November 2012

The 2012 election and big data are quickly becoming synonymous as the post-mortems and "How Obama Won" stories are published in the wake of the presidential contest. Speaking at Business Insider's Ignition conference in New York, Patrick Ruffini, president of Engage DC, and Blue State Digital CEO Thomas Gensemer weighed in on digital's role in the recent election cycle and the challenges that face the GOP in the data race for 2016.

The incumbent advantage was very real in 2012 -- especially when it came to implementing technology and organizing, Gensemer told the audience. "The biggest shift for democrats in this election was that we didn't have to deal with the primary," he said, noting that the general election focus allowed the Obama campaign to open up a series of field offices and digital infrastructures in swing states like Pennsylvania months before the Romney campaign. While Gensemer noted the Obama team's incumbent advantage, he also credits Howard Dean and Democrats with embracing digital as early as 2004. "Data and organizing have been the DNC's priority from 2010 onward," he said.

If Google is to achieve its stated mission to “organize the world's information and make it universally accessible,” says Jon Wiley, lead user experience designer for Google search, it must find out about people’s hidden needs and learn how to serve them. And he says experience sampling -- bugging people to share what they want to know right now, whether they took action on it or not -- is the best way to do it.

“Doing that on a mobile device is a relatively new technology, and it’s getting us better information that we really haven’t had in the past,” he says. Wiley’s research may take Google in new directions. “One of the patterns that stands out is the multitude of devices that people have in their lives,” he says. Just as mobile devices made it possible for Google to discover unmet needs for information through the study, they could also be used to meet those needs in the future.

The judge who spent a year investigating the misdeeds of Britain's lively newspapers is giving Prime Minister David Cameron an early look at his recommendations for the regulation of the press. Officials say Cameron will get a copy of Lord Justice Brian Leveson's report Nov 28, a day before the public sees it, but Cameron is already being besieged with advice about how to respond to the still-secret recommendations. The big question: Should the government legislate to regulate newspapers, or give them another chance at self-regulation?

Rep Darrell Issa (R-CA) is proposing a big legislative time-out in the form of a moratorium on new Internet regulations for the next two years.

It's certainly a bizarre move considering that Congress typically doesn't vote away its ability to do its job, but it's a defensive tactic that could resonate with an Internet audience that expressed concern about having to play whack-a-mole with bad internet laws following SOPA. The bill, named The Internet American Moratorium Act (IAMA), is currently just a "discussion draft" — which means that it's got a long way to go before even being considered for a vote by Congress. The bill's provisions are extremely broad, and would pretty much put a stop to all internet lawmaking.

A blanket ban on Internet legislation probably isn't a good thing, even if it gives Congress a little more time to educate itself on internet issues: the law would require both Congress and federal agencies, like the Federal Communications Commission, to put a halt on Internet regulation. That would mean the FCC's critically received Open Internet regulations would have to sit still for another two years (which might not be a problem for Republicans, like Rep Issa, who oppose network neutrality). It would also mean that the government would be unable to make new demands of companies like Facebook and Google to ensure the privacy of their customers through new regulations.