Well, let’s see how you can get press for all the wrong reasons.
Let’s start with a idea to crowd source information about areas with high crime rates that people might want to avoid. Build a website around it and launch it with the name “Ghetto Tracker.”
What could possibly go wrong?
Predictably it blew up. Take the coverage from Gawker as an example. The site was then taken down, brought back up after some changes to the graphics and the name for good measure (it was re-branded “Good Part Of Town”), and then taken down again. Sort of.
Well, the name is offensive because of what it implies, which is that this site helps people avoid parts of a given city that has visible minorities. It also didn’t help that the graphics were all of smiling white people, who were then replaced by smiling black people when the controversy exploded. But what really doesn’t help is the fact that the data is crowd sourced. That means that people are giving opinions and not facts when it comes to parts of town that one might want to avoid. That’s a #fail if I ever saw one.
I admit that I might get lit up like a bonfire by saying this. But I think that this idea has some merit. I can’t count the number of times where I’ve gone to a US city on business and unknowingly driven through a neighborhood where I felt less than safe, and I later found out it was absolutely not safe and I should not have been anywhere near that area. However, I would only go for this If, and only if, the data that determines what a bad part of town is comes from actual crime statistics rather than human beings. Take items like murder, petty crime, carjacking, etc. Use all of those to come up with a score, sort of along the lines of the passer rating in the NFL and use that to make the call. If the score passes a certain threshold, it is to be avoided. Doing it this way means that It’s empirical and without biases. If you wanted to get creative, add it to Google Maps or your GPS system along with the checkboxes that say things like “avoid tolls” and “avoid highways.”
Am I out to lunch here or am I making more sense than the authors of this website? Post a comment and share your thoughts. Please be kind.
Website Named “Ghetto Tracker” Causes Fury
Posted in Commentary with tags Crime, Racism, Statistics on September 9, 2013 by itnerdWell, let’s see how you can get press for all the wrong reasons.
Let’s start with a idea to crowd source information about areas with high crime rates that people might want to avoid. Build a website around it and launch it with the name “Ghetto Tracker.”
What could possibly go wrong?
Predictably it blew up. Take the coverage from Gawker as an example. The site was then taken down, brought back up after some changes to the graphics and the name for good measure (it was re-branded “Good Part Of Town”), and then taken down again. Sort of.
Well, the name is offensive because of what it implies, which is that this site helps people avoid parts of a given city that has visible minorities. It also didn’t help that the graphics were all of smiling white people, who were then replaced by smiling black people when the controversy exploded. But what really doesn’t help is the fact that the data is crowd sourced. That means that people are giving opinions and not facts when it comes to parts of town that one might want to avoid. That’s a #fail if I ever saw one.
I admit that I might get lit up like a bonfire by saying this. But I think that this idea has some merit. I can’t count the number of times where I’ve gone to a US city on business and unknowingly driven through a neighborhood where I felt less than safe, and I later found out it was absolutely not safe and I should not have been anywhere near that area. However, I would only go for this If, and only if, the data that determines what a bad part of town is comes from actual crime statistics rather than human beings. Take items like murder, petty crime, carjacking, etc. Use all of those to come up with a score, sort of along the lines of the passer rating in the NFL and use that to make the call. If the score passes a certain threshold, it is to be avoided. Doing it this way means that It’s empirical and without biases. If you wanted to get creative, add it to Google Maps or your GPS system along with the checkboxes that say things like “avoid tolls” and “avoid highways.”
Am I out to lunch here or am I making more sense than the authors of this website? Post a comment and share your thoughts. Please be kind.
Leave a comment »