July 26, 2010 by Jen
Concerns over a lack of privacy are rising as more and more people post up candid updates to social networking sites such as Twitter and Facebook. The media of online networking causes people to lose their inhibitions and post up candid status updates and messages which they may not be prepared to offer up on a different platform.
The quick exchanges and informal setting of the online networking site encourage intimate disclosure of detail that would previously have been reserved for close friends and family. Martha Lane Fox, the UK’s Digital Champion, is a prime example of someone who is candid online, to the extent that she invites open conversation and two-way interaction. On Twitter, Lane Fox will post up messages to ministers in text speak, confirming meeting times and venues. This leaves her open to members of the public who can follow her every move.
There are a number of issues with social media when it comes to people posting up personal details. Comments are circulated globally, and search engines record every single comment which is published online. This includes the libelous, spiteful or downright unprofessional comments which people may wish they could retract at a later stage, when tempers subside.
Celebrities such as Gillian McKeith have found themselves at the centre of a social media row, after a critic of hers made a malicious comment about her work on Twitter. McKeith responded in kind, and the two accounts sent unpleasant comments back and forth until McKeith was accused of libel. At this point, McKeith backtracked and claimed that her Twitter account had been hacked, and the comments had nothing to do with her at all.
While Twitter and other vehicles represent an irresistible opportunity to vent feelings, people with a number of followers need to bear in mind that everything which is said online can be recorded for prosperity, and potentially used in legal battles.
Related posts:
This article is factually incorrect. It states that “a critic of [Gillian McKeith] made a malicious comment about her work on Twitter.”
As has been widely documented (by The Guardian, among many others), the original tweet was actually pretty innocuous, and didn’t even address McKeith directly, via her username or a hash tag.
It simply stated:
“Can’t sleep – so excited about the next chapter of #BadScience – It’s the one on Gillian McKeith. (not Phd)”
McKeith responded with a number of very abusive tweets, before libelling herself by calling the very reputable Ben Goldacre a liar.
It’s also worth stating that at no point did the original poster respond to McKeith’s abuse. She certainly did not trade “unpleasant comments” with the faux-doctor. McKeith was the only person behaving unpleasantly, and with no good cause.
Comment by Anonymous — July 26, 2010 @ 9:07 pm