I’ve been fascinated about the potential for crowdsourcing to facilitate human rights and humanitarian work, ever since I read about Ushahidi following the earthquake in Haiti in 2010. Ushahidi, an open source mapping project, allowed anyone to pinpoint trapped people, unsafe buildings, people in need of treatment and more. Anyone with a mobile phone could post the information, and the crowd obliged. Humanitarian workers used the tool to prioritize relief. It was used to track violent outbreaks in Congo the swine flu epidemic, and the terrorist attacks in Mumbai. It is a Good (with a capital “G”) use of technology.
In thinking about other Good uses for crowdsourcing, I have kept coming back to crime. Some of those cold cases might get solved if little pieces of information were collected somewhere for analysis. But as I followed the logical progression of that I had two thoughts about all those amateur detectives out there, posting their “findings,” or worse, visiting sites of crimes:
- Danger, Will Robinson.
- Welcome, 1984.[i]
So it was with interest that I read a recent Los Angeles Magazine story of a small group of amateur detectives, united by an A&E-sponsored discussion board, who are on the hunt for what they call the Golden State Killer, a horribly prolific rapist and killer active from 1976 to 1986. You got to love the enthusiasm and thought they’ve given this case, not to mention the sheer number of hours. America’s Most Wanted DIY.
It sounds like fun, if you have a lot of time. Poking around online (or in person) compiling lists of people (suspects) in their quirky weirdness. But while the writer and her online community seem genuinely driven by very good intentions, it is hard to see how this will end. If it were a murder mystery, it would not end well. Their sleuthing has not as yet, been fruitful.
So, what do you think is the most likely outcome of this?[yop_poll id=”-2″]