Posts
This week one of the top stories for one of Australia's leading newspapers has been the purported rape of a woman after she met a man using the 'Tinder' matchmaking app.
Rape is a terrible act and unacceptable in every circumstance.
However the newspaper chose to make Tinder the story, not the rape.
Tinder is a mobile application designed to help people meet prospective dates.
It simply alerts users to other Tinder users who fall within a specified age range and gender and are within a certain distance of your location, lettings you know whether you have any mutual friends.
The alerted user then decides whether they like the look of a person from a supplied photo and gives them the option to privately message, and if desired, hook up.
Users must actively choose to turn on Tinder and can reject others without the other user ever knowing.
In other words, Tinder isn't much different to visiting a bar and looking around to see who seems to be your age and your 'type'.
Tinder's popularity stems from its ability to allow users to be discreet when seeking a partner. It gives users control over their dating choices - when they are available, who can be matched to them and whether or not they wish to be approached. In other words it's a little better than hanging around in pubs and nightclubs hoping to meet the perfect partner and avoid undesired come-ons.
In many senses the app is no different to popular online dating websites like HeyCupid and RSVP. it is simply a technological tool adding convenience and control to matchmaking.
Like all other technologies and software Tinder is neither good nor bad, but simply meets a human need.
So when a newspaper uses headline like 'Police warning after Tinder date ends in gang rape' and
'Tinder 'gang-rape victim' withdraws statement' it really gets my back up.
The approach creates an inappropriate connection between a neutral technology and a disgusting human act.
If the lady in question had simply met her alleged attackers in a pub, the newspaper would likely have not reported the story, or reported it very differently - they would not have used a headline 'Police warning after pub date ends in gang rape'.
This type of reporting is part of what holds back the use of digital technologies by government agencies, and it is a damn shame.
When senior managers who don't use social tools only read, hear and see bad news articles which blame or associate specific technologies with human misconduct it can creates an inappropriate association and make digital seems more dangerous to use than it actually is.
I wish I had a dollar for every media story sensationalising the failings of Facebook, Twitter, Google, RSVP, Tinder and other social tools when the real failing is in the human users.
Yes there are risks to all technologies. Cars and other road vehicles kill over 1,000 Australians each year and many other people are hurt when using other technologies, from paper cuts to knife wounds.
However let's try to keep things in proportion. There's few technologies out there specifically designed to harm people and these are usually carefully controlled, like guns and explosives.
The vast majority of technology are neutral, able to be used for good or bad - harming humans through accident or deliberate misuse.
Mitigating these risks is possible. Obsessing over them is unnecessary.
So if you're ever confronted in the workplace by a colleague or manager who quotes a headline like Police warning after Tinder date ends in gang rape' agree with them that the event is tragic and horrible.
But remind them that it was a human act that made it tragic and horrible. It is not necessarily a fault of the technological tool.
Rape is a terrible act and unacceptable in every circumstance.
However the newspaper chose to make Tinder the story, not the rape.
Tinder is a mobile application designed to help people meet prospective dates.
It simply alerts users to other Tinder users who fall within a specified age range and gender and are within a certain distance of your location, lettings you know whether you have any mutual friends.
The alerted user then decides whether they like the look of a person from a supplied photo and gives them the option to privately message, and if desired, hook up.
Users must actively choose to turn on Tinder and can reject others without the other user ever knowing.
In other words, Tinder isn't much different to visiting a bar and looking around to see who seems to be your age and your 'type'.
Tinder's popularity stems from its ability to allow users to be discreet when seeking a partner. It gives users control over their dating choices - when they are available, who can be matched to them and whether or not they wish to be approached. In other words it's a little better than hanging around in pubs and nightclubs hoping to meet the perfect partner and avoid undesired come-ons.
In many senses the app is no different to popular online dating websites like HeyCupid and RSVP. it is simply a technological tool adding convenience and control to matchmaking.
Like all other technologies and software Tinder is neither good nor bad, but simply meets a human need.
So when a newspaper uses headline like 'Police warning after Tinder date ends in gang rape' and
'Tinder 'gang-rape victim' withdraws statement' it really gets my back up.
The approach creates an inappropriate connection between a neutral technology and a disgusting human act.
If the lady in question had simply met her alleged attackers in a pub, the newspaper would likely have not reported the story, or reported it very differently - they would not have used a headline 'Police warning after pub date ends in gang rape'.
This type of reporting is part of what holds back the use of digital technologies by government agencies, and it is a damn shame.
When senior managers who don't use social tools only read, hear and see bad news articles which blame or associate specific technologies with human misconduct it can creates an inappropriate association and make digital seems more dangerous to use than it actually is.
I wish I had a dollar for every media story sensationalising the failings of Facebook, Twitter, Google, RSVP, Tinder and other social tools when the real failing is in the human users.
Yes there are risks to all technologies. Cars and other road vehicles kill over 1,000 Australians each year and many other people are hurt when using other technologies, from paper cuts to knife wounds.
However let's try to keep things in proportion. There's few technologies out there specifically designed to harm people and these are usually carefully controlled, like guns and explosives.
The vast majority of technology are neutral, able to be used for good or bad - harming humans through accident or deliberate misuse.
Mitigating these risks is possible. Obsessing over them is unnecessary.
So if you're ever confronted in the workplace by a colleague or manager who quotes a headline like Police warning after Tinder date ends in gang rape' agree with them that the event is tragic and horrible.
But remind them that it was a human act that made it tragic and horrible. It is not necessarily a fault of the technological tool.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.