Newborn false positives

Posted to Mistaken Data  |  Tags: ,  |  Nathan Yau

Shutterfly sent promotional emails that congratulate new parents and encourage them to send thank you cards. The problem: a lot of people on that list weren't new parents.

Several tipsters forwarded us the email that Shutterfly sent out in the wee small hours of this morning. One characterized the email as "data science gone wrong." Another says that she had actually been pregnant and would have been due this month, but miscarried six months ago. Is it possible that Shutterfly analyzed her search data and just happened to conclude, based on that, that she would be welcoming a child around this time? Or is it, as she hoped via email, "just a horrible coincidence?"

Only Shutterfly knows what actually happened (They insist it was a random mistake.), but it sounds like a naive use of data somewhere in the pipeline. Maybe someone remembered the Target story, got excited, and forgot about the repercussions of false positives. Or, maybe someone made an incorrect assumption about data points with certain purchases and didn't test thoroughly enough.

In any case, this slide suddenly takes on new meaning.


How We Spend Our Money, a Breakdown

We know spending changes when you have more money. Here’s by how much.

The Most Unisex Names in US History

Moving on from the most trendy names in US history, let’s look at the most unisex ones. Some names have …

Years You Have Left to Live, Probably

The individual data points of life are much less predictable than the average. Here’s a simulation that shows you how much time is left on the clock.

Real Chart Rules to Follow

There are rules—usually for specific chart types meant to be read in a specific way—that you shouldn’t break. When they are, everyone loses. This is that small handful.