I examined many of the data visualizations offered on the PLS site, but I found myself continually drawn back to the NYPD Stop & Frisk visualization. This visualization was created by John Keefe from WNYC and appeared both on the WNYC site (http://www.wnyc.org/story/222809-wnyc-map-police-find-guns-where-they-stop-and-frisk-less/) and on The Guardian website (http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/interactive/2012/jul/16/new-york-police-frisk-search-gun-map-wnyc). Published in 2012, WNYC used data from the New York City Police Department to map all stops & frisks and all gun recoveries. Interestingly, the data showed that most guns were found not in the targeted stop and frisk neighborhoods, but well outside them.
The NYPD has been criticized for racial profiling in its Stop & Frisk program, something the department denied, but that data seem to support. Then Mayor Bloomberg asserted that the program would get guns off the streets and that by focusing on certain neighborhoods believed to be "hot spots," the city would be safer. Instead, police distrust increased and the program data show that the profiling inherent in focusing on targeted "hot spots" is not only unfounded but unethical.
I have students who have routinely been victims of Stop & Frisk. One LaGuardia student spoke about his experience during the 2013 LaGuardia Speech Contest and received first place honors for his efforts. My own partner has been stopped and frisked while walking home from my apartment in Washington Heights for no reason other than that he has dark skin, even when he is dressed in slacks and button-down shirt with dress shoes.
Why did I choose to focus on this visualization? Because so many of my students have experienced being stopped and frisked, the program and its data are personally relevant for them. More important, though, students can see the actual results of the program. But perhaps the reason I chose this visualization as being particularly relevant for a class activity--especially in my Computer-Mediated Communication course--is its ability to present an enormous amount of data in an easy-to-understand, interactive visual tool. We talk in my class about how technology enables us to better understand ourselves and our place in the world. This tool gives students an opportunity to examine their own neighborhoods, to determine whether the NYPD sees their neighborhoods as "hot spots," and to critically evaluate the efficacy of the program in light of its mission to make the streets safer. Moreover, because the map is color-coded, the information is easily identifiable, allowing students an opportunity to think critically without the need to sift through what could otherwise be overwhelming information. Students can thus draw conclusions and expand them to develop arguments about the issue itself and/or about the utility of visualization tools such as this for presenting information.
This first image is a screen shot of a close-up view of my own area of Washington Heights, 171st & Broadway. I live three blocks from Columbia University Medical Center and New York Presbyterian Hospital. The area in bright pink is a "hot spot"--the area surrounding Columbia University Medical Center, the boundaries for which are Broadway on the east and Fort Washington Ave on the west, and 165th Street on the south and 168th Street on the north. You will see, however, that there were no guns seized in this area. Instead, a gun was seized further up Broadway on 172nd Street (one block from my apartment), indicated by the bright dot in the upper center of the image. This stretch of Broadway is not considered a hot spot, though it is a pale shade of purple, which means it is more heavily patrolled than are the areas that are royal blue.
The second image is a wide-view screen shot of the area, which clearly illustrates that guns were not recovered in the most heavily targeted areas (those shaded in medium and bright pink), but rather in areas that are only minimally patrolled for the program.
Interestingly, the wide view demonstrates that the areas targeted as "hot spots" seem to have been unfairly labeled as such. This entire area is quite diverse, though a large portion of the population is Dominican and Cuban. The medium pink areas are more heavily Dominican, and yet those areas did not produce more guns.
Does this support claims of racial profiling? Maybe yes and maybe no, but it at the very least suggests that the program is flawed. Perhaps it is most useful for opening a dialogue about the program, about racial profiling, and about the utility of visualization tools such as this for understanding ourselves, how we are perceived by others, and how we might go about changing those perceptions.




