The idea of “creating stability” ended up in another annoying centrifuge with tories right in the middle. Conservatives are, by their very nature, slow to adopt, but failing to keep up to date with the tech progress, made them look like the lamest party in the world.
It’s hard to know what made her think that the results would be different. Could it, perhaps, be share arrogance or, maybe, just oblivious ignorance? One thing is certain: her predictions weren’t based on Big Data.
Any census is done through gathering of information about the future vote. Traditionally, census are done through a questionnaire, posted to selected households who are expected to send it back. The answers are evaluated and put into a speadsheet to predict the results of next election. This manual process could take weeks and can’t and misses millions of households, especially those who can’t be bothered to fill out the form. More importantly, it can never compete with a candidate that uses Big Data.
It may feel like a buzzword, but it is the buzzword won the U.S. election 2016. It was the most expensive campaign in history with $5 billion spent in total, of which a huge percentage went on online analytics and targeted ads. The company that drove the process, Cambridge Analytics, famously stated that they can predict an individual’s political preferences through analysing their social media feeds and gather enough information from as little as three social media posts. As a result, they can see who’s voting what, down to a street level.
Our politicians have problems, big problems. They struggle to understand what the future holds and why people behave the way they do. It may be a sign of a Babylon’s collapse, or simply “interesting times” ahead, but it is certain that the people in power are blind the world before them.