One reason I love Internet blogs (especially big ones with a diverse audience) is the ability to argue with people from circumstances totally different from my own. The activity itself is pleasurable, but via the activity, I can also generate ideas. Sometimes some pretty good ones (or at least so I think).
So, foodies, environmental, consumer safety folks, and scientists, listen up. Because I think I have stumbled onto the most powerful tool you will have for your causes going forward if we can figure out how to use it. Follow me to the next section.
So, in the recent recommended diary, there has been some talk of scientific studies versus anecdotal evidence. Both sides use these claims against each other. And more importantly, the rise in social network participation by profit-oriented interests, is about to change the dynamic of political discussion. Unlike the television or other one-way media, it will be apparent to everyone when a viewpoint is being suppressed via commenting sections. It will also become apparent when a given organization is afraid of uncontrolled feedback as they will not enable the participatory aspect of their Internet sites.
However, there is another asymmetry to be examined. Paid PR speakers, who will naturally sound more polished (and perhaps gain some credibility due to this) and have access to research resources that all but the most dedicated activists will be unable to match will be matched against amateurs. Forcing corporate entities into a participatory arena thus gives the people some of a voice back, but the people will still be somewhat limited to natural voice while the pros have a megaphone.
And this is where we get to the trump card. There is about to be an amazing tool for public health introduced in this country. Electronic medical records will (if properly designed) enable a database to query the health of the entire nation. That is a truly amazing thing - the ability to sift through data a la Nate Silver for all sorts of chronic and longterm conditions. The data could be plotted against location, diet, profession, or pretty much anything you can think to collect or compare the other variables to. In other words, previously hidden trends can be examined due to the immense statistical power of 300 million data points. Those murky and complex relationships that can currently be waved away as "unstudied" or "needing more data" will be lit up like Las Vegas during a power surge.
Here's the trick. That data is health data, which means it will be (rightly so) subject to a great number of privacy concerns. It will be difficult to concoct a regime under which the data can simultaneously be protective of individual information and publicly available for open-source slicing and dicing. It will be inherently political and require specialized law. Sounds like just the kind of thing this community is into.
What say you? Is this merely a diversion, or is it a tool we should think more about and how to craft it?