Three Things We Don’t Know About Obama’s Massive Voter Database

By Lois Beckett for ProPublica | March 27, 2012

President Obama's re-election campaign is reportedly building a massive database of information about potential supporters.

The database seems to bring together information about supporters gathered from all branches of the campaign — everything from an individual's donation records to volunteer activity to online intera

ctions with the campaign — aimed at allowing the campaign to personalize every interaction with potential supporters.
Earlier this month, we built an interactive graphic showing how different Obama supporters received different variations of the same email — one way that the campaign may be using data to personalize messages.

We can't describe the Obama campaign's database with certainty because the campaign won't talk about it. Citing concerns about letting Republicans learn its tactics, the campaign declined our request for comment — as it has with other outlets — about what data the campaign collects and what it's doing with the data. The campaign did emphasize that, regardless of what information it gathers, it has never sold voter data or shared its voter database with other candidates.

Here's a guide to what we know — and don't know — about the information Obama is collecting about voters.

1. What information is the campaign collecting about individual supporters?

We know only some of the data it's collecting, but it is clearly collecting a lot.

The Obama campaign has hired a corporate data-mining expert, Rayid Ghani, to serve as its "chief scientist." Ghani has previously researched how to use a retailer's record of customer purchases to predict what a particular customer will buy during a given shopping trip — the same kind of data crunching that Target has apparently used to predict whether shoppers are pregnant. The campaign is continuing to hire "analytics engineers" and other data experts.

Click to read more ...

Mayor Warns on The Pitfalls of Social Media

Nicky Loh/Getty ImagesBy Michael M. Grynbaum for The New York Times | March 21, 2012

On Twitter, he is @MikeBloomberg, a popular online avatar with more than 230,000 followers. His official Foursquare account leaves tips about Shake Shack and Kennedy International Airport. And his Facebook page energetically promotes the programs and values of New York City Hall.

But the actual Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg? When it comes to social media, he has a few concerns.

In a speech on Wednesday in Singapore, where he received a prize for urban sustainability, Mr. Bloomberg spoke about the difficulties of leading a city into the future amid a political culture that is often focused on the short term.

The mayor noted that technology, despite its benefits, can add new pitfalls to an already grueling process. “Social media is going to make it even more difficult to make long-term investments” in cities, Mr. Bloomberg said.

“We are basically having a referendum on every single thing that we do every day,” he said. “And it’s very hard for people to stand up to that and say, ‘No, no, this is what we’re going to do,’ when there’s constant criticism, and an election process that you have to look forward to and face periodically.”

Later, Mr. Bloomberg noted that long-term urban planning “requires leadership, and standing up, and saying, ‘You know, you elected me, this is what we’re going to do,’ and not take a referendum on every single thing.”

At that, the mayor’s interlocutor, the Singaporean professor Kishore Mahbubani, took back the microphone.

“I think the Singapore government sympathizes with your point about social media,” Professor Mahbubani said, prompting loud laughter from the audience. “We are having the same daily referendums in Singapore.”

Click to read more ...

SOPA/PIPA Protest in New York. January 2012

Hello NY TECH MEET UP!

This afternoon we gathered together to protest an unprecedented attack on the future of our industry and to demonstrate and defend our love of the open web.

I used to joke that politicians don't know the difference between a server and a waiter, but in regards to PIPA and SOPA their ignorance in no joke.

In an effort to combat piracy which we all would like to minimize if not outright eliminate, Congress, at the behest of monied special interests representing the copyright holding industries, is proposing to redesign the Internet. If they are successful, they will not only not only stifle  innovation and investment in emerging technology companies in New York and elsewhere, they will irrevocably damage the architecture of the Internet so as to embolden censorship around the world.

The Internet and related connection technologies have created a renaissance in startup innovation in New York that now rivals Silicon Valley as a hub for economic growth. Tens of thousands of New Yorkers have been inspired to become entrepreneurs creating thousands and thousands of new jobs and offering professionals in many of New York’s traditional industries the opportunity to start new careers participating in the 21stcentury global economy. More importantly, the open web has fostered a new era of reform around the world allowing citizens using the technology to challenge repressive regimes and demand accountability in their political systems.

To be absolutely clear, we totally oppose any piracy of any and all copy righted material, However because of the poor way the language of the legislation is written, there is a very real possibility that that the PIPA and SOPA laws would vastly discourage  open innovation, investment, entrepreneurship, and free speech.

Click to read more ...