect light. Likewise, most of our data is behind corporate firewalls or is otherwise unshareable. So much of the information about people is not available to the people charged with representing them and ensuring they are healthy. Can we find a way to share data that doesn’t compromise business or privacy?

The future of the human race

This isn’t just about corporate social responsibility. If we could get the private sector to engage in sharing some of this data in a way that doesn’t produce business risk… Many business recognize that this volatile world is a terrible climate for business. We need a global real-time public/private data commons. Which models, tools, and technologies would allow a data commons to work for everyone?

“We think a data commons is the only way we are going to survive as a species for the next 100 years.”

Getting there will require safe space for experimentation. Many attempts will not work, but need to be tried.

Pulse Lab Jakarta is a shared facility with data scientists, research fellows, and private companies with tools and data to share. They’re actively recruiting partners to experiment in the most social-media-rich area of the world.

Additional labs will follow. Kampala, in east Africa, is less of a social media hub, but offers extraordinary opportunities for financial data. Makassar, in South Sulawesi, and Medan, in North Sumatera, are also regions of focus.

Issues of interest include food prices, urban poverty, and financial behavior.

The UN is a platform, which requires partners. They partner with governments to establish Pulse Labs, conduct research, and make it available to the world.

Their approach uses different data sources for various purposes. Twitter’s great for food prices, and useless for fears about job security. They correlate this information with official data sources, and visualize trends and map the results.

Some tools:

  1. ForSight gets a shoutout for monitoring conversations based on keywords. The global soybean shortage leads to a big spike in conversations about tofu and tempeh.
  2. Global Pulse also uses SAS’s Social Media Analytics and Text Miner tools
  3. They’re using linear regression analysis of social media conversations to determine if they can predict inflation of certain types of food. When prices go up, people tweet about that food. Except eggs. Indonesians tweet more about eggs as the price drops (“Mmm…omelet”).

Does this finding apply elsewhere? We’re going to need to map what these findings mean, and where they apply.

Our social media signals are getting stronger. People talk about basic needs using social media more than they used to. And the temporal correlation is growing stronger, too. Greater distribution of the human sensor network improves our results.

Our weather tools are pretty sophisticated because they pull from a large number of weather stations AND algorithmic detectors. Could we do the same for the monitoring of human networks?

This community is at an inflection point. The data’s everywhere, the tools are taking off, and the future’s exciting.

A word from the #ICCM Sponsors

  • Neils Holms-Nielsen, of the World Bank and the Global Facility for Disaster Recovery and Reduction, says this event is quite important for them. The cost of disasters annually has grown for the past several decades, much faster than the global economy (not that the global economy is growing too quickly, these days). This is a problem from a development point of view. For about half of the world’s nations, disasters pose a significant hurdle to development. Neils is heartened by the people, ideas, and technologies represented in the room. The World Bank cannot address this problem on its own, and looks to build stronger partnerships and relations with the emerging field of volunteer technology communities.
  • Salim Saway works on ESRI‘s Global Affairs team. They’ve attended all four CrisisMappers conferences, and sponsored the last three. They support the disaster relief community with data, tools, and licenses.
  • Christiaan Adams is here representing Google’s Crisis Response team. They’re excited by the data, collection of imagery, open tools, standards for sharing, and other developments. He says that crises force us to think faster and more creatively than usual, and encourage an environment of community and collaboration.
  • Tara Cordyack of GeoEye points out the critical need for commercially-available satellite imagery in a crisis. Time and time again, having this imagery leads to lives saved, money saved, and infrastructure saved. They’re happy to support this community with imagery and analytical services.
  • Dan Palmer, professor of Computer Science at John Carroll University. They hosted the first CrisisMappers conference. They’re a Jesuit university focused on helping others, social justice, and engaging with the world. On campus, they have a Center for Crisis Mapping, working in crowdsourcing and spatial analysis. It’s not a single academic discipline or department. Sociologists, computer scientists, and many more fields are brought into the mix. They are planning an expedition to Uganda to map resources.
  • Camille Cassidy of Digital Globe also provides earth imagery, with three satellites providing imagery for a range of uses.

 

Look Who’s Talking: Non-Profit Newsmakers in the New Media Age

Liveblog of the first Media Lab Conversations event of the semester, with help from Nathan Matias and Molly Sauter. You can view tweets from this event here.

“We’re a nonprofit, and we’re moving into the media business.”

Carroll Bogert (@carrollbogert) is the Deputy Executive Director for External Relations at Human Rights Watch. She also spent more than a decade as a reporter, bureau chief and editor of international news at Newsweek. Since 1978, Human Rights Watch (HRW) is one of the leading human rights organizations.

There are two threads of international advocacy. You have researchers in the field, traveling and gathering information much like a journalist, pen and notepad in hand. And then there are the people who meet at tables in suits. HRW’s work stretches all the way from the personal testimonies collected in villages to strategic meetings at the upper echelons of international institutions.

How big is Human Rights Watch? Their annual budget is $64 million, none of it from governments. They have 358 staff spread across 48 locations worlwdide

To illustrate research, she shows us a photo of a Human Rights Watch researcher interviewing people who are experiencing the Naxalite conflict. To illustrate advocacy, she shows a meeting between HRW and the Mexican president Calderón about people who have been affected by the drug war in Mexico.

How can research be applied to create social change? Carroll boils the process down to three steps:

  • Investigate (gathering)
  • Expose (communicate)
  • Making Change based on facts

Their researchers arrive in places like Sierra Leone and conduct research, gather interviews, and fact-check to determine whether or not an event like a massacre has taken place. The facts they uncover are heavy, and can have impact in the world if they are then reported and communicated more broadly.

Specific facts and information can be used tactically, at the right place and right time, to create change. Carroll tells us a story from her journalism days. In a room with the leader of a country that had violently repressed protests, the conversation with journalists was going nowhere. Then, someone from HRW stood up and offered a pointed question based on well-documented research. The leader squirmed, the reporters focused, and the dialogue was shifted.

Information and communications is central to the methodology of HRW’s work. Other NGOs come to media as an afterthought, when it comes time to fundraise. HRW takes pride in sharing some DNA with journalists as fellow information-providers. The group is happy to adopt the newswire style to help their reporting blend into the broader media environment. They structure their press releases like news pieces, complete with ledes and compelling quotes, and have seen steadily rising media mentions as a result.

The web has made their work more visual and opened new audiences to human rights content. But at the same time, it’s blown a hole in the budgets of traditional news organizations and hampered their ability to conduct international news-gathering.

HRW has used photos from photographers like Brent Stirton, Tim Hetherington, Marcus Bleasdale, and Platon. Carroll attributes the involvement of such talented photographers’ to the basic human need to share the awful things you’ve seen with others. Photographers want to be involved in the solution to the atrocities they’ve witnessed.

The organization now produces multimedia releases, with edited and disaggregated formats of video available. News editors can grab finished, produced pieces, or take and use raw footage for their own pieces. We watch a BBC story that makes use of HRW-provided video as well as a live interview with a HRW correspondent.

Other news organizations have lifted their video without attribution. This doesn’t bother Carroll in her role as an HRW employee who wants to disseminate the videos far and wide. But it raises questions for journalism, she says, when news organizations gather footage from third parties without identifying their sources.

The group has released a report on torture taking place in Syria. It includes extensive maps, gps coordinates, witness statements, and photographs.
Again, a press release of an embeddable interactive map of toture centers in Syria provides a hook for news organizations to further amplify the report’s findings.

Carroll has drawn on her experience as Russian editor for Newsweek to work to spread the Syria report in that country’s media. Russia provides a complicated media environment for HRW’s work. The country has free newspapers, but there are also clear pressures from the government.

Carroll considers HRW an original news producer in today’s complicated media environment. Google News now treats the organization as a news provider like any other, and they’ve won two Peabody Awards for their work.

Distribution remains a major challenge. They still reach the largest audience if the mainstream media picks up a story. Mainstream media coverage also reinforces social media discussion.

HRW.org reaches 600,000 unique visitors a month, and they maintain a YouTube Channel and Arabic, French, Japanese, Spanish, and German Twitter accounts. They have a lot of Facebook fans, but aren’t sure yet what this means.

What is the right balance between the short form content that the Internet requires and the long form content that HRW is known for, which gives them their credibility? They don’t want to follow the mainstream media into a “hail of Twitter bursts.” They want to be a bulwark against culture. They want to do heavily-researched, time-invested work that others aren’t doing.

HRW is accustomed to producing around 100 reports a year. That’s now falling as they diversify the formats that they’re producing. What’s the right number? They also want an audience, but their purpose is not to inform the public: they’re not targeting a mainstream audience. At the end of the day, they want their information to change the minds of people whose choices make a difference. That’s why they try to occupy the information sources that people in power pay attention to. This “acupunctural advocacy” is different from having the widest possible audience.

Given their limited resources (and a digital team of 3), what is the right strategy for engagement? Should they focus on supplying the mainstream media with content, or should they reach out directly to new audiences online?

Questions
Ethan begins the conversational portion of the talk by contrasting HRW’s targeted audience strategy (targeting decision-makers) with KONY 2012’s pursuit of huge numbers of easily-influenced teenagers. Advocacy organizations are working very, very hard to get attention and sway the minds of policymakers, and there is some diversity in how careful these groups are with the facts. Who wins between HRW’s dense reports and Kony 2012’s slick documentaries? (See Ethan’s post on Kony2012 and his followup post. Listen to Michael Poffenberger of TheResolve.org talk about the Kony2012 campaign at the MIT-Knight Civic Media Conference earlier this year).

Carroll says that HRW is certainly aware of the KONY effect, and have produced their own video postcards, using video to allow victims in the Congo to appeal directly to US President Obama for military intervention. The group doesn’t know if it affected any policy, but do know the video was watched by people in the White House. Kony 2012, likewise, has generated millions of views and set records, but it’s not clear if it has changed US policy.

Ethan hones in on the tension between the production of compelling video and staying true to the facts. He mentions a recent rap video by FARC which claims that they’re undefeated and keen for peace. How does HRW navigate this landscape? And doesn’t it get complicated when countless other organizations are producing videos to gain a finite amount of attention?

Carroll responds that because HRW’s strategy is to influence decision-makers, they would never make a video as sensationalist as KONY2012. They rely on the media as intermediaries between themselves and the public, and focus on reaching reporters with verified content. The organization is quoted in the New York Times on a near-daily basis.

Ethan mentions his last interaction with Human Rights Watch, over the mismatch between HRW’s research cycle and the speed of bloggers over the story of an Israeli attack on Lebanese Red Cross ambulances. Misinformation moves quickly online, and groups like HRW do the long, difficult research work. Carroll quotes a HRW researcher who summarized this balance to her: “Carroll, it’s your job to make my work shorter, punchier, and faster, and it’s my job to resist you.”

There are atrocities happening around the world, Ethan says, but we’re more likely to pay attention to some than others. How does HRW think about agenda-setting and balance their spotlight across all of the global crises?

Carroll admits that there are more human rights abuses than they have time to cover. They use four criteria to determine their agenda:

  1. How serious is the abuse, how badly are people being hurt?
  2. Does HRW have the resources and staff and knowledge to address the situation?
  3. Do they have the right partners on the ground who will stay on the issue and run with the report?
  4. Is the time right? Is there something in the zeitgeist that suggests HRW’s involvement could make a difference?

HRW is OK covering subjects that most people aren’t going to read. They want their work to be covered, but refuse to determine their agenda based on perceptions of what will interest a wide audience. Their researchers need to be ready to pounce at the split second the global media is suddenly focused on their specific area of expertise.

Audience Q&A
Alex wonders how the group’s reporting of the Nigerian story (A Heavy Price: Lead Poisoning and Gold Mining in Nigeria’s Zamfara State) was designed to effect change.
HRW’s Health and Human Rights division produced the video and showed it at a conference of health professionals, where it resonated deeply. Attendees were thankful that the video was able to transport these peoples’ voices from their homes to the conference.

George wonders about the different forms of influence that HRW aims to achieve, and how they go about it.

When Carroll thinks about expanding the audience of HRW, she is thinking about expanding the people in power who pay attention to them.

She tells us a story from Samantha Power’s book A Problem from Hell: the Human Rights Watch researcher in Rwanda is put off by the “politician’s dodge: my phone isn’t ringing about it.” Carroll doesn’t think it’s possible to make that phone ring.

The group conducted a survey at the State Department and on Capitol Hill to find out what these policymakers read (report PDF). The New York Times’ international reporting remains hugely influential, but there has also been a dramatic shift to mobile. If The West Wing were shot today, the walk & talk scenes would see the characters staring at their iPhones. If you can’t communicate your message to that attention span, you’ll fail to communicate.

Ethan responds: isn’t this the case for the limits of Human Rights Watch? Aren’t there times where there needs to be a major policy shift quickly? If you have a major shift in public will, do you think you might have a different outcome? What if we got people on social media talking about it, might that start to matter alongside the New York Times?

Carroll doesn’t think so. Public pressure on complex situations, by the public, is not something she thinks she’ll see in her timeline. She asks us: why, as an act of foreign policy, did Clinton go to war in Yugoslavia? He didn’t do it because it was popular in the United States. He did it because of a steady drumbeat in the New York Times and Washington Post that made him feel like that was the best thing to do. Carroll points out that there are a lot of problems with so called humanitarian military intervention. But she does think that articles in the mainstream media are of primary importance in influencing power.

Charlie De Tar says there’s a dichotomy between gathering facts and actual research. If the organization knew which of the two was more effective, would they drop one or the other, and what would those metrics look like?

Carroll’s focused the definition of impact. They consider impact to mean a long-term change in law or policy or international treaty or enforcement. Freeing an individual person from jail is less interesting to them than changing a long-term policy that will affect many.

Carroll notes that our children can have a powerful influence on our behavior as powerful adults. Teenage sons and daughters judge our actions, and Carroll hasn’t ruled out giving a talk at certain schools in Washington, DC, where certain policymakers’ children are students.

Nick Patterson of the Broad Institute points out that human rights violations are sometimes justifications for going to war. He wonders if they noticed that policymakers are also using them.

Carroll says that they have in fact noticed this and that they sometimes call for investigations of US policymakers for acts of torture and other ill-treatment of detainees. They don’t have any way to protect themselves of being used, but they are in fact able to

Sasha Costanza Chock: The US has the highest incarceration rate in the world, higher than Rwanda and Russia. Human rights abuses are rampant inside this system.

Research has a key role to play in challenging the ballooning for profit prisons. For example, today the National Justice for Families Coalition and datacenter.org released this report about youth incarceration. Does HRW face special difficulties getting attention in the US press for human rights abuses here in the US?

Carroll responds: No. It’s always hard to get media attention, but it’s easier to get attention if their stories are in the United States. They actually release more reports about the United States than any part of the world (not because the US is the worst violator of human rights). All the same, it’s hard to get policy impact, particularly for their work on immigration. In general, the media everywhere are more interested in their own countries.

Marco asks if the group’s focus is too broad, or if they would do better to foster community with a more narrow focus. Carroll remains skeptical of working to accrue large numbers of followers on online platforms like Twitter when compared to reaching the few people who will truly change policy.

Ethan wonders if the common man and woman reading the New York Times are just collateral damage on the path to reaching policymakers. Is it a missed opportunity to reach and educate them, but leave it at that?

Carroll asks us to contribute our time and knowledge and energy to take the information Human Rights Watch has made available and make it travel. If you have the online skills or an audience, you would do HRW a favor to help disseminate their research. HRW is not a membership organization; they are a highly professionalized NGO with a very small staff doing very specific things. But outsiders can help, and making HRW’s information move is one clear way to do so.

An audience member asks about the Russian media: how does Human Rights Watch overcome the standard narratives that dominate media coverage?

Carroll responds that Russian media are often very surprised to hear from Human Rights Watch. They have been more successful than they expected. More generally, individual journalists have their own tendencies and ways of seeing the world. Human Rights Watch tries to reach individual journalists with stories that are packaged in a way that appeals to them.

Larry, a former AP reporter, mentions how many nonprofits and universities are now funding journalism. He thinks that there’s a lot of distortion in that process; those funders are able to shape what gets covered. Has Human Rights Watch considered directly funding papers; is it financially tenable?

Carroll thinks it’s important to distinguish between journalists funded by Foundations and nonprofits like Human Rights Watch that are moving into the media business. She doesn’t think Human Rights Watch would want to fund outside journalists to do their work. They use journalistic talent to produce good pieces of journalism (though she wonders if you can call it journalism if comes from Human Rights Watch). Susan Meiselas has expressed that she wants HRW to support the profession of photojournalism. Carroll says that beyond hiring photojournalists, there’s not much they can do.

An audience member asks: Why have a research-led projects when you could collect just what your targeted powerful people need to create change? Carroll says that Human Rights Watch is moving increasingly in that direction. In addition to researchers, HRW now has a growing number of advocacy staff who work with governments and other powerful actors in national capitols. The needs of those advocates is increasingly shaping the research agenda.

How Not to Use Social Media Towards Civic Ends

“Parking Douche” is one of those ideas that seems brilliant at first, and then, upon a minute’s further reflection, fatally flawed. It’s a project by The Village, a Russian online newspaper. The Android app asks you to document people who park like jerks with your phone (much like You Park Stupid and You Park Like an Asshole, the latter of which encourages anonymous note-leaving).

Parking Douche took the internet by storm back in May, where it was featured everywhere from Mashable to BoingBoing to the Huffington Post. The internet is the perfect medium for these one-off videos promoting a seemingly clever idea. The posts about this video are nearly identical across all of the properties that posted it, with few expressing any skepticism. Ideas like Parking Douche grab us instantly, for three reasons:

  1. Seeing people park and drive like jerks is as widespread an experience as cars themselves
  2. We love seeing FAILs, and parking fails are practically an official subgenre. The ability to not only document, but shame a failure that has personally inconvenienced you to wider audience is a superpower that pre-internet citizens could only dream of
  3. This app bundles these two truths with the latest in “digital media” technology, including a mobile app and geo-targeted advertising
How great is it that users also viewed a “Find My Car” app?

The project differs from its predecessors in its promise to advertise the license plate and make and model of the offending vehicle across the local area (as determined by IP address targeting). It’s a clever repurposing of ad targeting tools towards civic ends, but also a clear attempt to shoehorn social media to solve a problem that should really be handled by local government (enforcement of parking rules with parking tickets).

The clever idea breaks down further when you realize that it achieves virality with site takeover ads (not popups, as the video says, but full takeovers) AND coercive Facebook sharing tactics (you must share to get the ad to go away, violating Facebook’s terms).

One effect of audience fragmentation across a host of channels is that the front page of the local newspaper isn’t quite as powerful a shaming mechanism as it used to be. In our Participatory News class last spring, Ethan Zuckerman argued that in the past, people might behave at least in part because they wanted to avoid being shamed in the news. The corollary of this argument is that the dilution of the mainstream media’s authority also dilutes the power of this socially useful shaming mechanism. As their audiences go a thousand different places, we lose the common platform on which to name & shame people who park like idiots (or commit more serious infractions).

And if there’s one thing we know about douchebags, it’s that they actually crave this sort of attention. Running ads promoting their car and their selfish parking handiwork to their local area could actually provide just the sort of attention they crave deep down, like a sophisticated advertising-network-based replacement for their trucker hat.

You’re More Powerful as a Customer than as a Citizen (and that’s bad)

If you’re an early adopter, you likely sign up for a wide range of new products and services. A number of these startups inevitably fold, and then you receive their closing-shop emails. The correspondence making up this genre tends to be fairly upbeat and concise, painting over what are surely far more lurid tales of unrealized dreams and blown investments. The email I received announcing the demise of Moxy Vote broke with this pattern and offered an unusually candid, clear explanation of how and why they failed. And their failure points to a strategic problem today’s would-be social changemakers face.

If you’re frustrated by the state of our country and the world, and have been thinking about the need to operate a wider range society’s levers to create social change, Moxy Vote was for you. It was one of those ideas so brilliant, you end up evangelizing it despite having no ties whatsoever to the effort. Something like a third of all publicly traded shares are owned by your average retail (armchair) investors. Because each of our 401ks represents such a small percentage of a major corporation, we ignore our shareholder voting privileges even more than we ignore our citizen voting privileges. Moxy Vote was based on the premise that if we were to get together in any meaningful numbers, we could begin to have real sway with the powerful corporations that we are, at the end of the day, investing our earnings in. They sought to allow retail shareholders to vote online, and even automatically vote in support of positions taken by personally trusted nonprofit groups (e.g. environmental organizations). This shareholder organizing successfully pressured a number of corporations to make decisions that were better for board diversity, division of power, animal rights, and the environment, among other victories.

Shareholder rights is an avenue of activism that has received significant attention because of the disastrous Citizens United decision that opened the floodgates for corporate spending in our elections. If our voice as a citizen is completely drowned out by SuperPACs, the thought goes, perhaps our voice as a consumer can still resonate. Fittingly enough, Moxy Vote’s tagline was “Let your voice be heard.” Today, fulfilling that promise requires stock ownership.

We’re seeing this strategy play out on a number of fronts. Corporate lobbyists have successfully filed down the teeth of most government regulations, but many consumer-facing companies are still quite sensitive to their brand reputation. In today’s world, we’re more likely to convince a company to do the right thing with our Twitter accounts than with our federal government. Advocacy groups like Greenpeace have realized this twist of fate and adjusted accordingly, shifting their attention to consumer-driven brand campaigns, from Apple to Barbie to Shell. Change.org, for its part, enables a long tail of citizen-driven public pressure campaigns and regularly helps petitioners adjust their sights towards still-sensitive targets (think movie studio press offices rather than congressional committee chairs).

The institutions we trust to run our society are broken (See: SEC oversight, congressional inaction, etc.). We’ve adjusted by shifting our energy from our increasingly symbolic civic powers to our still relevant consumer powers. Campaigns like Bank Transfer Day focus on specific, concrete financial actions that consumers can take to create impact with or without the permission of co-opted public offices. Billions of dollars were transferred to local credit unions as part of Bank Transfer Day. Nearly 200,000 people signed up for the (admittedly wonky) Moxy Vote service.

Yet Moxy Vote’s demise highlights the limits of this approach to activism. First, our agency as citizens in a democracy should outweigh our capabilities as customers in a market. But more immediately, the significant changes we need still require going through our slow and probably corrupted public institutions. Moxy Vote was a brilliant idea to allow us to create change through our capitalist identities rather than our democratic selves, but at the end of the day, they ran into the same bank-controlled quagmire that controls the rest of our economy:

1. Individual shareholders have no legal grounds to compel their brokers to deliver ballots electronically to internet voting platforms. And, unfortunately, many brokerage firms have stated clearly to us that they will send them only when required to do so by regulators.
2. Proxy distribution/collection agents are presently charging significant fees to internet voting platforms for vote collection – a fee that should be paid by public companies and one that proves substantially more burdensome to individual voters than institutional voters.

In the face of institutional inaction, we naturally pivot into the areas where we still wield some power. While these efforts are exciting and lately, the only approach that seems to work, this cannot be our ultimate strategy.