Holes in the theory
Watching Lewis Black's "Red, White and Screwed" the other night, I got angry about facts. Not particular facts, but facts in general. He says (paraphrasing here) that we don't hear facts anymore. We hear spin and opinion. The Republican party says "This is how the situation in Iraq looks to us," and the Democratic party says "No, actually it looks more like this," and the commissions our dollars pay for try to report some actual facts and everyone waits for someone to summarize it and recommend a course of action.
Even policy makers can't be asked to actually read a piece of legislation. Consider the scene in Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11, wherein he asks a bevy of actual congressfolks what they thought when the read the Patriot Act. Well, the sick thing is, none of them had. Some of the laughed at the thought of reading it. Facts have to parceled out, interpreted, commented on and turned into a short animated film by Trey Parker and Matt Stone before anyone in the regular populace will pay attention.
Most people just change the channel when presented with actual data. They glance at graphs and presume that presentation is reality. Seeing is believing on a stupidly profound level.
I am a die-hard anti conspiracy theorist. I believe that collective action by millions of individuals causes things to happen, and I don't really believe that any small group of people has nearly the control over our populace as some would like you to think. (Mind, the notion of conspiracy theory may be a useful tool for prodding people to action... but it might also be encouragement for the nihilistic malaise so many people feel when confronted with actual opportunities for change. I'm not sure.) So, I don't want to imply that the lack of facts is some kind of horrific plot to control our minds, but I think that everyone with control over media, or the money to utilize it is definitely taking advantage of the situation.
So when the honorable Mr. Black offers up that we're not seeing any facts, he hits me really close to home. I love facts. I fucking love facts. I can look at charts and graphs and maps and tables and dictionaries and thesauri and encyclopediae for days and days and days. I just want to learn things. The internet isn't just for porn, it IS porn. That is, in the sense that I am physically attracted to information, and there is no better place to get it.
But most people don't want all that information. Unlike me, it isn't in their current curriculum vitae to spend three hours on a weekday night oscillating between Wikipedia entries and non-fiction books. Most people don't want to do that. No one should have to do that. In fact, I understand that I'm pretty abnormal because I do.
But... and I'm not yelling at you, dear reader... THAT DOESNT FUCKING EXCUSE THE FACT THAT RAW, UNPOLISHED DATA IS DAMN NEAR IMPOSSIBLE TO FIND!
You know, yelling never gets old. But seriously, research is a huge industry these days. Believe me, I sell tens of thousands of dollars of esoteric research equipment every day, to scientists in dozens of fields. Biology, chemistry, zoology, biochemistry, nano-manufacturing, criminology, primatology, weapons research, materials science... this country is locked down hard into a progress model. We want to create, understand and categorize, and as a result, people around the world are looking at data. They're collating facts into those little nuggets of wisdom you see on CNN and read in the NY Times.
But they're not sharing it with me. Or else I'm completely in the dark as to where I can find more of this information. I want to be involved in this process. I'm no research scientist, but I can read tables of data and draw useful conclusions. Problem is finding that data. Facts. Unrefined information. Where are the repositories?
Where do I find a chart of temperature data for the last sixty years organized by daily, weekly, monthly and yearly averages? Sorted by region, elevation and aggregate world temperature?
Who can give me Nation Park earnings figures from 1930 to the present? Not to mention expenditures, percentage of revenue from donation or from ticket sales? How much of their budget comes directly from taxes, and how much is from other sources?
What was Grover Cleveland's use of the Veto like? Specifically, how many times did he use it, and against what bills? When was he overturned? Who spearheaded those votes? What were the margins?
I've tried often to find this sort of information. It exists. It's chronicled. I know this, because researchers use it when they publish articles. I'm probably just advertising my ignorance. I know you can probably find it in books in libraries, but isn't that silly? Inefficient at least. The old hacker credo still stands that information wants to be free, and locking it in books doesn't help anyone.
Again, this isn't about conspiracy. It's just that no one has any incentive to put that information into the public sphere. Google is trying, with Google Books. Most reference publishers have to charge prohibitively for their works, just to afford to be able to collect information that way. Things are changing, but slowly. We need to find ways to give incentive to the people who have this information to make it public.
I suppose what I want to say is that until information is easy to find, even dataphiles like myself will run into walls at every turn. A staff of researchers has the experience, incentive and time to track down, consume and organize data into bite-sized chunks for mass consumption. I don't have those resources, but that doesn't invalidate any conclusions I may draw. Good search tools are a must for the rest of us. Transparency levels the playing field.
As we approach perfect access to data, we will likely see an increase in the validity of points that individuals raise. We'll see more theorizing as well and better competition and we'll have a way to settle disputes. I hope that the same forces breaking down copyright and intellectual property will some day break down the limited locus of information. Electronic data doesn't have to be treated like a commodity.
Labels: Copyright, Data, Internet, Research, Science