Ada Lovelace Day

About The Authors

Suw Charman-Anderson

Suw Charman-Anderson

Suw Charman-Anderson is a social software consultant and writer who specialises in the use of blogs and wikis behind the firewall. With a background in journalism, publishing and web design, Suw is now one of the UK’s best known bloggers, frequently speaking at conferences and seminars.

Her personal blog is Chocolate and Vodka, and yes, she’s married to Kevin.

Email Suw

Kevin Anderson

Kevin Anderson

Kevin Anderson is a freelance journalist and digital strategist with more than a decade of experience with the BBC and the Guardian. He has been a digital journalist since 1996 with experience in radio, television, print and the web. As a journalist, he uses blogs, social networks, Web 2.0 tools and mobile technology to break news, to engage with audiences and tell the story behind the headlines in multiple media and on multiple platforms.

From 2009-2010, he was the digital research editor at The Guardian where he focused on evaluating and adapting digital innovations to support The Guardian’s world-class journalism. He joined The Guardian in September 2006 as their first blogs editor after 8 years with the BBC working across the web, television and radio. He joined the BBC in 1998 to become their first online journalist outside of the UK, working as the Washington correspondent for BBCNews.com.

And, yes, he’s married to Suw.

E-mail Kevin.

Member of the Media 2.0 Workgroup
Dark Blogs Case Study

Case Study 01 - A European Pharmaceutical Group

Find out how a large pharma company uses dark blogs (behind the firewall) to gather and disseminate competitive intelligence material.


free page hit counter



hit counter script


All content © Kevin Anderson and/or Suw Charman

Interview series:
at the FASTforward blog. Amongst them: John Hagel, David Weinberger, JP Rangaswami, Don Tapscott, and many more!

Corante Blog

Tuesday, March 31st, 2009

Street View in the UK

Posted by Suw Charman-Anderson

There’s been a bit of a furore recently about Google’s Street View, which has now come to selected cities in the UK. When it was launched a number of images had to be removed because they showed people in situations that could be potentially embarrassing or which people said invaded their privacy. There was the ambulance crew; the man coming out of a sex shop; the rock star enjoying a pint at his local. Complaints ensued and Google took down the images.

I am slightly perplexed as to why this kerfuffle happened at all. Google had a similar reaction when it launched in the US in May last year, and its face-blurring policy is a result of that pushback. Surely it was ready for a fuss to be made here? Especially as Privacy International pre-emptively threatened them with legal action last July. (PI kept its word and complained to the Information Commissioner’s Office.)

I think Google could have prevented a lot of this bad press by removing suspect images prior to launching the tool. Computers are really bad at figuring out what’s in an image, and even though face recognition software improves every year, a computer cannot make a judgement on whether that face is in a compromising position or not. But humans can, and there are millions of humans online who are not only capable of spotting an obviously unsuitable photo at a glance, but also willing to do so if it’s made easy enough for them.

Google could have put together a Galaxy Zoo-like tool to allow volunteers to assess each photo, after the face-blurring, but before it was accepted into their database. If Galaxy Zoo can find a few tens of thousands of people to check pictures of galaxies, Google can find a couple of million to check Street View photos.

I suppose some people would complain that even if you showed a compromising photo to just three people - which is all it takes to pass reliable judgement on an image - that’s three people too many. But I don’t believe that’s a reasonable stance to take. If you are in a public place then why should you have an expectation of privacy? My dad was once filmed getting off a train at Reading station, and for years afterwards his face showed up on every news story about trains. We have to accept that when we are in public places our image may be captured and may sometimes turn up online, or even on TV.

In my opinion, Google should have assessed the photos prior to publication because it’s good customer care. Google isn’t perfect, but if it has a fault, it’s that it often seems to lack a human dimension, using computer engineering to try and solve what are often human problems. The question of Street View isn’t, to my mind, a privacy question as much as it is a simple issue of empathy. Even the PR angle, really, is secondary, a side-effect to caring/not caring about the people around you. Would there have been as much bad press about Street View if Google had cleaned out any potentially embarrassing photos prior to launch?

Email a copy of 'Street View in the UK' to a friend

EMAIL THIS ENTRY TO A FRIEND



Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.



Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.





E-Mail Image Verification

Loading ... Loading ...

3 Responses to “Street View in the UK”

  1. Carl Morris Says:

    Yes. Street View is just another data set to Google.

    Another Google trait comes in here. They fully launch new services in a beta state. Even semi-broken. It only has to be good enough. All that remains are bug fixes and the like.

    In this instance, they fully intended to pull some images after launch. It was just a matter of waiting for people to flag them up.

    That’s a bit careless I agree. But “customer” is probably not the right word here. Google’s customers are its advertisers. (For example’s sake, they’d care more about a sex shop than some random guy walking out.)

    I don’t know if they’re planning to monetize Street View directly, but they’ve already benefitted - as a company - in many ways. Arguably too powerful! Ask PRS.

    Meanwhile, the rock star himself maintains that was a false positive.

  2. Chris L Says:

    If Galaxy Zoo can find a few tens of thousands of people to check pictures of galaxies, Google can find a couple of million to check Street View photos.

    I’m not sure that’s true; if our users help us because they want to contribute to Science (and we’re at nearly a quarter of a million, by the way ;-) ), where’s the motivation to contribute to Street View? Why should I spend my spare time sparing the blushes of a commercial company?

    Chris

  3. Suw Charman-Anderson Says:

    Chris,

    If Google designed the app well, it could be fun. They’ve already got an image tagging “game”, which is a bit pants if you ask me, but people do engage with it. So I do think they’d be able to find people who’d look through photos, even if just out of curiosity.

    That’s not to diminish the fact that Galaxy Zoo is a scientific endeavour that attracts people who want to really contribute to our knowledge of the universe, but there are lots of motivations for people to do stuff. I’m sure Google could find a way to make it engaging if they tried. What bugs me most is that they didn’t try, they just relied on people complaining after the fact.

    Carl,

    Yeah, you’re right. “Customer” was the wrong word. Not sure quite what the right word is - didn’t want to use “user”. Rubbish word, that!