Computer magic

Smarter Cities, Better Use of Resources?

Dr. Lisa AminiIf you’ve read a magazine or traveled through an airport in the last couple of years, you’ve probably seen ads for IBM’s Smarter Cities initiative. Today in our Post-Oil Shanghai course, we got to learn about some of the projects behind the very public campaign. Dr. Lisa Amini is the first director of IBM Research Ireland, based in Dublin. They focus on creating urban-scale analytics, optimizations, and systems for sustainable energy and transportation.

Lisa’s group focuses on transforming cities with:

  1. Sensor data assimilation: how do we ensure data accuracy, and account for the volume of data that comes in from sensors deployed at a metropolitan scale?
  2. Modelling human demand: how do we design a robuest enough model to reliabily infer demand and peoples’ use of city infrastrucure
  3. Factor in uncertainty: we’re talking about humans, here.

Sensor Data
Smarter CitiesWe have a massive amount of diverse, noisy data, but our ability to use it productively is quite poor.

One reason Lisa’s team is based in Ireland is that Dublin shared their municipal data on energy, water, and other core services. IBM wanted to focus on making use of available data, not laying down new sensors. Lisa shows us a map generated by bus data. The data is much more granular at the city center than in the suburban outreaches. And even downtown, the GPS isn’t terribly accurate, and sometimes locates buses smack dab in the middle of the River Liffey. This complicates efforts to infer and improve the situational awareness.

Bus bunching is a major problem in cities. Buses that begin ten minutes apart get slowed down, and end up clustered in bunches, with long waits in between. One goal is to dynamically adjust schedules and routes to compensate for predictable bunching conditions.

Another project looks to improve traffic signalling, not just for public transportation, but all traffic. Scientists are finding links between vehicle emissions and health, and certain urban corridors and certain times see a dangerous buildup of pollutants. Smarter planning could help us at least prevent this buildup from taking place around schools and hospitals.

Lisa talks about Big Data, but also Fast Data. It’s continuously coming at you, and if you can leverage it in realtime, it can be much more useful than a study conducted well after the fact. Her team is working on technology to make use of data as it comes in, and construct realtime models and optimizations. They can see bus lane speed distribution across an entire city of routes and a fleet of a thousand buses, accounting for anomalies past and present.

Sensor data’s great, but what do you do when a segment of the bus route is flashing red? Often, a disruption requires a person going to the scene to find out what’s wrong. The IBM team is experimenting with using Natural Language Processing data to determine if the cause of traffic is a Madonna performance at the O2 Centre. They can analyze blogs, event feeds, and telco data. Twitter isn’t useful for this yet because of the low percentage of Twitter users with geocoding enabled on their tweets.

Congestion is a significant contributor to CO2 emissions, so proative traffic control is becoming an important tool. Europeans are more and moer concerned about the livability of their cities, and even when they’re not, the EU Commission is happy to regulate. Cities are excited to avoid paying heavy fines, and invest in technologies that help avoid such costs.

At the individual level, congestion charging only works if there’s a reasonable alternative to driving. Even then, Praveen notes, it creates equity issues, where the wealthy can afford to drive into the city, and the poor cannot.

Lisa’s team is also modeling coastal quality and circulation patterns. One of the big problems is the treatment of water in waste plants. These plants treat the water to a static chemical index, and then release the water back into the world. Marine life dies, and we have toxins in the water, because
Large rainfall creates road runoff into the wate system. And tidal conditions can push water back upstream and hold the toxins in place, killing marine life. People are deploying sensors across the water systems, which is a huge improvement on annual testing conducted by a diver. But sensors don’t work incredibly well underwater – they’re limited by range and “fouling” of data.

New technology uses light sensors to understand the movement of water, which, combined with other sensors and de-noising models, can produce a cleaner picture of what’s happening across the bodies of water.

Modelling Human Demand
How people move, interact, and how they prefer to consume resources.
They can improve city services by taking advantage of telco data, smart car data, and other private and public information. The findings show a surprising sapital cohesiveness of regions. Geography still plays a huge role in how we look for services, communicate, and travel. Cellphone path data can illustrate points of origin that can better inform the planning of transportation paths. Political lines are a particularly ineffective way to organize services.

In the energy space, two trends have converged: First, we have more and more renewable energies, but they’re only available when the wind blows and the sun shines (efforts to store this energy notwithstanding). Our fossil fuel power plants require careful management, and must be gradually. Ireland could actually use more windpower than they currently do, but it would have adverse effects on the traditional plants.

The second trend is smart meters, which provide much more information on how energy is used. This allows for demand shaping, dynamic pricing, and smart appliances that act based on this information. But the energy companies are structured around predicting national energy demands, and follow very conservative policies that optimize for fulfilling peak demand. Energy companies are learning to forecast energy demands for pockets, rather than huge regions, and to take advantage of reneweable energy sources with pilot projects. They foresee running hundreds of thousands of dynamic energy models, rather than their current one-model-that-rules-them-all.

A project with Électricité de France simulates massive amounts of realistic smart meter demand data to test future scenarios. They’re building additive models based on human events like holidays and residential vs. commercial energy usage. The IBM Research team has build complicated flowcharts to identify compelling datastreams.

Uncertainty
Utility leaders are forced to make decisions that are fraught with risk and uncertainty. It’s not just optimization, but social welfare and balancing competing costs. Lisa would like to incorporate the notion of risk into the technological systems. When your phone tells you there’s a 10% chance of rain today, it’s not very actionable information. Medical tests and treatment plans can be equally infuriating in that they fall short of complete predictability. How do you communicate information that carries risk with it so leaders can make decisions?

Interconnected water systems, with water treament plants, households, and geographical features demanding different priorities. Water utilities spend enormous amounts of energy moving water from one place to another, losing between 20-70% of the water along the way. We need to begin considering these systems as integrated, and acknowledge the risk and uncertainty inherent within them. When you start working on any one aspect of city services, you quickly involve other departments.

There have been many studies on providing energy and water information to homeowners to encourage conservation. The biggest change you can make? It’s not laundry or watering your lawn. Fix your leaky faucet.

Culture matters, too. Europeans expect more of their government, and citizens get up in arms when a resource like water becomes metered.

Rather than produce a perfect formula and answer to a question like municipal water demand levels, they have built models that allow for imperfections in data and can optimize for cost or service delivery.

An area of hope is to target non-experts with well-communicated information and visualizations of existing data.

What would you do if you had a city’s worth of data?
Lisa’s team is working to convince the city of Dublin to release more municipal data for others to make us of, following in the footsteps of Data.gov, Washington, DC, and San Francisco.

The Social City project seeks to better understand the social context of people in a city to better understand why certain groups of people aren’t getting the resources they need. The conditions in which these people live could be major drivers of why

Q&A

Sandra: Have you thought about incentivizing people, rather than just providing information?
Lisa: Incentives don’t need to be financial. One study found that knowing how other people like you behave has the ability to change individual behavior.

Praveen: Is it feasible to offset the cost of installing smart meters with the energy savings it provides?
Lisa: Right now, it’s still a net loss, because you still don’t have systems on the energy utlity side to take advantage of smart meters. But utilities know their time to adjust is limited, and governments are helping utilities to see that their time is limited.

People like to see immediate changes when they alter their behavior. Anything you can do to show people a change early in the feedback loop can be powerful (anecdotally).

Q: Can we do a better job of choosing sites for our buildings?

Lisa: There’s great data for this, but there are a lot of difference influencers. The telco data and the social context projects, for example, show just how many factors are at play. People may take advantage of a welfare system, but in the data, we often see them pop up once, and then disappear. They may register under different names. Cities know their service centers aren’t meeting peoples’ needs, often because of inconvenience of location.

Zack: There are a lot of policy implications in your work, and new technologies at play. You’re also in a position to educate policymakers and advocate for specific policies. What kind of barriers do you run into talking to those folks?

Lisa: Where it works is when you find some city leaders who are incredibly passionate about trying to do better and fix their city or some aspect of their city. Predominantly, people take these jobs because they do care about the city and services and infrastructure and making that better. The challenge is that a lot of policy and politics and regulations at larger levels that an individual leader can’t work around. Bus drivers’ union leaders were initially upset about the city sharing the Dublin buses’ GPS data. Are you going to spy on my lunchbreak?? Cities have histories and personalities and election cycles. Some people are afraid that the data will paint a negative picture of their work. Lisa compares it to the tide: sometimes you just can’t command it due to its scale. Leaders can’t yet prove a return on investment on a project because there’s so much uncertainty.

How to Surface the Valuable Resources All Around Us

I started my morning with an exciting (to me) development: Verizon had finally approved the Jelly Bean update to my Android phone. One of its features, Google Now, works like the iOS 6’s Passbook. Both systems pull from the vast number of things your phone and connected services know about you to surface relevant information when and where you need it. The day’s weather, the score of your favorite sports team, and traffic on your commute home are pushed to you so that you don’t even have to search. It was a fitting way to start the morning as I headed to the PhD. thesis defense of Polychronis Ypodimatopoulos (or Pol, or @ypodim, if you’re a fan of brevity).

The question that has guided Pol’s research is how we can enable people to easily tune in to what’s going on around them. When a curious mind walks into the Media Lab, how do they find out all of the amazing things happening inside this building? The Lab has Glass Infrastructure screens, but most other buildings do not.

The pain point here is the “If only I had known…” feeling. We work on projects similar to others, without ever connecting. We could better exchange products and services, engage in joint activity, or pool resources, like finding a roommate.

Cities offer many resources and opportunities, but navigation remains a daunting challenge. High rise buildings and crowds make us feel intimidated, not empowered. How can technology help us see our neighborhoods as the rich hives of potential they really are?

Pol’s answer is the decentralized social network. His first application was a mesh network on a mobile device that showed you what was around. Writing apps on multiple platforms and limitations of battery life were issues, though. So he moved the network to the cloud with Ego. Ego sought to put the user at the center of activity, with apps circling us, rather than our current model of competing platforms, where users revolve around sites like Facebook and Amazon.

Pol added indoor location-sharing to the mix with Bluetooth devices. The Twitter-like interface allows you to literally follow your friends. He charted the aggregate location results of two competing sessions at the same event, and could visualize the depressing effect poor venue selection has on the size of your audience.

The aforementioned Glass Infrastructure is a place-based social information system comprised of 40 touch screens placed around the building. It maps out the Media Lab’s many people, groups, and projects for visitors. By exposing this information in a public place for the first time, students rushed to update their projects and headshots (this novelty effect has worn off, however).

The GI architecture consists of a large touch screen in vertical orientation, which can read RFID tags on the nametags of passerby. This allows the infrastructure to provide different applications for different user classes (Media Labbers, sponsors, visitors).

The Bird’s Eye View application for the Glass Infrastructure provides a collage of faces. When you walk by the screen, your photo is pinned for the next 5 minutes so that others can see your recent presence and potentially reach out to you.

These two projects introduced a decentralized social network and a place-based social information system, but Pol sought to create a discovery mechanism that works across different contexts. Siri and Google Glass are interesting ways to present the information around us, but Pol thinks there’s room for improvement in creating the actual content of what’s interesting around us.

One such application is discovering the experts around us. This is usually done by starting with a corpus of information, such as emails or a forum, and then identify and suggest expertise. But when you’re in a new space, you don’t have such a corpus. FourSquare doesn’t tell us much about the people around us. Twitter has hashtags, but we have to advertise that hashtag’s existence before people know to use it. Starbird, et al. proposed hashtagging everything, which gets messy quickly. And combining Facebook + Highlight limits you to your existing social network’s reach.

Pol pulls up his own Facebook Profile. There’s a lot of information here, but it’s not enough to capture him, especially when you throw variables like location into the mix.

Brin.gy is a discovery service that centralizes our skills across users. It’s designed so that multiple discovery services could compete using the same format. You, the subject, list objects (topics) paired with a predicate (talk to me about these topics).

Pol simulated the discovery service with thousands of users at the scale of a city block. A coffee shop owner would be able to determine how many people walking by match the profile of a person likely to buy coffee. Pol sees this as a way to make markets more efficient, and let consumers group themselves to achieve better prices.

This being MIT, most of the skills listed in the demo are software development skills. Your personal taxonomy consists of tags for your skills, gender, and languages spoken. The average user contributed 15 values about themselves, which is actually the same amount of datapoints Pol found in Facebook Profiles.

Pol tested Brin.gy at O’Reilly Ignite Boston 9 to help attendees find people they might want to talk to. TED has actually produced a similar iPhone app, TEDConnect, with the same “Talk to me about” field.

This list of information doesn’t scale, though. It quickly becomes unwieldy. So Pol looked at exposing information selectively based on the user’s current context. The lists become applications based on specific geographically-defined areas depending on whether you’re looking for dinner or a study partner.

 

Pol also mined a useful Media Lab listserv discussion to extract the knowledge within and import it into Brin.gy. He mapped the tips and displayed . He asked users which format they preferred. People like the email thread for the personal touch and the contextual information provided in each email. But it takes a long time to digest many emails in a thread. Brin.gy extracted the valuable data, but not the personal stories behind it.

Q&A:

Me: Are we forever doomed to choose between inefficient but meaningful personal narratives and rich, if soulless, databases?

Pol has attempted to design a sweet spot between the two, and points to databases that link back to the personal context as a solution. Bring.gy provides a map with database entries of rich, concrete information, but each entry also shows the faces of the people who made the recommendation and a link to the email where they tell the story behind that great shot of espresso. You can have the best of both worlds.

Eyal asks if Pol has considered the emergency applications of such a skills database. Could we quickly determine if there’s a doctor in the vicinity?

Pol points out that verification of one’s medical degree would be important in such a scenario. Pol has played out a scenario where your train station is closed, and you are able to hitch a ride with someone headed the same direction. But realtime location sharing apps will probably leapfrog Pol’s tag-based attributes in this specific application.

Catherine Havasi notices a number of Google Maps pins in the Charles River and asks about moderation and verification. It turns out this was intentional, for a flashmob-by-sailboat app. But in general, Pol relies on user flagging for crowd moderation.

Privacy is managed by users themselves, who can set how many degrees of Facebook friend can view their location and attribute information.

 

Wiring Informal Economies with Square

Jack Dorsey (@jack) is a double-timing executive. He spits his week between Twitter and Square, two fundamentally game-changing companies he has founded. You’ve probably heard of Twitter. And you’ve likely heard of Square by now, as everyone who uses it inevitably becomes an advocate for the service. Every time you see a cab driver or food truck faced with the decision to either not accept credit cards or pay high vendor setup costs, you feel compelled to share the gospel of Square’s free setup and bare minimum processing fee (2.75%).

Jack starts with the story of two nice guys who founded a pizza company together. To keep the company intact, they promised not to date the waitstaff. Until they hired Jack’s mother. His dad broke the interoffice dating rule and gave up the pizza company. The moral being that neither Jack’s father nor Jack himself sought to be entrepreneurs. They wanted to do work they loved. Jack lists sailor, tailor, and surrealist artist as his original career paths. His goal was to teach the world to see in a different way.

Entrepreneurship is an attitude, not a declared self-identity. Steve McQueen said “When I believe in something, I’m going to fight like hell to get it.” That’s the attitude you need to hold to start a company.” Entrepreneurship is finding the intersections of life and being there before anyone else.

William Gibson said, “The future has already arrived. It’s just not evenly distributed yet.” This quote excites Jack: just think about the future that lives inside the heads of students at MIT, or inside our laptops.

The Founding Fathers’ best idea was embodied in the phrase “a more perfect union.” They understood that the work wasn’t done yet, that others would have to carry the banner and flush the rest of it out.

We tend to emphasize these founding moments, but Jack points to every new employee and every new user’s ability to change the course of the company. Such an idea can come from anywhere. Successful organizations are the result of multiple founding moments.

Jack’s not a huge fan of the word ‘disruption’ in a startup context. He shows us a photo of what appears to be post-hurricane damage as an example of disruption. Disruption is confusing, has no purpose, and has no values. We want leadership, we want direction. The world has enough confusion. What we really seek to build is a Revolution. Jack isn’t shy about pointing to the French Revolution or Ghandi to illustrate his corporate principles.

Square is the latest version of a fundamental human behavior: commerce. Commerce, put simply, is the activity between buyer and seller. Square seeks to help ease all of the friction and frustration that lives between buyer and seller in our modern economy. They shrunk the complexity of the credit card industry down to a device the size of a quarter that you just plug into your phone.

The onerous fees, setup costs, and credit checks prevented many people from accepting money. Traditionally, only 10% of applicants are approved to receive credit card transactions. Square accepts 95% of applicants because they found more intelligent ways to verify identity and prevent fraud.

We’ve stopped carrying checkbooks. Many of us have stopped carrying cash. How long will it be before we stop carrying credit cards?

The Square team gave themselves one month to build the system, and were successful. Jack had fun demoing the app to friends and family by swiping their credit cards. The simplicity resonated with everyone they talked to. Many of the informal merchants that make up our economy, from golf trainers to food trucks, were free to accept credit cards for the first time.

Accepting credit cards grows your business. You get more customers, and they spend more. Prior to Square, merchants had to rely on POS (Point of Sale…or Piece of Sh&t) terminals. They’re big, clunky, and silly expensive. You get a receipt for a donut. It doesn’t actually track what you sold.

The analytics Square offers are exciting, too. Small businesses can learn what sells when in an intuitive interface. The Square register app runs on an iPad and replaces the DSL line, the cash register, and all of the other credit card processing paraphernalia.

 

Jack didn’t have to do much business development for Square. Starbucks came to them (a nice perk of being the Twitter founder). It turned out that Starbucks had many of the same problems of small vendors. The cost savings add up. Merely running an iPad rather than a PC and receipt printer saves on electricity, especially when you consider the scale of Starbucks’ stores.

As a company, Square is focused on building a product. They don’t want to get in the way of their users and merchants. They’ve engineered the company to stay out of the way.

Jack tells us the story of the Golden Gate Bridge. The “Golden Gate” refers to the strait in the bay. The water’s deep, and there are earthquakes. But the engineers had the audacity to do it, and the project came in two years early and under budget. Jack attributes this success to the pairing of design and engineering. “Design” here doesn’t mean the visual aesthetics, but also marrying the function and the form. Engineers are concerned with efficiencies and readable code. When you write code, you’re not just telling the computer what to do. You’re communicating with other coders.

The Golden Gate Bridge’s #1 feature is its 100% uptime. But it also takes your breath away. The designers had the audacity to build something functional and beautiful. They built something they could be proud of. Square takes this approach to heart.

 

Photo by Joe Azure

Money has been with us for 5,000 years and touches every single person on this planet. Everyone on this planet feels bad about money at some point in their life.

Square’s electronic receipts were noticed to be a compelling medium in their own right. You can communicate with receipts.

A team of four people built the idyllic purchasing experience at Square. You can now walk into a store, buy a cappuccino, and walk out wondering if you paid for your coffee. They accomplished this with geofencing and communication between your smartphone and the Square-powered iPad register. Your face and name show up on the register, you give your name, and choose how much to tip. Tips have gone up 22% (interface design and default options can have serious impact here).

Square has seen crazy growth, crazy competition, and yet, Jack promises, a relaxed work environment.

Q&A

Every Square piece is a real-world ad impression. The device is synonymous with the company name (an improvement upon the previous working name ‘Squirrel’), and makes enough of an impression that people Google it and find them. Jack is proud that the company now beats Wikipedia’s geometry page for such searches, vindicating his 14-year-old self.

Jack’s passionate about maintaing a transparent corporate culture. Twitter holds weekly town halls, which live on at Square as Town Squares. Notes are kept at every major meeting, and shared with the entire company. The final decision is posted at the top of the document, and the conversation that led to it is recorded below. Jack’s also a fan of standing meetings, where long, drawn-out agendas expire with his colleagues’ leg muscles.

Even with major employee growth, Square only employs 5 people with backgrounds in the finance industry. They are engineers, above all else.

When Jack pitched Square to JP Morgan Chase, they pointed out just how much money he was leaving on the table by eliminating all of the traditional fees and hardware costs. But this pro-customer behavior earned them unquantifiable (IMHO) word of mouth for their product. A taxi driver in Cincinnati was paying 15% transaction fees on credit cards, with a significant time delay before the money made it into his bank account. Square’s radically improved economics led this taxi driver to convince the rest of his union to adopt the device. The company has directly benefitted from these offline social networks simply by being great. It would be interesting to see a business case study on the financial value of leaving money on the table in exchange for your customers’ love.

Square’s analytics feature could also prove controversial. Traditional POS systems have shied away from this feature on the grounds of privacy. Square will collect huge amounts of small business data, which is valuable in aggregate.

Jack points out that 90% of the people in large organizations are paid to say “No” to new ideas. They are hired to protect existing business and eliminate risk. They need to be pushed for innovation to occur.

Square makes its money on the 2.75% fee, but must pay the interchange, so there are transactions on which it loses money. The pricing around credit cards hasn’t been rethought in 62 years, when Diners’ Club started charging merchants 7% to accept their cards. Square introduced Simple Pricing to allow merchants to pay a flat fee per month rather than a per swipe fee. Businesses between $10,000 and $250,000 do well with this pricing model. The more compelling case may be around data. Merchants and consumers alike could benefit from insights provided by Square’s data, but Jack doesn’t offer specifics yet.

On NFC: Jack doesn’t see a fundamental connection between NFC technology and payments. With NFC, you don’t get the customer’s identity until after they’ve paid. Merchants don’t have much reason to be excited about NFC at the moment.

Smart Customization vs. Mass Production

Liveblog of Ryan C.C. Chin’s PhD thesis defense at MIT Media Lab

Ryan came to MIT in 1997, and got a Master’s in Architecture, and then at the Media Lab, before entering into the Lab’s Ph.D program. He took leave for 18 months to work on the CityCar project.

Ryan’s thesis examines smart customization, and the scientific differences between mass customization and traditional mass production. Is one better than the other? Is one more sustainable?

The CityCar is customizable on a number of levels: its base design, its adaptability to its environment (city), and its individual parts’ modularity.

Ryan hasn’t only worked on cars; he’s also studied customization of dress shirts. He chose shirts because of their low cost, frequency of use, and relatively easy traceability (see SourceMap).

Ryan started with an online customer survey of nearly 1,000 people. People have three types of dress shirt, with regards to fit: standard, made-to-measure with your measurements, and custom-tailored, designed specificaly for oyu. The average male has 14.2 dress shirts for work, but we don’t wear them all. Very few of us own only custom shirts, whereas 76% of respondents owned only standard shirts.

He then studied how people actually acquire mass customized products vs. mass produced products. 94% of respondents drove to buy their shirt. 63% of us clean our shirts in the washing machine, but mainly because it’s wrinkled, not because it’s dirty.

The main reason we return shirts is that they don’t fit properly. Online, mass-produced shirt retailers see a 40% return rate. That drops to 20% return rate in offline mass-produced shirt stores. Mass customized retailers see only a 5-10% return rate.

Whether it’s sold online or offline, mass produced shirts are made pretty much the same way. But when you order online, the delivery of a shirt to your home by truck produces huge CO2 savings over you driving to the store yourself.

With made-to-measure dress shirts, nothing gets produced until your order comes in, at which point the order goes to a QA center in China, where an electric scooter brings it to the factory. The carbon costs add up as your shirt is flown DHL to the US.

When you get a shirt custom-tailored, the tailor comes to your office to fit you and your coworkers, and then sends the order to Hong Kong. The shirts are made and flown back to the tailors’ studio, which then delivers the shirt and makes additional alterations. This back and forth adds some carbon costs.

The vast majority of the the CO2 involved in delivering your shirt comes in the last few miles, where you drive to a store. The mass-produced shirt ordered online has the lowest carbon count, followed by made-to-measure shirts ordered online.

Ryan also conducted a post-transaction customer use study using two washable RFID chips inserted into the collar stays on dress shirts. What happens after you acquire the new clothing? They built an RFID tracking system and embedded it into the office environment. Subjects would see a green confirmation light when the shirt they were wearing registered with the RFID readers.

The team cataloged a selection of sample shirts and sold them to employees at Fidelity and MIT Tech Review. They collected thousands of RFID reads over the course of the summer and color-coded a grid (or calendar, really) of how often each shirt was worn in the office.

Patterns emerge

People wear their favorite shirts on consecutive days, often in the same order. Ryan calculated an ideal shirt utilization rate: the number of shirts you own divided by number of days you need to wear a shirt. But we favor certain shirts and shun others. Some of us achieve equal distribution, though, working through our wardrobes systematically (“first in, first out”). One man reported that he gets dressed each morning by literally going right-to-left through his closet. Another man saved his custom-tailored shirt for a big board meeting, like a power tie, and felt the desired effect. A third guy wears only his cheap shirts, knowing that he or his children are likely to stain it, while the nicer shirts are never used at all. Others save their nice custom-tailored shirts for out-of-office occasions where Ryan’s RFID readers couldn’t scan them, like weddings and dinners.

On average, we don’t wear about 20% of our shirts at all. The mass production shirts got worn a lot, and were generally considered favorites, even over custom-tailored shirts. Ryan attributes this puzzle to better craftsmanship in mass-produced shirts, and fewer opportunities to wear custom-tailored shirts.

Lessons Learned:

  • We should move goods, not people, as much as we can. 16-ton UPS trucks are 24 times more efficient than a personal automobile for delivering goods.
  • Pull-based marketing dramatically reduces inventory. $300 billion in lost revenue in textiles wasted on stocks, transportation of goods, and heavy discounts. Build-to-order automobiles are only 6% of the US market, while it represents 50% of the European market.
  • Persuasive interfaces help people make the right choices. Showing the environmental effects of fast shipping vs. slow shipping works on us.
  • We need to miniaturize retail environments. The big box stores have become . Apple has begun deploying urban boutiques, where the highlight is experiencing the product, not stacking boxes.
  • Customizable Clones: Take the top 5 shirts you wear, the ones you love and the ones that fit, and make the rest of your shirts like those. These shirts are the iterative product of the trial and error represented by the rest of your wardrobe.
  • Local production is controversial. The labor cost is still about 2.5 times higher, even when you account for transportation costs.
  • Smart materials, like the Apollo Fabric, reduce the amount of energy the textiles require after it’s produced. Few retailers know Ministry of Supply claims to be anti-microbial and wrinkle-free, meaning fewer trips to the drycleaners, and higher shirt utilization.

Responsible Consumerism would allow us to create the ideal wardrobe, at the intersection of our own desires and environmental benefits. Ryan suggests a carbon label, like US FDA’s nutrition labels, showing the consumer the amount of carbon involved in the clothing article’s production, lifetime use, cleaning, and recycling.

How can customization improve the utilization rates of all the things we produce and own? And how do we scale this customization to the scale of a city?

Ryan attributes his inspiration to the late William J. Mitchell, and the huge number of people that worked on the CityCar and other projects.

Is the era of mass customization over?
Ryan points to Joseph Pine’s continuum of mass production, customization, lean production, and craft. All are necessary.
The number of customized things is going to increase, but what’s ideal? Standard, mass-produced goods work for many purposes (like Ryan’s current outfit). But there are huge cost and environmental savings to customization. Whether or not everyone feels these costs and benefits will depend on actual environmental policy. Everyone would love a custom shirt, but the average mass produced shirt is $20, while custom tailor shirts can easily cost $80. Custom needs to become more economical.

Ryan recommends that we receive a copy of the data generated by the full body scans the TSA requires of us. We could use that data for custom clothing, health, and other purposes.

Ryan foresees an “apparel genome,” where all of our clothing is tagged and machine readable, leading to insights about how we choose our outfits, what additional outfit configurations we could create from our existing clothing, and so on. I’ve begun using SuperCook, where I catalog the food in my pantry, and the app informs me what recipes will utilize my CSA-delivered eggplants. It’s not a big stretch of the imagination to consider doing the same for our clothing.

Customized goods fit into the broader trends of rent-rather-than-own, where an increasingly urban population favors access over ownership and proximity over storage space.

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.

Let Us See Under the Hood

Our machines can do amazing things. Our mapping and travel tools can span numerous transit agencies and modes of transport to conveniently navigate us across the land. They still mess up, which is acceptable. But when they fail, we don’t even know that they have errored, or how, and this is less OK.

On an intermediary leg of a marathon journey from Washington, DC to Nairobi that included a DC Metrobus, a ZipCar, a BoltBus, a commuter train, an airtram, two 6+ hour flights, I needed to simply get from Penn Station to JFK Airport. I already knew that the Long Island Railroad was the best combination of price and speed for my needs, and HopStop’s website confirmed it. Unfortunately my BoltBus ran an hour late, and I found myself recalculating the trip from my phone using HopStop’s mobile app. For whatever reason, whether an errant filter or another limitation of the mobile app, HopStop no longer showed me any LIRR options. In this case, I knew I wasn’t seeing the results I needed. I just couldn’t do anything about it.

Eli Pariser talks about the societal implications of opaque social algorithms in The Filter Bubble, where we don’t know what we don’t know, and couldn’t see it if we did. The ability to understand what we aren’t seeing is also a simple usability affordance. A few apps break the general trend in this department:

Hipmunk hides duplicate flights

Hipmunk intelligently sorts the best flights available by eliminating the obviously bad choices (70% of possible results, according to cofounder Steve Huffman in this Forbes piece extolling Hipmunk’s many virtues). But the site also wisely allows the user to re-expose similar flights, and dive into the larger world of possibilities when your price or time is severely constrained.

Gmail's Priority Inbox explains why messages are promoted

Gmail’s Priority Inbox attempts to order your email based on your rules and habits. In my experience, it’s not quite there yet, but by hovering over the Priority icons, you can at least see why the feature sorted your email as it did, and correct for future cases.

If you’re not going to share the secret sauce of how decisions are made, you should at least let users circumnavigate when the decisions are poorly made. An admittedly small group of users care about this sort of thing. And maybe the apps we build will get smarter and smarter and smarter and the exposure of results the machine guesses are wrong will be considered an in-between technology as the machine’s guesses become more perfect. But I think it’s more likely that we’ll still want a grayer, more complicated version of what the machine tells us is possible, even as the machine’s computational abilities exceed our continuously evolving definition of magic. Let us see.

Upworthy’s Content Goes Further Than Yours, and Not Because It’s Better Content

Sara Critchfield and Adam Mordecai‘s talk at Netroots Nation (#nnupFTW) was less-than-standing-room only, so I’ve combined the parts of his talk we were able to catch with a similar talk by their colleague Peter Koechley at the Conversational Marketing Summit. Thanks to Deepa Kunapuli for her notes.

the Upworthy kittenUpworthy’s goal is to amplify content worth spreading online. If you mixed the earnestness of a TED talk with the brevity of a LOLcat and Coca Cola’s distribution network, you’d end up with something like Upworthy’s network of crack content. They don’t necessarily produce the content themselves, they just make sure it goes places. While we debate the impact of technological tactics like SEO and A/B testing on the future of journalism, the Upworthy team is working to harness these new (and always changing) algorithmic tactics for social change.

Peter Koechley (@peterkoechley) thinks about virality as a product of the shareability of the source content and the clickability of the content’s packaging. Everyone who’s spent the last ten years paying consultants to produce viral content will be relieved to know that the latter part of this equation, the clickability of your content’s packaging, is much, much easier to optimize than the content itself. But people don’t spend enough time on this part of the process.

Your Headlines Matter

Sara and Adam, Peter’s colleagues at Upworthy, explain that we’re spending all of our content production time in the wrong places. We slave over the wording in the 12th paragraph of the blog post, and then write a throwaway headline that no one ends up clicking. If we care about people finding our content, we need to think generationally, or keep in mind not just our readers, but also what our readers’ friends will see should the gods of the feed place your work before their eyeballs.

an example of the Onion's headlines on Facebook

Peter walks us through the three schools of headline optimization on the web. Peter started at the Onion, where hilarity depends almost entirely on the headlines. Unfortunately, because the entire joke is contained in the headline, users can get their giggles without actually clicking through to the site. So headlines from the Onion perform rather poorly in terms of driving traffic back to the website.

The second category of headline optimization is your traditional search engine optimization, where the headline contains all of the right keywords, and again, spells out what the page is about. Google loves proper nouns, but humans find them pretty boring.

Social optimization breaks from these two approaches and hits the user with just a taste of the content, worded in a compelling way, and often with an emotional tone. You may have noticed that brands are learning to generate interactions with their Facebook posts by asking for their followers’ opinions, because if they’re successful, Facebook rewards them by increasing the visibility of their posts. But anyone optimizing for click-throughs rather than comments should be considering the degree to which the headline teases and entices the reader while refraining from giving away the meat of the content. Peter calls this the curiosity gap: too vague, and I don’t care, but too specific, and I don’t need to click the link.

Peter shows a case study of two takes on the same 3-minute video about gay marriage. The video of Zach Wahls’s moving testimony about growing up with two moms reached a million views without Upworthy’s help, and without a great headline. The original video was titled “Zach Wahls speaks about family,” which, Peter points out, is bad because you don’t know who Zach is yet, and you might not particularly care about family. Even though it had already gone viral once, the team at Upworthy decided to try spreading the video again with an improved headline. Angie Aker at MoveOn.org came up with “Two Lesbians Raised a Baby And This Is What They Got” and made the video their daily share. The result was 20 million additional views of the same video, and a headline that regularly beats actual porn results for Google searches for “two lesbians”. A good headline teases, but also appeals to different audiences for completely different reasons. Even homophobes were intrigued enough to click that link. Upworthy will sometimes write 25 different headlines for each piece of content, and test response before selecting a finalist.

Greasing the Tracks of the Internet

For someone studying how ideas spread these days, Upworthy’s facilitation is interesting in a number of ways. First of all, Upworthy has taken after the Instagrams of the world and eschewed the traditional website-as-hub model. Where Instagram pushes everyone to their mobile app, the majority of Upworthy’s existence is in followers’ Facebook, Twitter, and Pinterest streams. Upworthy also has some rather prominent share buttons to help you connect the dots:

Upworthy's share buttons

Adam and Sarah also advised that we spend 55 minutes on emotion for every 5 minutes of fact. And, as cognitive studies have proven, images work much, much better than text. The default image that gets shared with the link on social networks is particularly important (you can control this with Facebook’s og:image tag).

How the Social Networks Stack Up
(for the content Upworthy has tested — your mileage may very well vary):

Twitter: Not great for actually driving people to your content. Facebook accounts for about 90% of the traffic in their tests. (It’s not clear to me if they’re only counting Twitter.com traffic, or all Twitter clients, as well. This divide has historically depressed measures of Twitter referrals). Twitter users like to share facts.
Facebook: If you have a limited budget, focus everything here. Photo posts get three to four times the interaction of regular posts, but don’t necessarily drive traffic. Close-ups of faces perform well, as do visual dichotomies, in ads as well as posts.
Reddit: Good luck. If you crack it, you are a god.
Pinterest: Hey ladies! Pix please.

Testing Virality

Adam says you must test because you are dumb. We are all dumb. Our intuition means nothing, and Upworthy’s two biggest headline hits were written by interns. You will be wrong 90% of the time.

Peter will pay you $1,000 to popularize a word that describes these phenomena other than ‘virality’.

[Video and slides of Peter’s presentation, with Sara and Adam’s presentation to follow shortly]

Upworthy’s Content Goes Further Than Yours, and Not Because It’s Better Content

Sara Critchfield and Adam Mordecai‘s talk at Netroots Nation (#nnupFTW) was less-than-standing-room only, so I’ve combined the parts of his talk we were able to catch with a similar talk by their colleague Peter Koechley at the Conversational Marketing Summit. Thanks to Deepa Kunapuli for her notes.

the Upworthy kittenUpworthy’s goal is to amplify content worth spreading online. If you mixed the earnestness of a TED talk with the brevity of a LOLcat and Coca Cola’s distribution network, you’d end up with something like Upworthy’s network of crack content. They don’t necessarily produce the content themselves, they just make sure it goes places. While we debate the impact of technological tactics like SEO and A/B testing on the future of journalism, the Upworthy team is working to harness these new (and always changing) algorithmic tactics for social change.

Peter Koechley (@peterkoechley) thinks about virality as a product of the shareability of the source content and the clickability of the content’s packaging. Everyone who’s spent the last ten years paying consultants to produce viral content will be relieved to know that the latter part of this equation, the clickability of your content’s packaging, is much, much easier to optimize than the content itself. But people don’t spend enough time on this part of the process.

Your Headlines Matter

Sara and Adam, Peter’s colleagues at Upworthy, explain that we’re spending all of our content production time in the wrong places. We slave over the wording in the 12th paragraph of the blog post, and then write a throwaway headline that no one ends up clicking. If we care about people finding our content, we need to think generationally, or keep in mind not just our readers, but also what our readers’ friends will see should the gods of the feed place your work before their eyeballs.

The Onion's headlines - perfect, except for driving traffic from Facebook

Peter walks us through the three schools of headline optimization on the web. Peter started at the Onion, where hilarity depends almost entirely on the headlines. Unfortunately, because the entire joke is contained in the headline, users can get their giggles without actually clicking through to the site. So headlines from the Onion perform rather poorly in terms of driving traffic back to the website.

The second category of headline optimization is your traditional search engine optimization, where the headline contains all of the right keywords, and again, spells out what the page is about. Google loves proper nouns, but humans find them pretty boring.

Social optimization breaks from these two approaches and hits the user with just a taste of the content, worded in a compelling way, and often with an emotional tone. You may have noticed that brands are learning to generate interactions with their Facebook posts by asking for their followers’ opinions, because if they’re successful, Facebook rewards them by increasing the visibility of their posts. But anyone optimizing for click-throughs rather than comments should be considering the degree to which the headline teases and entices the reader while refraining from giving away the meat of the content. Peter calls this the curiosity gap: too vague, and I don’t care, but too specific, and I don’t need to click the link.

Peter shows a case study of two takes on the same 3-minute video about gay marriage. The video of Zach Wahls’s moving testimony about growing up with two moms reached a million views without Upworthy’s help, and without a great headline. The original video was titled “Zach Wahls speaks about family,” which, Peter points out, is bad because you don’t know who Zach is yet, and you might not particularly care about family. Even though it had already gone viral once, the team at Upworthy decided to try spreading the video again with an improved headline. Angie Aker at MoveOn.org came up with “Two Lesbians Raised a Baby And This Is What They Got” and made the video their daily share. The result was 20 million additional views of the same video, and a headline that regularly beats actual porn results for Google searches for “two lesbians”. A good headline teases, but also appeals to different audiences for completely different reasons. Even homophobes were intrigued enough to click that link. Upworthy will sometimes write 25 different headlines for each piece of content, and test response before selecting a finalist.

Greasing the Tracks of the Internet

For someone studying how ideas spread these days, Upworthy’s facilitation is interesting in a number of ways. First of all, Upworthy has taken after the Instagrams of the world and eschewed the traditional website-as-hub model. Where Instagram pushes everyone to their mobile app, the majority of Upworthy’s existence is in followers’ Facebook, Twitter, and Pinterest streams. Upworthy also has some rather prominent share buttons to help you connect the dots:

Upworthy's battle-tested share buttons

Adam and Sarah also advised that we spend 55 minutes on emotion for every 5 minutes of fact. And, as cognitive studies have proven, images work much, much better than text. The default image that gets shared with the link on social networks is particularly important (you can control this with Facebook’s og:image tag). 

How the Social Networks Stack Up
(for the content Upworthy has tested — your mileage may very well vary):

Twitter: Not great for actually driving people to your content. Facebook accounts for about 90% of the traffic in their tests. (It’s not clear to me if they’re only counting Twitter.com traffic, or all Twitter clients, as well. This divide has historically depressed measures of Twitter referrals). Twitter users like to share facts.
Facebook: If you have a limited budget, focus everything here. Photo posts get three to four times the interaction of regular posts, but don’t necessarily drive traffic. Close-ups of faces perform well, as do visual dichotomies, in ads as well as posts. 
Reddit: Good luck. If you crack it, you are a god.
Pinterest: Hey ladies! Pix please.

Testing Virality

Adam says you must test because you are dumb. We are all dumb. Our intuition means nothing, and Upworthy’s two biggest headline hits were written by interns. You will be wrong 90% of the time.

Peter will pay you $1,000 to popularize a word that describes these phenomena other than ‘virality’.

Video and slides of Peter’s presentation. Sara and Adam’s slides are pretty great, too:

 

8 more innovative political and civic technologies

There was another Tools Shootout session at Netroots Nation (#nn12) today. We’re all a bit more exhausted than Thursday’s session (13 of the Newest Political and Civic Tools), but Dan Ancona held it down and showcased another round of shiny new tools. Here are the ones I didn’t cover in the last post:

Democrats traditionally outdid Republicans online until 2010, when Republicans matched the voter file to browser cookies and targeted ads like direct mail. Jim Walsh introduced the Democratic answer: DSPolitical‘s cookie. In addition to giving out blue-frosted cookies all weekend, the tool allows campaigns to target voters online based on their voting record and 42 segments. The result is more accurate and efficient advertising (and probably a pending Filter Bubble nightmare).

Eric Ruben provides an overview Salsa Labs. The founding organization, DemocracyInAction, works with 2,200 organizations, including the AFL-CIO and many other progressive groups. The suite includes mass email tools, donation pages, a CRM, events, advocacy and contact-your-representative tools, and third party plugins.

Marci Harris founded PopVox after years as a congressional staffer. There are two ways to move legislation: move money, or move people. But there’s no good way to measure people. Counting people is hard, Congress only wants to hear from constituents, and Congress is overwhelmed by the messages generated by online tools. Congressional offices have the same number of staffers that they had in the 1970’s.

The voice of the people is diffused and frequently unfocused. A letter asking Congress to Save the Whales is not the same as asking Congress to pass HR 1234 banning whaling ships. PopVox works with Congress to deliver the people’s voice in a clean, organized format. There’s XML tagging and the messages practically sort themselves once they reach congressional offices. Individuals and organizations go through the site or its embeddable widget to support or oppose bills. All positions and counts are mapped publicly on their site. At the moment, their community is 53% Republican and 47% Democrat.

ElectNext (@electnext) is building an eHarmony for voters to find candidates they might support. They translate political data into tools that help create a more informed electorate. If you’re in the political data world today, you have access to tons of information about voters (250 unique data points). But when you flip the equation and look at what the American voter knows, consistently less than half can tell you anything about Congress, candidate positions, and other information. Where’s the average voter’s political database? ElectNext has pulled together 15 million datapoints to determine where over 4,500 candidates stand on issues. They’re live with US Senate, House and presidency and hope to expand to every US election. They also have a widget with issue and voter-candidate matching features.

Jim Pugh of Rebuild the Dream shows us Control Shift Labs, a platform to allow their members to create their own campaigns. It competes with Change.org and Signon.org, also here at the conference. As an organization, Rebuild the Dream is using the self-service campaign platform as a mechanism to identify members within their ranks who are ready to step up and assume a leadership position. This, in my opinion, is a hugely underserved area within online grassroots organizations.

Leif Utne‘s at WareCorp, which runs the SoapBlox blogging platform. It powers 80 political blogs with millions of monthly views across the network. They’ve relaunched SoapBlox.net as a media property that aggregates content. The new technology they’re announcing today is the idea of paying bloggers for content (with 50% of the advertising revenue they receive). You can become a contributor here.

Oh, and I showed off LazyTruth, which is launching imminently. Sign up at LazyTruth.com.

13 of the Newest Political and Civic Tools

Netroots Nation had a New Tool Shootout session to highlight all of the cool new political tools, sponsored by New Media Ventures.

BlueStateDigital’s QuickDonate tool (now live on BarackObama.com lets your constituents save their payment information for frictionless giving. There’s also a mobile edition that pulls from the same saved credit card information, which prevents the mobile carriers from taking a cut of the donation. Even new users are spared from entering their data on a mobile device. It’s available to any organization already using BSD.

Paul Schreiber, “the TurboVote kid,” makes voting as easy as renting a DVD from Netflix. The US is 138th in voter participation. We vote on Tuesdays and generally make it hard for people to vote. Oregon introduced statewide vote-by-mail. TurboVote uses the internet to make voting as easy as buying a pair of shoes online. If the states are the laboratories of democracy, their registration requirements and forms and websites are the meth labs of democracy, Paul says. Rather than visit crappy state election board websites, you simply use TurboVote’s wizard to register to vote and/or vote by mail. When you’re done with the wizard, it generates the appropriate PDF for you to print and mail. TurboVote also has a mobile site, and partners with Voto Latino, the League of Young Voters, and other such groups.

The Voter Activation Network is working to synchronize its voter records with voters’ online social media profiles. The tool, Social Organizing, will enable organizers to reach people where they already are, rather than interrupting dinner with a phone call. There’s a strong overall trend around social organizing, and letting people bring in their real-world networks is believed to be better for all parties than a randomized call list.

Mike Sager’s working on Repurpose, a system of incentives and frequent flier miles to reward organizers who take action. They’re not just empty gamification points and badges, though; these points will direct the spending of a SuperPAC. You earn your points by doing political organizing work like canvassing, and can then redeem them to help campaigns and adbuys of your choosing.

Stephanie from SignOn.org, a free petition site created by MoveOn.org. All of the petitions created are tested with a segment of MoveOn’s huge email list, and some are further promoted within relevant segments of that list. Petition creators themselves can message the signers about anything except fundraising appeals. They’ve designed sophisticated testing systems for each petition, which is micro-targeted to others based on the petition’s signers, geography, and virality. The end result is that MoveOn is sharing their progressive email list across a wide range of progressive causes.

Tim Lim introduces his Precision Network online advertising targeting system. They can target on a number of electoral, demographic, consumer, and behavioral factors — more here.

The Agenda Project takes on the battle of ideas in American politics. Indices like http://policyexperts.org/ have always been important in national politics. The Agenda Project’s TopWonks project pulls together a stable of solid, rational policy experts all in one place.  TopWonks has a profile for the progressive thinker expert you’re looking for, whether it’s municipal tax policy or developing economies. National news brands have already begun consulting the site.

Rally lets anyone with a cause share their story and raise money. The “cause” here can be a man trying to get his fianceé to move to his city, or saving a community’s church from fiscal insolvency. You can follow causes, which gives them your email address, and donate (Rally takes a 4.5% cut of donations). The system lets you send out email fundraising appeals, and shares analytics with you (donation emails with photos and videos perform better than text-only appeals). They’re also implementing a one-click donate button.

Seth Bannon introduces Amicus, which is looking to solve the problem that most of the communications in the world of social change happens between two strangers. (phonebanks, info@ email accounts, canvassers). Amicus finds your existing Facebook friends and looks for potential matches in the official voter file. Users confirm the matches, and are then asked to contact them. After you work through your list of friends, the tool connects you with friends-of-friends as well, as you still have a much better context for knowing each other than being randomly assigned a phone number. In addition to phonebanking, the system also lets you send emails and mail postcards. On the organization’s admin side of things, you can cut a list based on the target group you’re looking to contact — young women in New Hampshire, for example. Volunteers level up as they complete actions, and group administrators can reassign the weighting of various actions. If calls suddenly become vitally important to the campaign, the admin can assign more points to calls (and so far, volunteers have responded to the re-weighting). AFL-CIO and about ten nonprofits have used the tool.

Amicus demo at the Oct NYTM from Seth Bannon on Vimeo.

Eric Hysen, from Google’s Politics and Elections team, introduces google.com/elections, Google’s main elections hub. Google’s polling place gadget (powered by Voting Information Project data) shows up in Search results whenever people search for “where do I vote” “polling place” and other election-related queries. The gadget is also embeddable with a single line of code, can be customized with pre-populated addresses, and has been featured on many official campaigns’ sites. An API is available to developers, as well. This time around, they’re adding ballot information and voter ID requirements. The goal is to help voters get everything they need to vote from the tool. It appears across Google Search, Maps, and News.

Colin from LoudSauce acknowledges that most of us hate advertising, and says LoudSauce’s goal is to repurpose advertising to make it meaningful for society. Advertising favors large, entrenched, monied interests, and lets them win the attention game. But the internet allows us to transform the medium, which has historically fueled consumption, to fuel civic engagement. The politically engaged are like technology’s early adopters: they jump in early, long before the rest of society. Crowdfunded advertising allows us to reach the laggards.

The anti-consumerist video Story of Stuff, produced in 2007, was a huge win online. But most people across broader society have still never heard of it. They raised money with their supporters online and purchased national TV ads using Google TV Ads, at under $3,000 a spot, and drove many more people to the site. Only 82 donors drove 2 million additional viewers.

Their new features allow people to set up their own media-buying campaigns and activate their personal networks to raise the money to extend the reach of their video. It’s Kickstarter for amateur media. And it’s not limited to small TV buys. You can purchase video ads on MTV, CNN, Current, and YouTube. The Redditors and Upworthies of the world might be interested in this platform. Occupy Wall Street supporters produced 12 Occupy Spots ads, covering Occupy Wall Street, Occupy the Hood, and other organic messages at http://occupyspots.com/. Creative politicos created the Meh. Romney campaign and are seeking donations to bring it to the Republican convention. [LoudSauce is onto something: Facebook is reportedly toying with a similar pay-to-promote feature to allow users to expand the reach of their content across News Feeds].

DemDash is a democracy dashboard to educate activists and voters on candidates and issues. It’s in alpha and currently covers only California politics, but will be expanded to include information from the Ballot Information Project.

John Brougher talks about NationBuilder, a complete suite of well-designed organizing and activist tools available for a low monthly subscription fee. They’ve been focused on scalability since day one, resulting in the low $20 / month (and up) cost.

Christie George introduces New Media Ventures, a fund investing in progressive political and civic startups. They support nonprofits as well as for-profits, but have noticed a lack of funding in the nonprofit space for new ideas. So, this summer they’re issuing an open call to nonprofit entrepreneurs using technology to creative progressive political change. Their three criteria are that your venture be scalable, revenue generating with a sustainable business model, and creating progressive political change. They’ll be awarding grants of $25,000. Follow @newmediaventure and @christiegeorge.

Bonus tool! via Nick Grossman: Thunderclap lets you coordinate mass amplification of the same message. Right now it works by asking people to pledge to retweet, but the same strategy could work to juice YouTube views and other social media sites. I’ve actually heard from unscrupulous commercial marketers who have gamed YouTube’s top video playlists’ algorithms, to the point that they can use Mechanical Turk to get a video onto the trending videos lists, where the video then gains many, many more organic views. Thunderclap could be the grassroots version of this tactic. Although, if you’re not going to get enough amplification of the message to break the Top Whatever lists threshold, it might be better for a campaign to spread the amplification out over a period of time than to do it all at once.

Using Data to Transform Elections

I’m at Netroots Nation 2012 (#nn12) and will liveblog as possible. The first panel I got to covered the data-driven transformation of American politics, whether that’s testing messaging, identifying groups of persuadable voters, and modernizing political advertising.

David Mermin of Lake Research Partners talks about testing messages.

Traditionally, we do dial testing of targets while watching a video. The viewer toggles a dial up and down over thirty seconds, and we get a nice line graph of their reactions.

Now we have Internet surveys, visual stimuli, and other methods. But public polls online have sample issues — weighting and demographic matching still doesn’t always account for online demographics. Mapping to voter files is a challenge, as well as district boundaries. But unlike phone surveys, you can be interactive.

You can simulate a ballot, and see where people have trouble with the design. (see also http://ballotusability.blogspot.com/).

You can ask people to highlight the parts of messages they like, and create a paragraph of talking points where the key phrases that resonated with voters are larger fonts, like in a tag cloud.

And then there’s online dial testing, where you can see how the base, persuadable, shifters, and opposition each trend in their reception of your message. In this case, you can view not only how each group responds to the message, but also the gaps between groups, which you might actually seek.

Who’s persuadable?

Polling has always been concerned with identifying the persuadable voters, but there are new tools for getting answers to whose mind can be changed and which messages are effective.

Are weak partisans more partisan than independent leaners?
They tested attitude consistency from 2008-2010 on attitudes towards Obama, the NRA, and other hot-button issues. They found that independents who lean Democrat are actually more progressive on a whole range of issues than people who identify themselves as weak Democrats. The same holds true for Republicans. [Could the answer to this be that this group of independents who lean towards one side aren’t, in fact, centrists, but are actually to the left and right, respectively, of the parties?]

Iterative mail testing for the AFL-CIO
They measured the persuasion effect of mailers in 2010 and tested the targets their model predicted versus those the model predicted, and tripled the efficacy of their communications (and mail is expensive). Many of our assumptions don’t actually play out when we look at empirical tests.

Once we have data, what can we do with it?

David Radloff with Clarity Campaign Labs, formerly with ISSI:

There are a lot of terms buzzing about these days – modeling, microtargeting, statistical analysis. But a model is just a statistical tool that gives a probability for each voter’s likelihood of taking an action, voting a certain way, support an issue, and so on. Common types of models include turnout and ballot return dates and the likelihood that the person is a progressive activist.

We’ve been carving universes of voters from the voter file for a long time now. We have many pieces of data about voters – age, race, marital status, voter registration status, where they live past information from previous campaigns, and now, thousands of consumer fields augmenting the existing file. No one uses these fields individually, but rather as parts of complex models that create likelihood scores for each voter.

It’s a three step process:
1. Training data is collected from a poll or previous turnout data or other sources
2. Algorithms are applied to find patterns, usually based on
3. Score the voter file

Once you have the counts, you run them against a turnout model, which projects likelihood of turnout and likelihood of being a Democrat and cross them and see where they meet and talk to those groups. It becomes a fairly easy tool to aggregate large amounts of data you weren’t otherwise able to take into account.

So far, the empirical research has found that it’s really hard to guess, and it usually requires testing for each issue and each campaign. Conventional wisdom is something consultants tell you because they feel like they need to have an answer.

Persuasion targeting best practices

  • Cross-pressured voters
  • base education or low information models
  • intra-survey message test models
  • experiment-informed-program models

Targeted Political Advertising

Tim Lim (@PrecisionNet @limowitz):

Tim starts by illustrating the waste that’s happening in online political advertising. The total Democratic vote is much smaller than the US population, voting eligible population, and actual turnout groups.

Innovation in online advertising happens in the commerical sector. Between 15-20% of commercial media budgets are spent online. In the political world, it’s even less, and amongst Democrats, only 5% or lower.

Online advertising is effective. 2% of time spent viewing video online is spent viewing ads, while with television, 25% of your time is watching ads. This leads to better recall amongst targets in the online environment.

Most political advertising is still done primitively, through site-by-site ad buys and vendor-by-vendor deals. Measurement of ads is poor.

Precision takes the voter file, overlays third party data, does precision matching, and serves up ads.

Targeting options range from electoral information (voter ID, party, voting frequency), demographic, economic (including donor history and occupation) and behavioral (online / offline purchases, content subscriptions, online browsing habits, and browser language settings).

They also do custom list matching, so you can target ads on your existing supporters list. It’s a shift from buying media on specific websites to buying media to reach specific people.

aCPM is the actual CPM it takes to reach your target audience. Advertising on mainstream sites like CNN, HuffPo, and others costs more because only 20% of site visitors might be in your target group.

David Radoff: The exciting thing is merging all of these fields together.

Study Grader

For my final Participatory News assignment (and because one can never have too many projects), I’m going to try to build this semi-automated grading rubric for shoddy science journalism over the next couple of weeks:

I’m interested in nutrition, and health in general. As a result, I’ve read a lot of really shoddy nutrition and health news over the years. I’ve noticed that the mistakes journalists make usually involve coverage of a single scientific study. For example, correlation is presented as causation, making us all a little dumber. You can see for yourself over at Google News’s Health section, where you can see a variety of takes on the same study results. A study on the mental benefits of expressing one’s feelings inevitably produces the clickbait headline, in one source, that Twitter is better than sex.

What if readers and journalists had a semi-automated grading rubric they could apply to media coverage of medical studies and drug development?

I started looking around, and found that science journalists are concerned with these problems. Veterans like Fiona Fox at the Science Media Centre have even shared some specific red flags for the skeptical observer. I was also fortunate enough to meet with two of our classmates (who also happen to be Knight Science Fellows), Alister Doyle and Helen Shariatmadari, who, in addition to significant personal experience, pointed me to great additional resources:

I’ll also be meeting with science writer Hannah Krakauer tomorrow.

I’m pulling out as many “rules” (in the software sense) as I can from these recommendations, and will then attempt to build a semi-automated grading rubric for these types of articles. It’s important to note that there will still be user involvement in producing the score.

HubSpot's Website Grader
(click image to expand)

I hope to present the results in the spirit of HubSpot‘s Grader.com series of tools for grading website marketing, books, and Twitter authority. The tools themselves vary in utility, but the format of the results embeds an educational layer into the score review (unlike closed-algorithm services like Klout). I am more interested in training journalists and readers to develop a keen eye for the hallmarks of high- or low-quality science reporting than the actual numerical score on a given article. By asking for readers’ involvement in scoring an article, I might be able to augment the automatic grading with human input, but also help teach critical thinking skills.

Down the road, it’d be interesting to incorporate other journalism tools. rbutr integration could allow us to pull from and contribute to crowdsourced rebuttals of misinformation, while Churnalism would let us scan the articles for unhealthy amounts of press release.