Exactly How Responsible Are We For Privacy?

privacyFacebook recently entered a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission admitting all manner of fraud in its privacy policies.  The list of violations admitted are shocking enough to make the most hardened among us blush.

Here is the list of violations to which Facebook admitted, from the FTC announcement.

  • “Facebook changed its website so certain information that users may have designated as private – such as their Friends List – was made public. They didn’t warn users that this change was coming, or get their approval in advance.”
  • “Facebook represented that third-party apps that users’ installed would have access only to user information that they needed to operate. In fact, the apps could access nearly all of users’ personal data – data the apps didn’t need.”
  • “Facebook told users they could restrict sharing of data to limited audiences – for example with ‘Friends Only.’ In fact, selecting ‘Friends Only’ did not prevent their information from being shared with third-party applications their friends used.”
  • “Facebook had a ‘Verified Apps’ program & claimed it certified the security of participating apps. It didn’t.”
  • “Facebook promised users that it would not share their personal information with advertisers. It did.”
  • “Facebook claimed that when users deactivated or deleted their accounts, their photos and videos would be inaccessible. But Facebook allowed access to the content, even after users had deactivated or deleted their accounts.”
  • “Facebook claimed that it complied with the U.S.- EU Safe Harbor Framework that governs data transfer between the U.S. and the European Union. It didn’t.”

We shouldn’t be surprised that Facebook would use every means at its disposal to gain a business advantage (especially if you’ve see The Social Network), but the sheer impunity of the violations is still shocking.

Facebook agreed to a long list of reforms, but do you still feel good about using social media data in your research analysis?

If you have any grounding in the history of market research and its respect for respondent privacy, you should pause to consider the implications of the Facebook settlement for the future of market research.

Research-Live.com editor Brian Tarran writes about this dilemma in his recent post, “What the Facebook FTC settlement means for market research.”

“The question is, how do researchers respond knowing that errors of technology and ethical judgement might be commonplace?” Tarran writes. “Can they – and more importantly, should they – trust the promises a site makes to its users about its terms of service or privacy policy? Legal recourse for misuse of data might land on the website itself, but does that mean researchers are absolved of all ethical and moral responsibility to the people they are taking data from?”

These are important issues, indeed. As an industry, we should keep our eyes wide open and continue to be the skeptical data consumers we have been trained to be.

We should use our professional judgement to exclude data where there is a reasonable supposition that privacy violations exist.

We should lend our strong support to proper regulatory efforts like the FTC’s investigation as privacy advocates and as professionals with an interest in data integrity.

Once we’ve taken those steps, though, we’ve done our part.

We should then keep forging ahead and using social media data in our analyses.

It would be a shame if our noble concern for privacy were to stop us from innovating and taking advantage of new data sources, data collection methodologies and analytical techniques.

The reality is we are limited in our ability to control the privacy policies and practices of other organizations.  We must rely on the proper authorities to enforce privacy violations.  We should have a critical approach to our use of data.

Beyond that, we have satisfied our responsibility, and we should proceed boldly.

Photo Credit:  Alan Cleaver

Liquor Privatization Initiative Accurately Pegged by Pre-Election Online Survey

liquorSurvey Analytics is pleased to report that our recent poll of King County, Washington voters called the outcome of the State of Washington’s liquor privatization initiative with a high degree of precision.

Our political poll marks an exciting and innovative, new approach whereby public opinion researchers, public affairs firms, political consultants and political campaigns themselves can cost-effectively and efficiently take the pulse of the electorate.

1183

Back in late October through early November, we invited likely voters residing in King County and Seattle to weigh in on various ballot measures, candidates and other matters. One of the most prominent issues on the November 8 General Election ballot was Initiative 1183, which will privatize the sales and distribution of liquor.

A total of 2,001 likely King County voters took part in our survey. When asked how they would vote “if the election were held today,” 61% said yes and 33% said no, with 6% undecided. In the actual election results, 60% of ballots cast voted for the initiative and 40% against. A match-back analysis of the survey sample suggests that those who participated were closely representative of the King County electorate, in terms of party affiliation, gender and age.

Liquor Chart

Unlike full-blown telephone surveys typically used by pollsters, our unique approach can be fielded within minutes and produce meaningful results within hours. Complete cross-tabulation data and topline results are available immediately. A complete analysis of our survey and its results is coming soon.

Note: For more information on this survey, check out this post on the SurveyAnalytics Blog:  ”Voter Panels – a real-world application in predicting outcomes of voter initiatives.”  

Election Polls: 5 Tips For Navigating the Clutter

vote buttonTomorrow is Election Day here in the States.  The big vote (for President) isn’t until next year, but we have the usual spate of races for local offices as well as a wide range of citizen-initiated referenda on everything from the mundane (bond measures) to the highly divisive (social issues).

As the expected avalanche of survey results washes over me and everybody else (accompanied by a barrage of television advertising, internet electioneering, and attack mailers), I thought I’d share some tips for understanding which poll results to heed, and which to take with the proverbial grain of salt.

My experience in the world of election polling has given me a bit of insight into this topic; I hope these tips help you find your way on your journey through the sea of election polling data.

1. Understand the Methodology

The best way to judge an election poll – indeed, any survey – is to have a good understanding of the study’s methodology.  Unfortunately, reporting on survey methodology is often woefully inadequate, scarcely going beyond a reporting of the margin of error.  However, sometimes one can read between the lines of a story to gain a better understanding of the circumstances under which the poll was conducted, including: timing, data collection mode and survey length.

If the methodology is completely unclear from the article, be a good citizen and email the editor requesting clarification.  The rest of us will thank you!

2. Think Random

Generally speaking, in election surveys, relative to market research surveys, it is particularly important to have sampling methods that give all likely voters as equal as possible an opportunity to be surveyed.  Look for efforts to ensure a representative sample, including:

- surveying voters at different times of day and on different days of the week
- compensating for sampling limitations such as telephone coverage, cell phone coverage, and internet access
- using a “likely voter” screening question, ensuring only those both registered and likely to vote are considered.

Also, be wary of  polls conducted using automated telephone interviews rather than trained interviewers.

3. Evaluate the News Source

As good a data consumer as you are, you cannot realistically check the fine details of methodology on every study.  Therefore, pay attention to the reputation and track record of both the publishing entity.

More reputable organizations tend to higher publishing standards than less reputable ones; they have more to lose if they publish bad reporting.  Put more stock in a study reported by the Washington Post or the Pew Research Center than a study sponsored by a smaller or less reputable newspaper, website, non-profit organization.

In local elections, sometimes the most reputable (though hardly infallible) source is the state or locality’s largest newspaper.  However, look for critical analysis rather than simple reporting of results.

4. Pay Attention to the Sponsor.  Often a group with a vested interest in an election will privately commission a survey to be used for internal strategy; however, if some of the results support their public relations efforts, they will release an (often-misleading) subset of the data in order to influence the electorate.  Sometimes entire carefully-worded polls will be conducted which are meant for public release.  Be very skeptical of any data paid for by a group or persons with an interest in the election’s outcome.

5. Learn from the Experts.  There is a wealth of great content created by smart people who focus on analyzing election data.  Take advantage of their wisdom!  I’m partial to HuffPost Pollster (formerly Pollster.com) – check out my friends Mark Blumenthal (a.k.a. “@MysteryPollster“) and Margie Omero – and Nate Silver’s Five Thirty Eight blog at the New York Times.

These resources are primarily focused on U.S. Elections; there are undoubtedly many more good resources out there both for the U.S. and everywhere else; please suggest others in the comments section below.

I hope these tips are useful to you.  And if you’re in the U.S., don’t forget to vote tomorrow!

Mobile Polling of the State of the Union

Tomorrow night, President Barack Obama will deliver his State of the Union address before a joint session of Congress. Every major political event, but especially a presidential address, is always soon followed by a slew of polling information conducted by media outlets, analyst firms, and so on. We’ll hear news stories that tell us how the President performed, based on the opinion of sampling of a few hundred people.

We all know market research, and those polls can certainly be an accurate representation of public sentiment. But we also know that larger samples equal better data. That’s why I’m following the SurveyAnalytics State of the Union project. This project is a joint effort of SurveyAnalytics, SurveySwipe (a new mobile device research platform), Cooper Strategies, and UMass Amherst.
[Read more...]

How Crowdsourcing is used at FEMA

One of the most interesting and seemingly impactful uses of crowdsourcing technology seems to be taking place within governments. (We’ve talked about this before with Bev Godwin of the GSA and  Haley VanDyck of the FCC.)

Recently, Craig Fugate, Administrator of the US Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) posted to the White House Blog about how FEMA is using crowdsourcing and public challenges to engage the public, gather input and feedback, and generate new ideas.
[Read more...]

Interview with Bev Godwin of the US General Services Administration

Continuing our series of interviews from the Government 2.0 Summit, we spoke with Bev Godwin, Director of New Media and Citizen Engagement for the US General Services Administration (found on Twitter at twitter.com/govnewmedia). Bev sat down to talk with us about ways the GSA is providing new social media-based research and feedback tools to agencies throughout the Federal government to improve the governments connection with the public. She also introduced us to Challenge.gov, a new initiative that allows the public to participate in solving challenges facing the government.

(If you are receiving this post via e-mail or RSS, be sure to click through to the Web version to view the embedded video.)

Interview with Haley VanDyck – Director of Citizen Engagement, FCC

Continuing our series of interview from the Government 2.0 Summit, we sat down with Haley VanDyck. Haley is the Director of Citizen Engagement for the Federal Communications Commission, and she spoke with us about ways that the FCC is using social media technologies like crowdsourcing to engage with citizens and collect public comments on new regulation (see the Broadband.gov IdeaScale instance for an example).

(If you are receiving this post via e-mail or RSS, be sure to click through to the Web version to view the embedded video.)

Live from the Government 2.0 Summit

We’re spending the day in Washington, DC today, covering the Government 2.0 Summit. We’ll be sitting down with senior officials from a variety of government agencies to discuss new technologies being used to connect with and listen to the public. (The government is a pretty big consumer of market research!)

Have a question you’d like us to ask? Send it our way! Post it in the comments of this post, or find us on Twitter.

Look for full video of our interviews in the next few days!

Goverment – “How to get to Yes” – Peter Levin – CTO of Veterans Administration

Peter Levin is one of the most down-to-earth CTO’s of a federal agency I’ve ever met – Strike that – he is one of the most straight talking CTO’s I’ve _ever_ met. It’s quite amazing that he is the CTO of a 310,000 (yes – 310K) person organization – the Veterans Administration.

Recently, Peter gave a talk on “Get to Yes” – on Gov 2.0 – To talk about his experience on making Government work and work better. Key points he mentioned:

  • The notion of “Getting To Yes” – Only Secy Shinseki can say “No” – Find a way to get to “Yes”
  • Transforming from Adversary to Advocacy
  • I need to get 300K employees to engage – find a channel – Be present, accessible on the web
  • IdeaScale worked well – but there are lots of other tools also out there
  • 50K employees participating in this experiment
  • 6 Million Unique patients the VA serves

Video embedded below: