There is an interesting article on the BBC website about a controversial new app promoted by the Samaritans, a charity who provide a helpline and other support for people suffering emotional distress or considering suicide:
Once activated, the app tracks tweets from people you follow on Twitter, and emails you if any of them sound distressed. If one of them writes “help me”, “hate myself”, or any other phrase the organisation deems troublesome, you’ll receive an email from the Samaritans nudging you to take a closer look. The tweets are already public, and you might have spotted them anyway, so the service simply highlights things you might’ve missed. Right?
Not so, according to its critics, who have been tweeting and blogging about the service since its launch last week. The app is fraught with problems, they say. It raises major privacy concerns, and is all but tailor made for trolls. Stalkers and online bullies now have a tool that tells them exactly when their targets are at a low ebb, detractors suggest. Users aren’t notified when someone begins using the app to monitor their tweets.
Via the Guardian article on the controversy, I found two posts by Adrian Short, “Unethical uses for public twitter data” and “Samaritans radar must close”. His arguments mix calls for regulation by law, with which I disagree, and acute observations about the implications for privacy and whether this app will help or harm those who talk about their emotional problems on Twitter.
What do you think?
Anyone who talks about their feelings and problems in a public forum (like Twitter) deserves everything that comes to them.
It is something potentially useful and/or a force for good, which also has nefarious applications as pointed out by others. I would say it’s probably not a grievous offence against privacy though. Tweets are public; there are already countless algorithms poring over every tweet, which are catalogued in various places and available almost forever for all to view.
On the one hand, I could write this service myself in like half an hour, at least as regards my own use. So it’s not like it provides any capabilities which aren’t already available.
On the other, there is a relevant difference between “some computer geek can do it with an investment of time” and “anyone on the street can do it by clicking a button”.
No real idea about the best course here. Except, of course, that any sort of regulation by law would be moronic and impossible.
The idea is out of the box now. If somebody wants to use this idea to target somebody at their lowest ebb it is unavoidable; this is not a good enough reason for the Samaritans to withdraw the app – it would not make any difference.
I’m with Kim, in believing that anyone who broadcasts their emotional difficulties on Twitter is too far gone to respond to any conventional therapy.
This is a case of sleeping in the bed you made.
Personally, as one who really does value her privacy, I wouldn’t touch any of the “social media” with a bargepole.
The aspect of the thing that’s troublesome is that it’s an example of still more nannying — and of the lack of interest in maintaining and respecting privacy that we are displaying.
I agree, it’s not anything with which The Gov should involve itself.
But people ought to have the good taste — the respect for others — not to make use of such an application. And if I were stupid enough to Twitter, and I found out that some alleged “friend” had a program running that would continually monitor my emotional temperature and sic the nurses on me if it didn’t like the words I was using, that EX-friend would be sent packing toot sweet.
No offense to anyone intended. 🙁
Well there I was thinking that the Samaritans were there to stop people jumping off Beachy Head, a traditional English beauty and suicide spot on the South Coast. Perhaps this tells us that the Samaritans, a charity set up to offer telephone counselling to those in despair, have too much money to burn, I have noticed that they are putting up posters in railway stations.
I’m with Kim on this too. If you use the service to let the world know about your feelings then presumably you want somebody to listen. If not you can always write ‘help’ on a post-it note and stick it on your bedroom wall.
It is of course possible that this app may help some people. The Samaritans were set up to listen to those who wanted to speak so I don’t find the development outside of their remit, as it were.
Obviously a regulatory response would be idiocy bordering on insanity, which means it will probably happen.
And happy 5 November everybody! Hope I won’t see any of you on the news 🙂
Being a user of facebook I often see people broadcasting their most personal problems and feelings for all the world to see. I have to say I find it quite perplexing, being a pretty private person myself.
As for Twitter, I think Stewart Lee summed it up when he described it as ‘the Stasi for the angry birds generation’.
The thought that we are so inseparable from Twitter, Facebook and suchlike abominations is alone sufficient to give me thoughts of suicide.
>I’m with Kim, in believing that anyone who broadcasts their emotional difficulties on Twitter is too far gone to respond to any conventional therapy.
Why would you think that? I mean, why would you *seriously* think it, as opposed to just exaggerating for comic effect (which is what I took Kim to be doing)? It seems obviously false to me. It’s very common for younger people to broadcast their feelings on social media, and while I’m with you in finding this somewhat nauseous and depressing, I don’t see any reason for thinking that all these people are beyond help.
Is it that they are beyond help, or as the motor industry calls seriously damaged cars ‘BER’ ‘Beyond Economic Repair’, i.e. write-offs? If someone broadcasts emotional difficulties on social media, are people saying that they despair at others broadcasting despair and don’t feel that they are worth bothering about? Perhaps these sort of people need a sense of perspective and a little less self-importance.
The whole thing strikes me as bizarre. I do however, thank Rosenquist for his post, a real gem.
“If one of them writes “YOLO”, “FML”, or any other phrase the organisation deems troublesome”
Corrected. Yeah, that’ll work.
You’re sounding a little distressed, Julie. I’ve sent some friends to check up on you.
>Is it that they are beyond help, or as the motor industry calls seriously damaged cars ‘BER’ ‘Beyond Economic Repair’, i.e. write-offs?
Don’t see why you would think they’re all write-offs. Some will be, sure, but why ‘all’?
>If someone broadcasts emotional difficulties on social media, are people saying that they despair at others broadcasting despair and don’t feel that they are worth bothering about? Perhaps these sort of people need a sense of perspective and a little less self-importance.
Not following this bit.
I’m not saying that the Samaritan app is good idea. I don’t know about that. On the one hand, it is known that people who are suicidally depressed do often talk about it on social media before taking, or attempting to take, their own life. On the other hand, modern charities have lost their way and are generally focused these days on sucking up as much money as they can for salaries and empire-building, so that is a reason to distrust their ‘innovations’.
For real pre-suicidal cries for help, the Samaritan app is obviously a help that will save lives. For false alarms there seems to be a simple solution that nobody has mentioned yet, start talking to your unwelcome intervenors about the remarkable opportunities of Amway or whatever else tickles your funny bone and is likely to drive them from your door the quickest.
Get a sense of humor, people.