Legisletters: A Hub for Congressional Correspondence


Daniel Schuman at Congressional Data Coalition: “…GovLab beta launched a new tool, Legisletters, which automatically gathers congressional correspondence with agencies and publishes it in a searchable, user-friendly interface….Members of Congress have a hard time tracking their correspondence with federal agencies, in part because of staff turnover and the absence of an inexpensive, easy-to-use tool. It is very hard for an office can be aware of the letters that other offices send. Frequent staff turnover means current staff often have no idea of what was sent in the past.

Fortunately, since members of Congress often publish their correspondence on their websites–often in the less-than-helpful PDF format–it is possible to reconstruct some of the communications….Legisletters can help address several problems. It can serve as:

  • An archive of correspondence by individual members of Congress to agencies, which is very useful for current staff and historians alike.
  • A finding aid for other offices interested in partnering on issues, perhaps incorporated into a tool like the nascent “coalition builder.”
  • A data source for an alerting tool, like Scout, so journalists and advocates can keep an eye on what a particular office is doing.

In addition, the underlying technology can be repurposed to gather other documents published on the web, such as CRS reports….

feedback here. Let them know what you think.”

How a Mexico City Traffic Experiment Connects to Community Trust


Zoe Mendelson in Next Cities: “Last November, Gómez-Mont, Jose Castillo, an urban planning professor at Harvard’s Graduate School of Design, and Carlos Gershenson, their data analyst, won the Audi Urban Future award for their plan to use big data to solve Mexico City’s traffic problem. The plan consists of three parts, the first a data-donating platform that collects information on origin and destination, transit times, and modes of transit. The app, Living Mobs, is now in use in beta form. The plan also establishes data-sharing partnerships with companies, educational institutions and government agencies. So far, they’ve already signed on Yaxi, Microsoft, Movistar and Uber among others, and collected 14,000 datasets.

The data will be a welcome new resource for the city. “We just don’t have enough,” explains Gómez-Mont, “we call it ‘big city, little data.” The city’s last origin-destination survey conducted in 2007 only caught data from 50,000 people, which at the time was somewhat of a feat. Now, just one of their current data-sharing partners, Yaxi, has 10,000 cars circulating alone. Still, they have one major obstacle to a comprehensive citywide survey that can only be partially addressed by their data-donating platform (which also, of course, does depend on people having smartphones): 60 percent of transportation in Mexico City is on a hard-to-track informal bus system.

The data will eventually end up in an app that gives people real-time transit information. But an underlying idea — that traffic can be solved simply by asking people to take turns — is the project’s most radical and interesting component. Gómez-Mont paints a seductive alternative futuristic vision of incentivized negotiation of the city.

“Say I wake up and while getting ready for work I check and see that Périferico is packed and I say, ‘OK, today I’m going to use my bike or take public transit,’ and maybe I earn some kind of City Points, which translates into a tax break. Or maybe I’m on Périferico and earn points for getting off to relieve congestion.” She even envisions a system through which people could submit their calendar data weeks in advance. With the increasing popularity of Google Calendar and other similar systems that sync with smartphones, advanced “data donation” doesn’t seem that far-fetched.

Essentially, the app would create the opportunity for an entire city to behave as a group and solve its own problems together in real time.

Gómez-Mont insists that mobility is not just a problem for the government to solve. “It’s also very much about citizens and how we behave and what type of culture is embedded in the world outside of the government,” she notes….(More)”.

The Trust Imperative: A Framework for Ethical Data Use


New report by Susan Etlinger: “The way organizations use data use is affecting consumer trust, and that trust affects not just a brand’s reputation, but its business performance as well. As a result, chief executives who wish to sustain the trust of their customers and constituents must take a hard look at how their organizations collect and use customer data, and the effect of those practices on customer relationships, reputation, risk and revenue.

This report by Altimeter Group analyst Susan Etlinger lays out key drivers and principles for ethical data use. It discusses emerging best practices, and—most  importantly—a pragmatic framework that organizations can use to earn—and build—the trust of customers and consumers. This framework lists the questions that need to be asked at each stage of collecting and analyzing data, helping brands earn the trust of their customers, and safeguarding against both legal and ethical transgressions….(More)”

Beyond Propaganda


Foreign Policy: “This essay is adapted from the first in a series of publications by the Legatum Institute’s Transitions Forum on the politics of information in the 21st century.

Pity the poor propagandist! Back in the 20th century, it was a lot easier to control an authoritarian country’s hearts and minds. All domestic media could be directed out of a government office. Foreign media could be jammed. Borders were sealed, and your population couldn’t witness the successes of a rival system. You had a clear narrative with at least a theoretically enticing vision of social justice or national superiority, one strong enough to fend off the seductions of liberal democracy and capitalism. Anyone who disagreed could be isolated, silenced, and suppressed.

Those were the halcyon days of what the Chinese call “thought work” — and Soviets called the “engineering of human souls.” And until recently, it seemed as if they were gone forever. Today’s smart phones and laptops mean any citizen can be their own little media center. Borders are more open. Western films, cars, and search engines permeate virtually everywhere. All regimes are experimenting with at least some version of capitalism, which theoretically means that everyone has more in common.

Yet the story is far from straightforward. Neo-authoritarian, “hybrid,” and illiberal democratic regimes in countries such as Venezuela, Turkey, China, Syria, and Russia have not given up on propaganda. They have found completely new ways of pursuing it, many of them employing technologies invented in the democratic world.

Why fight the information age and globalization when you can use it?

Often, the techniques are quite subtle. After analyzing the real-time censorship of 1,382 Chinese websites during the first half of 2011 — 11,382,221 posts in all — researchers from Harvard University found that the government’s propagandists did in fact tolerate criticism of politicians and policies. But they immediately censored any online attempts to organize collective protests, including some that were not necessarily critical of the regime. One heavily censored event, for example, was meant to highlight fears that nuclear spillage from Japan would reach China….(More)”

Introducing the News Lab


Steve Grove at Google: “It’s hard to think of a more important source of information in the world than quality journalism. At its best, news communicates truth to power, keeps societies free and open, and leads to more informed decision-making by people and leaders. In the past decade, better technology and an open Internet have led to a revolution in how news is created, distributed, and consumed. And given Google’s mission to ensure quality information is accessible and useful everywhere, we want to help ensure that innovation in news leads to a more informed, more democratic world.

That’s why we’ve created the News Lab, a new effort at Google to empower innovation at the intersection of technology and media. Our mission is to collaborate with journalists and entrepreneurs to help build the future of media. And we’re tackling this in three ways: though ensuring our tools are made available to journalists around the world (and that newsrooms know how to use them); by getting helpful Google data sets in the hands of journalists everywhere; and through programs designed to build on some of the biggest opportunities that exist in the media industry today…..

Data for more insightful storytelling

There’s a revolution in data journalism happening in newsrooms today, as more data sets and more tools for analysis are allowing journalists to create insights that were never before possible. To help journalists use our data to offer a unique window to the world, last week we announced an update to our Google Trends platform. The newGoogle Trends provides journalists with deeper, broader, and real-time data, and incorporates feedback we collected from newsrooms and data journalists around the world. We’re also helping newsrooms around the world tell stories using data, with a daily feed of curated Google Trends based on the headlines of the day, and throughpartnerships with newsrooms on specific data experiments.

Another area we’ve focused our programs on is citizen reporting. Now that mobile technology allows anyone to be a reporter, we want to do our part to ensure that user-generated news content is a positive and game-changing force in media. We’re doing that with three projectsFirst Draft, the WITNESS Media Lab, and the YouTube Newswire—each of which aims to make YouTube and other open platforms more useful places for first-hand news content from citizen reporters around the world….(More)

African American family records from era of slavery to be available free online


Joanna Walters in The Guardian: “Millions of African Americans will soon be able to trace their families through the era of slavery, some to the countries from which their ancestors were snatched, thanks to a new and free online service that is digitizing a huge cache of federal records for the first time.

Handwritten records collecting information on newly freed slaves that were compiled just after the civil war will be available for easy searches through a new website, it was announced on Friday.

The records belong to the Freedmen’s Bureau, an administrative body created by Congress in 1865 to assist slaves in 15 states and the District of Columbia transition into free citizenship.

Before that time, slaves were legally regarded as property in the US and their names were not officially documented. They often appeared only as dash marks – even on their owners’ records.

African Americans trying to trace family history today regularly hit the research equivalent of a brick wall prior to 1870, when black people were included in the US census for the first time.

Now a major project run by several organisations is beginning to digitise the 1.5 million handwritten records from the Freedmen’s Bureau, which feature more than four million names and are held by various federal bodies, for full online access.

All the records are expected to be online by late 2016, to coincide with the opening of the new Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture on the National Mall in Washington.

Hollis Gentry, a genealogy specialist at the Smithsonian, said at the announcement of the project in Los Angeles on Friday: “The records serve as a bridge to slavery and freedom. You can look at some of the original documents that were created at the time when these people were living. They are the earliest records detailing people who were formerly enslaved. We get a sense of their voice, their dreams.”…

The Freedmen’s Bureau made records that include marriages and church and financial details as well as full names, dates of birth and histories of slave ownership.

They have been available for access by the public in Washington, but only in person by searching through hundreds of pages of handwritten documents.

The project to put the documents online is a collaboration involving the Smithsonian, the National Archives, the Afro-American Historical and Genealogical Society, the California African American Museum and FamilySearch. The last-named body is a large online genealogy organisation run by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints – otherwise known as the Mormon church, based in Salt Lake City.

Volunteers will help to digitise the handwritten records and they will be added to the website as they become available. The website is discoverfreedmen.org….”

 

Social Innovation Lab Guide


Publication by the Waterloo Institute for Social Innovation and Resilience: “The Social Innovation Lab emphasizes not only imagining high potential interventions but also gaining system sight, redefining problems, and identifying opportunities in the broader context with the potential to tip systems in positive directions. It is a three-step process of developing, testing and instigating innovation strategies. It requires the right starting conditions, an investment in research and skilled facilitators. It also makes use of computer modeling to proto-typing interventions in complex systems. Like other processes for convening multi-stakeholder groups working on complex challenges, it is best suited to the early stages of making change.

This guide is offered as a resource to peers, colleagues, practitioners, leaders from all sectors, and concerned citizens – all who have and/or will participate in change-making processes. One hope for this work is that these ideas on Social Innovation and these recommendations for new practice will result in greater sense of agency for those who work on what often seems like impossible aspirations for a different, better world. Probably our greatest hope is that these ideas help to transform the impossible into the possible.

To download a PDF copy of the guide please click here Social Innovation Lab Guide “

Modernizing Informed Consent: Expanding the Boundaries of Materiality


Paper by Nadia N. Sawicki: “Informed consent law’s emphasis on the disclosure of purely medical information – such as diagnosis, prognosis, and the risks and benefits of various treatment alternatives – does not accurately reflect modern understandings of how patients make medical decisions. Existing common law disclosure duties fail to capture a variety of non-medical factors relevant to patients, including information about the physician’s personal characteristics; the cost of treatment; the social implications of various health care interventions; and the legal consequences associated with diagnosis and treatment. Although there is a wealth of literature analyzing the merits of such disclosures in a few narrow contexts, there is little broader discussion and no consensus about whether there the doctrine of informed consent should be expanded to include information that may be relevant to patients but falls outside the traditional scope of medical materiality. This article seeks to fill that gap.
I offer a normative argument for expanding the scope of informed consent disclosure to include non-medical information that is within the physician’s knowledge and expertise, where the information would be material to the reasonable patient and its disclosure does not violate public policy. This proposal would result in a set of disclosure requirements quite different from the ones set by modern common law and legislation. In many ways, the range of required disclosures may become broader, particularly with respect to physician-specific information about qualifications, health status, and financial conflicts of interests. However, some disclosures that are currently required by statute (or have been proposed by commentators) would fall outside the scope of informed consent – most notably, information about support resources available in the abortion context; about the social, ethical, and legal implications of treatment; and about health care costs….(More)”

Researcher uncovers inherent biases of big data collected from social media sites


Phys.org: “With every click, Facebook, Twitter and other social media users leave behind digital traces of themselves, information that can be used by businesses, government agencies and other groups that rely on “big data.”

But while the information derived from social network sites can shed light on social behavioral traits, some analyses based on this type of data collection are prone to bias from the get-go, according to new research by Northwestern University professor Eszter Hargittai, who heads the Web Use Project.

Since people don’t randomly join Facebook, Twitter or LinkedIn—they deliberately choose to engage —the data are potentially biased in terms of demographics, socioeconomic background or Internet skills, according to the research. This has implications for businesses, municipalities and other groups who use because it excludes certain segments of the population and could lead to unwarranted or faulty conclusions, Hargittai said.

The study, “Is Bigger Always Better? Potential Biases of Big Data Derived from Social Network Sites” was published last month in the journal The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science and is part of a larger, ongoing study.

The buzzword “big data” refers to automatically generated information about people’s behavior. It’s called “big” because it can easily include millions of observations if not more. In contrast to surveys, which require explicit responses to questions, big data is created when people do things using a service or system.

“The problem is that the only people whose behaviors and opinions are represented are those who decided to join the site in the first place,” said Hargittai, the April McClain-Delaney and John Delaney Professor in the School of Communication. “If people are analyzing big data to answer certain questions, they may be leaving out entire groups of people and their voices.”

For example, a city could use Twitter to collect local opinion regarding how to make the community more “age-friendly” or whether more bike lanes are needed. In those cases, “it’s really important to know that people aren’t on Twitter randomly, and you would only get a certain type of person’s response to the question,” said Hargittai.

“You could be missing half the population, if not more. The same holds true for companies who only use Twitter and Facebook and are looking for feedback about their products,” she said. “It really has implications for every kind of group.”…

More information: “Is Bigger Always Better? Potential Biases of Big Data Derived from Social Network Sites” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science May 2015 659: 63-76, DOI: 10.1177/0002716215570866

Open Innovation, Open Science, Open to the World


Speech by Carlos Moedas, EU Commissioner for Research, Science and Innovation: “On 25 April this year, an earthquake of magnitude 7.3 hit Nepal. To get real-time geographical information, the response teams used an online mapping tool called Open Street Map. Open Street Map has created an entire online map of the world using local knowledge, GPS tracks and donated sources, all provided on a voluntary basis. It is open license for any use.

Open Street Map was created by a 24 year-old computer science student at University College London in 2004, has today 2 million users and has been used for many digital humanitarian and commercial purposes: From the earthquakes in Haiti and Nepal to the Ebola outbreak in West Africa.

This story is one of many that demonstrate that we are moving into a world of open innovation and user innovation. A world where the digital and physical are coming together. A world where new knowledge is created through global collaborations involving thousands of people from across the world and from all walks of life.

Ladies and gentlemen, over the next two days I would like us to chart a new path for European research and innovation policy. A new strategy that is fit for purpose for a world that is open, digital and global. And I would like to set out at the start of this important conference my own ambitions for the coming years….

Open innovation is about involving far more actors in the innovation process, from researchers, to entrepreneurs, to users, to governments and civil society. We need open innovation to capitalise on the results of European research and innovation. This means creating the right ecosystems, increasing investment, and bringing more companies and regions into the knowledge economy. I would like to go further and faster towards open innovation….

I am convinced that excellent science is the foundation of future prosperity, and that openness is the key to excellence. We are often told that it takes many decades for scientific breakthroughs to find commercial application.

Let me tell you a story which shows the opposite. Graphene was first isolated in the laboratory by Profs. Geim and Novoselov at the University of Manchester in 2003 (Nobel Prizes 2010). The development of graphene has since benefitted from major EU support, including ERC grants for Profs. Geim and Novoselov. So I am proud to show you one of the new graphene products that will soon be available on the market.

This light bulb uses the unique thermal dissipation properties of graphene to achieve greater energy efficiencies and a longer lifetime that LED bulbs. It was developed by a spin out company from the University of Manchester, called Graphene Lighting, as is expected to go on sale by the end of the year.

But we must not be complacent. If we look at indicators of the most excellent science, we find that Europe is not top of the rankings in certain areas. Our ultimate goal should always be to promote excellence not only through ERC and Marie Skłodowska-Curie but throughout the entire H2020.

For such an objective we have to move forward on two fronts:

First, we are preparing a call for European Science Cloud Project in order to identify the possibility of creating a cloud for our scientists. We need more open access to research results and the underlying data. Open access publication is already a requirement under Horizon 2020, but we now need to look seriously at open data…

When innovators like LEGO start fusing real bricks with digital magic, when citizens conduct their own R&D through online community projects, when doctors start printing live tissues for patients … Policymakers must follow suit…(More)”