Cyberspace: The Public Administrator Frontier

    Will Predictive Analytics Put Walter Mercado Out of Work?

“What if you could search into the future? Now you can.” This is the claim by the website Recorded Future (https://www.recordedfuture.com/) that uses predictive analytics to “…unleash all that mankind knows about the future.” The website was featured in the article The Pre-Crime Comes to the HR Department http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/feature/Pre-crime-Comes-to-the-HR-Dept-3905931.htm) which is an interesting account of how data scraped from cyberspace is being used to predict future actions. The article also features another website, Social Intelligence (www.socialintel.com/) that performs a similar service. However, this site will also follow the employee via cyberspace and alert the employer of any potential misconduct or indicator of future misconduct. I find this article raises some important question for public administrators:

1.       What are the ethical boundaries of cyberspace? Solely because information is available or an encounter is possible in cyberspace does this validate its action and use? And, how does this information and encounter—being that it takes place in cyberspace—differ  from an encounter in “real” space in terms of ethical norms, legality and the public good?

2.       What really can we predict? Dr. Herbst (ASU Professor) suggests that in regression analysis only very small percentage of interactions can be seen as potentially causal or predictive as the error term is where the majority of the interactions are explained. I assume some form of regression or similar statistics methods are used in predictive analysis and the capacity to accurately predict appears relatively limited.

·         Secondly, how does the reliance on quantitative data account for factors that are difficult to measure, isolate minority populations and promote homogeneity over diversity? Lessig (2006) contends that the nature of code is restrictive and needs to be carefully considered by those who construct it. He provides the parallel analogy for policy.

·         Furthermore, what are we saying by removing the power of the error term and possibility for a person to change. Does synergy—The interaction or cooperation of two or more organizations, substances, or other agents to produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects (Wikipedia definition)— cease to exist is within this concept?

I think this article reinforces the notion by Lessig (2006) that we should consider the constitution of the society we want to live in, paying attention to the code (policies within and without the internet) we construct and their effects on our lives.

Techno Savy Public Administrators

What problem are you trying to address?

A central problem that has been noted in public administration literature is the lack of participation in the electoral process by citizenry. The voter turnout for the Primary Mayoral Election in Phoenix only garnered 22% participation (AZ Republic, http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2011/09/30/20110930phoenix-dual-polling-places-may-stifle-turnout.html), which was an increase from the previous year. Alongside these dismal voter turnout rates reside low satisfaction and trust in the government. The most recent Gallop Poll indicates that 81% Americans are dissatisfied with the way the nation is governed and 69% indicate they have “not very much” or “none at all” trust and confidence in the legislative branch of the federal government (http://www.gallup.com/poll/149678/americans-express-historic-negativity-toward-government.aspx). I will examine the problem of low levels of government trust as a byproduct of low rates of participation in government and community involvement.

What current approaches are being used?

Currently a push for transparency is in effect to increase accountability and thus trust by citizens through legally mandating disclosure of the work being performed by the government and the allocation of resources. Furthermore, the resurgence of goals and performance metrics are a popular mechanism of demonstrating effectiveness and efficiency of governmental actions. As these structural changes provide a more accessible paper trail, they haven’t been successful in addressing the issue of trust which has been dropping precipitously since 2006 (Gallop Poll, September 26, 2011). A report by the United Nations: Managing Knowledge to Build Trust in Government states “E-Government’s ultimate objective is to provide a viable framework to make public services high quality, accessible and convenient” (http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/UN/UNPAN028460.pdf#page=280). I argue that a necessary component of E-Government not directly addressed in this document is the leveraging of technologies to increase the participation of citizens, not only in voting on policies and public officials but also taking part in the delivery of services and strengthening of community relationships (social capital). This I believe has the potential to lead to community protective factors and less intervention by the government. Moreover, I purport that trust will increase when the response-ability for action is transferred from the government back to the community (which includes local government, private, non-profit and local organizations).

Why should this new approach be useful (Hint: Lessig, especially chapter 7, will probably be helpful in this part)?

I propose that local government institutions utilize the framework of social networking sites and appropriate rating mechanisms to promote the discussion, collaboration and action for social advocacy. For example, utilizing the model of the website foursquare, a local government could track where and how much volunteerism, neighborhood clean-ups, voting registration, town halls, etc took place. The emphasis (represented by badges) shifts from the individual activities and consumption to the collective action for the benefit of the community. Additionally, the concept behind distributed moderation could be utilized to encourage the individuals with the highest attendance or social action impact to host a community forum. I think the metrics utilized by government would be a significant difference between what is being done in the private sector. The focus could shift from Number of Friends, Likes, Page Views, External Reviewers, etc.  to Percentage of “free-time” volunteering, whales saved, trees planted, children mentored, etc. Note: I don’t endorse the sole use of quantitative metrics as I believe they falsely promote excess. However, I recognize their effects on normative behavior.

This approach, rather than instituting a legal regulation for transparency, proposes an architectural opportunity for community engagement through local government internet sites. This also redefines the normative framework of civic participation from voting to community development, which is reminiscent of the Kennedy era, “ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country.”

Moreover, sites such as echo http://echo.to/en/ (still in the beta stage) are reminders of the positive use of social media towards the end goal of action rather than passive or inconsequential consumptive participation. The article on the Economies of Attention by Goldhaber provides an interesting perspective on human nature and the future of communication. Public administrators can learn from this in order to provide interesting attention measurable activities in cyberspace that promote stronger communities and active political participation.

Market Use

PAO!!!!!.....The Public Administration Opportunity

Rather than discussing the Public Administration Challenge, I would like to address the Public Administration Opportunity. Challenge can be defined as “a call to engage in a contest, fight, or competition” where opportunity can be conceptualized as “a favorable juncture of circumstances”. Each video reviewed this week deconstructs the popular notion of human nature being driven primarily by self-interest and provides new language for the human experience through the constructs of empathy, socially connectedness, participatory, transparency and collective action.

Videos

The video on empathy directly confronts this notion and suggests that human interactions are driven by our mirror neurons—an amazing concept that humans experience similar emotions and neural experiences as those witnessed by our fellow humans. The ALS video builds upon this idea with the formation of the http://www.patientslikeme.com/website. Individuals are able to share their stories within groups of individuals with like conditions and with those who are interested in the human story of each condition. The human story told through data is another interesting concept that quantitative researchers embark upon but cloak the individual story, face and experience beyond the curtain of anonymity and quantitative measures. Both of these shortcomings of the quantitative field are addressed through releasing the power of vulnerability and development of new measures—collected and constructed by the patients—to create a community. This is the aspect that speaks most directly to me. Social media is being used to connect us through the pain and suffering of the human experience to where “we need to give to others to be successful” (ALS Video).

The video by Chris Anderson touches upon the formation of new communities where the relationship of one-to-many is replaced by the relationship of many-to-many. I think this notion is the crux of the opportunities for both the internet (tool) and cyberspace (experience/community) to reconstruct our social constitution and consequently redefine our expectations for and experience with government. The Patientslikeus website empowers patients to shed the identity of victims in need of being saved by omnipotent doctors to being participants with an active role in concert with the medical community. This symphony of actors is not limited by the doctor-patient experience but is most potent when it extends to family and the cyber-community. Utilizing the internet as a connector around empathy and innovation (Anderson video) can create new ecosystems of health that can replace the reactive function of treatment and proactively build protective factors and emergent response systems within the community.

Second Life

I found the activity of joining Second Life very interesting. It is easy and free to join and the graphics and software are very modern and professional. The avatar experience in this world allows you to create your own avatar where you decide gender, appearance, race and contextual identity (human, animal, machine or symbol). This exercise reminded me of a quote by Catherine Riessman in her book Narrative Method for the Human Sciences. She states: “Perhaps the push toward narrative comes from contemporary preoccupations with identity. No longer viewed as given and “natural” individuals must now construct who they are and how they want to be known, just as groups, organizations, and governments do. In postmodern times, identities can be assembled and dissembled, accepted and contested, and indeed performed for audiences.” (Riessman, 2008 p. 7) I think this quote cogently provides a perspective for the draw to Second Life (SL). Within SL it appeared that all avatars who were people were skinny and the women were dressed with bare-minimum amounts of clothing. This identity I find pervasive in advertising and found it interesting that most individuals I came contact with ascribed to these generalizations of desired appearance. I also notice that people could get married on SL and written into the code was the blowing of kisses gesture and a love meter (I do not know the purpose of this indicator as we all need love). The availability for virtual connections is definitely a purposeful aspect of the architecture of the site.

Furthermore, the descriptions of the destinations provided a glimpse into expectations of a location: lover’s paradise, Perdition- where crime and ghetto-life run rampant, vampires, education, etc. Though I prefer the real interaction with people to that of the virtual experience, SL is noted to be a new tool for companies to hold virtual conferences and meetings. I can see how both the positive and negative aspects of a world similar to that shown in the movie Inception can be created in an environment of “limitless” (code permitting) possibilities and interactions. For public administration this could provide a medium for citizen to interact and model citizen expectations as they interact with computer generated public administrators and governance systems. Citizens could also create their own ideal city where they are subsequently encouraged to model these changes in the real world. The opportunities for both the intellectual development and practical motivation for action are ripe if utilized appropriately.

Meetup

The Meetup experience provided me with a new appreciation of the opportunities of social media. My mother is a very empathetic woman who was raised with a strong sense of community. Over time and by recently moving to a new neighborhood, my mother has become less connected to her social networks and would benefit greatly from sites such as Meetup. I registered for the Phoenix Philanthropists Volunteer Meetup and was made aware of the grand opening event for Maggie’s Thrift. Maggie’s Thrift is run by Maggie's Place who offers assistance to expectant mothers who are alone or are on the street. This is the type of organization that my mother expressed interest in volunteering for a number of years back but never found an opportunity to participate. Anderson would suggest that these sites create crowds focused (the light) on programs of your interest which subsequently leads to the catalyst for innovation through human interaction and desire. I like the language Anderson utilizes and the opportunities granted by sites such as Meetup.

Public Administration Opportunities

Modern public administration is ripe for opportunities for creating similar Meetup sites structured by the theories provided in the videos to engage to the highly mobile, populated urban cities. Democracy within this context can extend beyond the notion of shared ideas and equal votes to shared actions and equal participation. I believe that the responsibility placed upon government is disproportional to the resources available and our innate sense of accountability. Moreover, I propose that the opposition to the ideas that government should over regulate and control public and private actions stems from the inherent need to belong and participate. The liberty espoused in the American ideals is also imbued with a response-ability by each of us in shaping this nation and collectively writing its future. I contend that public administration will be successful if we are able to engage our citizens to release their collective intelligence, empathy, resources, love and innate desire to participate in advancing the human experience.

Citizen Deregulators... Mount Up

I chose the article Needles in a Haystack to analyze this week. The article describes the work of a 25 year-old San Franciscan computer programmer, Austin Heap who happened to come across an article about Iranians decrying that their votes were not counted in the recent presidential election. He thought he could help curb the government’s restriction of websites visited by developing a safe proxy for Iranians to use. With the help of a defected ex-Iranian government official he acquired the architecture for Iran’s filter software. Heap subsequently created an anti-censorship software called Haystack. He began to distribute this technology in Iran which is against U.S. trade law. The State Department assisted Heap in obtaining fast-track approval for the legal distribution of his technology to Iran. Since then, Heap has cofounded the Censorship Research Center, “a nonprofit dedicated to fighting censorship everywhere”.

The central problem addressed is freedom of speech and freedom assembly in Iran and the countervailing views of these principles in the United States. Heap has utilized an architecture deregulator to address this problem. Interestingly, this is the only method that is available to a single individual (non-citizen of Iran) living outside of Iran. Heap had no means of addressing the laws, market (to any significant extent) or norms of Iran. Conversely, the U.S. government has exercised both market influences through economic sanctions and restriction of trade and lawful sanctions through international organization such as the United Nations. It could also be suggest that the U.S. has attempted to change the norms inside of Iran by explicit and economic support of Iranian dissidents. The effects of market, law and norm regulators imposed by the United States appear to be slower moving and not as immediately impactful as the work of Heap’s architectural deregulator. Heap’s deregulator facilitates free speech and communication in a non-directed fashion, as the previous three regulators endeavor targeted influences on society. Thus, the impact of Heap’s work is unknown as it decentralizes power rather than shifting it to other centralized structures.

Furthermore, the support by the U.S. of Heap’s software—though originally illegal according to U.S. Trade Law—could be viewed as what Lessig (2006) terms indirection. This misdirection of responsibility can assist in shielding the U.S. as an active proponent in creating structures that undermine Iranian law. It would be interesting to know if Heap’s work and foundation are supported by U.S. government funding. Ironically, the current support for such technology by the U.S. could prove to have unintended consequences if similar methods are utilized to assist individuals in the U.S. in evading U.S. laws. Since the context of Iranian values is being filtered through U.S. values, a strong value contradiction (within the U.S.) is not in effect—unless the idea of sovereignty is being addressed. However, as the prevalence in use of such technologies to deter U.S. surveillance and apprehension increases, I purport that there will be reduction in U.S. Government support for these technologies and subsequent debates within the political and judicial environments. The article concerning backdoor encryption algorithms provides evidence of this conflicting value—within Iran these technologies are good and within the U.S. they are bad. Moreover, the proliferation of technologies created in the U.S. laden with U.S. values of such as liberty or free markets theory are powerful change agents in the international scene. This suggests ethical questions of sovereignty and governance should be reviewed by the United States as cyberspace facilitates communication and international influence to degrees not available previously.

In this example, I can see no other methods of influence available to Heap to empower citizens in the method he is interested. I suggest a more salient argument here is the role of citizens as deregulators of governmental control. As suggested in the articles concerning the government’s use of new technologies to control the actions and monitor citizens; the level of freedom available to citizens is being monitored and the long-term consequences remain unknown. Will the architecture of cyberspace stifle citizen participation and increase government control or will hackers and technology activists play the balancing force within this medium to counteract such control and continue the debate between security and freedom? I agree with Lessig that “code embeds certain values or makes certain values impossible” (p.125) and hope that if government continues to over emphasize security that programmers emerge as the philosophical defenders of liberty in order for citizens to consider the impact of such regulation on market, law, social norms and most importantly architectural frameworks.