On Social Networking

I had an opportunity last night to discuss Social Networking with a few friends. As a very avid poster on Facebook (I hate the term Facebooker, it's not a verb) and Tweeter (on Twitter), I've surely got my opinions (as you can tell).

"Facebook is silly, why do you need to update your status? Who cares that you mowed the lawn or walked the dog? And why do I care that someone needs a cow for their farm?"

Okay, I'll admit that the applications are way out of hand. Then again, I'm not in the application demographic. But I update my status pretty often, and the 460-or-so people on my friends list can see what I'm up to if they want to. Facebook has proven its worth many times over to me. I'm in touch with people I was friends with in elementary school after not seeing them in person for over 2o years. It's almost taken the place of a point-in-time yearbook, because now I see these friends grown up with families. Updating your status gives the people on your list the ability to see a little bit about you. You can use Facebook without updates, but I think that's the drawing point and gets people coming back regularly.

"Why does anyone need to know that someone is in the bathroom? I mean, when else would you do the Twitter thing?"

Twitter is a stream-of-consciousness tool. Nothing else. It's great for viral marketing and passing along funny things and memes, but it's all based on what's happening now. If you don't think you need to tweet, there are likely a couple of reasons why. You might not like providing details of your life to perfect strangers. Well, who says you need to? It's about keeping your fingers on the pulse of the many. It's immediacy, immediately. And it's more about opinions than actual information. You also need a good tool for Twitter. In my opinion you need a smartphone (BlackBerry, iPhone) to take full advantage of it.

"Isn't Twitter and Facebook the same thing?"

This gets arguments all across the world. My opinion: No, it's not. Facebook is a closed network of people you let in. Updating your status on Facebook and posting things on walls, and needing a cow for your farm gets you to interact with specific people that you let into your network. Twitter is wide open (unless you don't want it to be ... and unless you're posting things you don't need to, that's just silly) and you can measure the public consciousness without having to be a part of their specific network. There are overlaps. But they're less alike than the first impression might lead you to think.

"Isn't all this the downfall of human interaction? People don't know how to carry on a face-to-face conversation anymore!"

I don't buy this argument. Nothing takes the place of a personal conversation when you need to have one. Work is not done on Facebook or Twitter, and social skills are specifically important. But the under-20s in this world use Social Networking as tools rather than just as websites to participate in. There is a generational divide in the use of technology. The long-told joke about hiring a kid to set the time on your currently flashing (12:00) VCR might be outdated, but now that kid might be setting up your Facebook page or transferring your pictures to an online storage medium. These "kids" pop out already wired for technology. It's true. Maybe it's why kids seem to all be ADHD by default. Is the art of conversation something to be taught in school? Possibly. But I wonder what was said when typewriters became prevalent in the last century -- did bloggers rue the downfall of penmanship?

On Weather

In yesterday's New York Times was an article that's completely reflects the purpose of this blog. They explain that there are less murders in NYC on rainy days than on sunny days.

Being that they did the analysis for me (thanks, guys!), let's take a look on how an article like this gets written. It's possible the intrepid Times reporters started with a regular review of historical daily murder figures, matched them with weather patterns, and came up with a correlation between days of rain and homicides.

Being that the recent weather in New York City had been so damp in the month of June, it's possible that the reporters (or an editor, or an unrelated analyst) saw the decrease in year-on-year murders from last year's really hot and dry June, brought it to the attention of the right people, and from there the reporters decided to investigate further.

I'm going to venture a guess and go with that second scenario.

Most detailed data analysis is founded in brainstorms. "Hey, what do you say about this?" or "This might be a pattern." Investigations do not always yield measurable results that can be neatly packaged into an article. But this one did.

The best part about this article is that it doesn't just provide a clear explanation proving a thesis. It gives lots of possibilities as to why the analysis might turn up the data they are presenting. This is a big difference. Data doesn't lie, but why it falls into patterns is not always so cut and dry.

On Voting

I recognize the Junior Senator from the Great State of Minnesota.

Al Franken, known better as a comedian and author of books decrying the mental capacity and body shape of a right-wing radio host, has won the terminal legal challenge against Norm Coleman to be seated in the U.S. Senate.

This is an historic decision, not just because of the legal ramifications, but because of the tightness of this race. Over 2.9 million votes were cast, and Franken won by 312. That's a 0.0129% margin.

On Election Night, way back in November, Norm Coleman had the initial lead, with 206 votes over Franken. The usual chaos of a contested election ensued, and the voting lead switched back and forth due to the challenging of certain ballots.

But, let's look in on the data. The two most populous counties in Minnesota (Hennepin & Ramsey) are where most of the vast Minneapolis-St. Paul central urban area exist. In these two counties, covering about 1/3 of all votes cast in this election, Franken won in a virtual landslide with 58.8% of the vote. Yet Coleman had 54.3% of the votes in the other 2/3 of the state.

Coleman's biggest voting margin came in Carver County, a suburb of Minneapolis, with 65.7% of the votes cast in that county. Franken's biggest voting margin came in St. Louis County (Duluth), with 62.7%. Coleman had over 60% of the vote in 11 counties to Franken's 3, but Coleman's landslides happened well outside the population centers.

The fractured race for Senator in Minnesota thusly came down to the political leanings of urban vs. rural populations. This mirrors much of the rest of the country, as ideology somewhat mirrors lifestyle.

(See the outstanding Minneapolis Star-Tribune coverage: http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/)

On Broadway

The Tony Awards were presented this past Sunday.

Fourteen different shows that debuted this season won an award. If you're in the New York area, you already see the ads touting the victories. Many of these shows, from the revival of Hair to the new star-studded play God of Carnage, are expecting to reap benefits at the box office with the summer tourists. Billy Elliot has played to full houses since its opening, and with its 10 Tony wins its success will manifest as endurance, rather than with increased attendance.

The rest, if they haven't closed yet, are weighing their options. The musical Shrek, which won only one award for costumes, will be offering steep discounts in an effort to attrack theatregoers. Other musicals are closing because they can't compete with the award winners.

This is the pattern that Broadway shows have followed for decades, exacerbated in 2009 by the economy. The summer tourist season is a great boon to the established shows, to which out-of-towners will flock. And it's big business, with yearly Broadway revenues just shy of $950 Million over the past few years. And this doesn't count New York's vibrant Off-Broadway scene.

Broadway producers aren't dumb, however, and they track their own metrics. Much of this data is internal, but the expectation of an award-show bump to recoup a significant investment is what keeps some of these shows playing this long in the first place.

On striking nurses

There are 650 nurses at Englewood Hospital, and they're striking because of a pay dispute, among other things. To strike for more money alone seems absurd in this economy, so I hope it's not just that. Sorry, I digress.

As per the Bergen Record's report in 6/9/2009:

• the nurses' union says the average salary for nurses in Englewood is $80,000.
• the hospital says the average salary for nurses in Englewood is nearly $100,000.

Both numbers are possibly right. Why? Definitions.

I would ask each side of the argument for the formula they used. It's conceivable that the union is using a median instead of a straight average. Maybe the hospital is only counting registered nurses. What about those working part-time? Are there nurses that split duty between multiple hospitals? Maybe the nurse administrators' salaries are in one of these calculations.

In any case, this information is both biased and incomplete. Without a clear definition, "Nurse's Salary" is a metric that I would never put into a report. And even if I'm not privy to the calculation, I would want to know that it would be clear and understandable by all who would need to see it.

Nurses are valuable commodities by any definition, I hope this dispute is resolved quickly.