Innovation Incubator

I envision the letter writing application something as such:

A reader of an online news article would find at the bottom of it a link to our application entitled something like, “Write a letter about this article,” or whatever. The link would take the reader/user to a Web site that would feature contact information to people that the application would suggest one might write a letter to about the issue/event that the story discussed, but would also allow them to choose from the entire list of contact information that the application stored, or enter the contact information of another person.

A text box would be embedded below the salutation section that would feature a standardized opening paragraph that says something like, “This letter is in regard to issue/event X as discussed in article Y in publication Z.” The message would be as nonpartisan (dare I say, objective?) as possible and would be intended to give the user a jumping-off point. There would be a link to an aggregate of all of the other letters written about that particular article/event/issue, which could also appear on the article’s page. All of the letters written/sent using our application would be available to view and would be organized by tags that correspond to the tags of the articles they concern and would be accessed through a searching or browsing. People could send other people’s letters by simply copying them and using their name.

I contend that this application be embedded directly on a news organization’s site because it makes the letters people would write part of a pre-existing, tangible conversation (like comments on a news story) rather than leaving them to create or find another dialogue about an event or issue they’re concerned about to take part in (like blogs). The biggest obstacle I can think of right now is that the people the algorithm or whatever provides as default contact people might argue that their names appear as contacts about a particular story might be the result of bias, but I don’t imagine this would be terribly difficult to work around.

My brain works in sloppy sentences.

You should be able to catch a significant portion of my interpretation of this project from the following lists:

Advantages of the idea:
* Increases ease of political involvement advocacy.
* Allows those with knowledge/talent to multiply their efforts at writing quality letters.
* Encourages agenda-setting.

Disadvantages of the idea:
* Overly reliant on a crucial bit of yet cutting-edge technology: snail mail.
* Basically already accomplished.
* Increasing advocacy "noise" is likely to erode the impact of true homegrown letter-writing.

I envision an interface that integrates several fields of user-entered data (e.g., name, salutations, personal message) with one or more "boilerplate" paragraphs from a database of user-reviewed advocacy statements (addressing abortion, gay marriage, involuntary sterilization, etc.) and then allows the user to personalize the entire letter.

The software assists users in directing the letters to the relevant gatekeepers/politicians, then allows them to print off a double-sided page that is automatically addressed for being tri-folded and sent.

What I envision is an easy to use program (from the end users perspective) that can be incorporated into multiple types of sites including (but not limited to) news organizations, blogs, non-profit organizations, activist sites, social networking sites and anyone’s personal site. Its purpose is to facilitate, in a non-partisan way, interaction and action for both social and political issues.

At the bottom of relevant stories, blogs, etc., would be link to the letter writing app, encouraging the reader to voice their views. The link would activate a pop-up (debatable, but I like that idea), that would first ask for the users relevant information (name, address, email address, etc.). This information would allow the system to determine a series of choices about who the letter could go to (political, governmental, business, media personnel) based on the users location. The program could then prefill all the relevant contact information for those agencies/people. At this point, the user would be able to browse through all the letters that have been written by other users on this topic, hopefully encompassing many different views on the issues at hand. The user could choose one of the letters already written or write another.

If the user chose to write a letter, it would give the user a place to start by prefilling in the start of the letter in a text box. I rather like Nate’s description, so I will use it. “This letter is in regard to issue/event X as discussed in article Y in publication Z.”

Finally, when the user is ready, they could choose to print the letter to mail (or fax) or the user could choose to email the letter.

As advanced possibilities (not necessary for immediate implementation) users could vote for what they believe are the best letters.

In addition to my previously stated Facebook vision..

The letter application could be launched simply by a link at the bottom of a story or a Web page, or maybe a text box (similar to the L-J World comment box scheme) could also serve as a jumping point for a letter. While I prefer the idea of a pop-up box, getting somebody to type something the minute they think it could mean a more potent thought.

There are a few approaches when it comes to finding the recipient(s). Perhaps the user could type in their state and the a pop-up box could categorize recipients (choose from congressmen, newspapers, etc.) Or, the user could type in their state and the names of recipients, which would be matched by a database of the names typed in. More of what I see is drop-down boxes.

For example, select “newspaper” in a drop-down box, and another box will let the user see major publications within an x-mile radius. Or, select “congressmen” and choose a congressman through the subsequent drop-down box.

As for the letter itself, I’m behind Nate’s idea (iterated by Courtney). An approach that is initially objective is the best way to get the letter read, anyhow.

As far as setup goes, I’m of the opinion that the letter should be typed and THEN recipients chosen (as not to clutter the user’s thought with choices).

Another important element, as I mentioned earlier, is the implementation not necessarily into a social network (though this would be a totally kick-ass and effective method), but allowing your friends to see what you’ve written and give them a chance to put in their two cents (or however much time they’re willing to take out of their day/spend on postage). Perhaps a “share this with your friends” button?

The “share this with your friends” approach is a little weak – typing in e-mail addresses of people you think would care is defunct. (This is why a social network implementation is the best cheese with the cracker. Easy interest for the easily amused!)

The most important thing that we have to consider is that people need to be enthused to use this application. We need to create it ergonomically with a big hook.. it can’t be too daunting. And it must be pretty. Very pretty.

And, of course, the user should be able to print or e-mail the letter to whomever they choose.

Ta-da!

Excuse this disjointed entry, but I apparently left my brain in Wichita this weekend.

As the last person to write a description, I'll save everybody from reading what would mostly be repetitive. You guys pretty well summed up my interpretation of what this "LWA" is. There would be a link to our application below news stories, blog entries, etc. Clicking on this link would open up a separate window or tab. This new page would include an easy-to-use letter formatter, with quick links to the leaders/editors that the user wishes to address, as well as links to existing letters on the topic.

Sam's concern about using snail-mail is very legit, and something that's repeatedly popped up in my head. It was also a concern of some of the "lay-people" I threw this idea out to to get reactions. An anecdote that helped alleviate this concern comes from my roommate, who previously worked as a congressional intern in Topeka. He said one of his duties was to read e-mails and provide a short summary to his boss at the end of each day, while the bossman read almost every "snail-mailed" letter and responded to most of them personally.

I feel like that's the selling point of this program - letters are more "credible" than emails. This is something we're definitely going to have to remember as we craft our presentation for August, as some of my feedback has reflected some of the same concerns.

Another selling point that made people's eyes light up - that kind of "Oh, I get it now" moment - was the inclusion of a link at the bottom of relevant stories. Several of my friends said that if the link was right there and the program was easy to use, they'd be much more likely to take the time to write a letter on issues that concern them. They might have just been blowing smoke up my ass, but I found this encouraging.

Otherwise, my immediate concerns have been mostly alleviated - it looks what you guys were envisioning was very close to what I had pictured in my mind. Good work.

Concerned lazyheads of the world, unite! The open letter application serves as an automatic voice to the voiceless – at least, any and all who have Internet access.

The open letter application (codename: Better Letter) allows Internet users to easily contact the editor of a newspaper, city commissioners, mayors and congressional representatives alike in the most convenient and effective of manners.

If a citizen reads a news article or blog post about an issue they're concerned about, chances are good that they won’t write a letter voicing their opinion to local leaders or newspapers. With the open letter application, people won’t have to break out the ‘ole pen and paper or go to a third-party Web site for their letter-writing purposes – instead, a link that opens the letter-writing window sits at the bottom of the news story or blog post.

In the window, the user can send a letter to their choice of local politicians (organized by zip code or state), as well as send a letter to the editor of local or national newspapers. A database of politicians and newspapers will include and autofill contact information for the user.

Users can also send the letter they write to friends in illustration of their concerns. In addition, users can view previously written letters and rate them with their comments.

A silly example of how the letter-writing tool works:

Joe, a 21-year-old student at the University of Widget reads an article on his favorite blog, Bwong-Bwong, about a group of journalism students who have been harassing the well-known and much-loved campus dog, Willy Widget. A steadfast animal lover, Joe decides to investigate the matter further on his local newspaper’s Web site, squeegeetimes.com, but to his surprise, there is no mention of the doggy-delinquents. Joe goes back to Bwong-Bwong and clicks the link at the bottom of the article, opening a letter-writing window. In the window, he can choose from a database of recipients. He decides to send the letter to a few city commissioners as well as to the editor of the Squeegee Times about his concerns of animal abuse in the area.

After choosing the recipients, he types his letter in the text box and signs his name. He can then choose to print the letter and mail it the old-fashioned way or e-mail it to the databased recipients. Addresses and e-mail addresses are autofilled, so all of Joe’s work (minus the letter itself) is already taken care of.

Bottom line: the open letter application allows people who wouldn’t normally write to their politicians or newspapers the chance to do it quickly, easily and efficiently.

1. Writing letters has traditionally been an important means of communication between citizens and their leaders.

2. Letter-writing has also been a way for civic-minded people to play an active role in their communities.

3. Advances in technology has improved the efficiency of letter-writing.

4. Advances in technology has also improved the speed at which we get our news, but not necessarily the quality.

5. Even though technology has enabled easier and quicker access to news than ever before, people often still feel detached and uninvolved.

6. People now expect access to news and information to be quick and easy, but the ability to respond in a meaningful manner, i.e. writing a letter to a community leader, is slow and outdated in comparison.

7. A substantial barrier has formed between reading a news story and responding to it in an effective manner that will actually be read by a community leader.

8. This application breaks down that barrier.

9. The internet is an excellent tool to try to bridge the gap between media gatekeepers and news consumers.

10. This application keeps readers on news sites longer, and inspires greater engagement and interaction with the news.

Throughout history, communication has toppled tyrannies, established nations and preserved the liberties of mankind.

True democracy is dependent on the public communicating clearly with its electorate.

Personal communication is the foundation of democracy. Thus, the first amendment.

The fourth estate's power to keep the government in check is reliant on the voice of the people.

Today, government officials have an unlimited number of issues they can address; they only know what's important by listening to the voices of their constituency.

But in an age where communication is a nuisance, messages lose their impact.

But no method of communication is as effective at transmitting the thoughts and passions of one person to the mind of another as a personal letter.

Yet in a digital age, where information is seconds away, few have the patience to rely on a personal letter.

Letters connect media consumers with the issues, fulfilling the potential power of the first amendment to change the government.

If only there was a way to combine the power of the digital age with power of the personal letter...

Hi all,

It turns out that I'm going camping tonight instead of this weekend. Who would have thought (since I'm without a job, I work around the lady's days off).

Anyhow, here is the conceptual framework for the video that I came up with today based off of Chris, Sam and my statements of fact about letter writing:

I. Letter writing has historically been a tool people have used in America to communicate with their elected representatives and others in power.

II. Communication between elected leaders and their constituency is essential for democracy.
A. There could be a whole shitload of subcategories to this: take your pick

III. News provides information to people about the world in which they live, but what are people supposed to do with that information? How do they use it?

IV. People can write letters to leaders using the information they learn from the news.

V. Letters are good because they're personal, a historically approved of thing (see I), and they're cheap (I was going to put that they're easy, but I don't think that's a very good selling point).

VI. The Internet makes it easy to both receive information and "send letters" to leaders all in one place, possibly all in one site using one application...

So yeah, it's rough and not visualized (that's the next step, right?), but that's what I've got. Since I'm going camping I wouldn't be able to meet tomorrow until evening-ish, but I could meet on Wednesday or you could meet without me. I care not.

In other news, were any of you at the Yello Sub closing party last night? I was there until about 12:30, and things were getting hairy (people throwing chairs through walls, etc.), and then this morning they found a body there. Crazy shit.

On the Team Voltron blog, someone posted some quotes from the Knight proposal to put their ideas in the context of what was expected out of the grant. Reading them over, it mostly made me think we have come up with something that is moving in the right direction.

”Web site, news application or immersive media simulation/platform”

“promote knowledge among people”

“share know-how”

“solve local problems”

“using information to imagine collective possibilities” (a site that helps people see a larger/bigger vision for life on this planet–this goal stood out to me)

“reach common community goals”

“participatory community news”

“useful to real people/communities”

I was looking for interesting examples of successful letter writing campaigns and found this story from last month (I'm kind of surprised I missed this when it was in the news cycle).

Japan has rechristened the island of Iwo Jima, site of one of World War II's most horrific battles, with its pre-war name in an attempt to rectify a misnomer proliferated for a half-century by such movies as Clint Eastwood's "Letters from Iwo Jima."

...

The change was championed by surviving islanders evacuated during the war, who wanted to reclaim an identity they said had been hijacked.

American maps will not rename the island.

Here are some quotes from a Reuters article about the CNN/YouTube debate:

The 39 questions posed by ordinary citizens highlighted "the role new media is playing in politics and everything else in society," he added.

Phil Noble, founder of PoliticsOnline.com, said the format would get more people engaged in the political process and give politicians a better chance to connect with the voters.

Clearly what we're presenting is different, but I think it does highlight the belief that people should be finding new ways to use the Internet to interact with their politicians and that news organizations can help people do that.

I found some great material to use during the presentation. Amy Gahran at Poynter Online ran a great column last year about the importance of linking to full text copies of legislation. Her argument was:

The reason we report on the legislative process is to empower citizens to more easily follow what their government is doing. That makes it easier for citizens to get involved in the legislative process.

She also had a follow up column with some reaction.

Also, yet another map/wiki idea in action: Placeopedia. I'm increasingly happy that Brian had the balls intelligence to challenge that idea.

I have to say, some of the other teams' blogs really are helpful. Charlotte-Anne at the All-Knighters blog posted this tidbit from an interview with Jay Rosen about how Assignment Zero ended up working out.

Rosen: Your Wikipedia example is critically important. Here's why. I am on the Wikipedia advisory board, and in the spring I had coffee with Jimmy Wales when he was in town. I asked him why did Wikipedia work when the odds are that most things don't work, and he said something very important, although its significance escaped me at the time. People come to Wikipedia not knowing how it works, but they do know how a regular, 'ol encyclopedia works and so the "leap" to knowing what a free online encyclopedia would be like is not that great. This prior knowledge is critical to a system's viability because is constrains users and points them in the logical directions. How much did it cost Wikipedia to put that common understanding into each contributor's head? Zero! They already knew it. Explaining the way it works takes all of six words: "The online encyclopedia anyone can edit." With 6,000 words we did not get clarity on what a crowdsourced investigation asked of participants because there was no common image to start with, nothing comparable to "encyclopedia, right!..."

I think we pass the bar on part of the simplicity of explanation (even though we've been having problems explaining it). I think we just might be over thinking it. Essentially, it's consuming news and writing letters/emails. People understand both of those things, so the leap to directly tying them together shouldn't be too big.