Question

what is The 2015 Data Awards part 1 and part 2 reaction. 150 word plus.

Answer 1

The Dumbest Data

Many of our Data Awards recognize important, rigorous data sets or the academics and experienced analysts who worked to expose misleading data or enlighten us with good data. But sometimes we want answers to things we’re afraid to ask, the things only your Google search history would expose. Those are the things that bring us a little closer to understanding where we fit in this strange world. So this award goes to our former colleague Mona Chalabi, who during her time at FiveThirtyEight wrote the “Dear Mona” column, which answered those odd but telling questions. She answered 47 “Dear Mona” questions in all, but these three from the past year really stood out to me as the best examples of dumb data (that we definitely needed!).

Best Data Collection the Government Isn’t Doing (Yet) but Should Be

More than 1,000 people have been killed by police officers in the United States this year, but you won’t see that figure in any official statistics — at least not for some time. Even though a 1994 law requires the federal government to track police use of force, the FBI’s method, which focuses on so-called justifiable homicides, significantly undercounts police killings. We know this because of the diligent work of two news organizations, The Guardian and The Washington Post. Each collected data on police killings and covered the topic intensely this year, giving the public a more accurate picture of who dies at the hands of police. Both efforts were built on earlier work by crowdsourced websites, Fatal Encounters and Killed By Police, and introduced further reporting and analysis. They even embarrassed the FBI into collecting better data: The agency now plans to expand its own database of police use of force. Its goal is to publish more reliable statistics by the end of next year.