I had the opportunity to spend some time with Sarah Meyers of PopSnap this week. Sarah was in town to do the videos for the Crunchies, and I had to drive her up to the award ceremony Friday. On many levels she’s inspiring, particularly given that someone so relatively young can make a decent living out of video blogging, and can afford to live in New York.
We just happened to discuss the topic of life streaming. I mentioned Robert Scoble live Twittering the birth of his son and how I believed that it was a step too far, that ultimately some things should remain private. It’s hard to describe her reaction in words, but the look of horror at the suggestion was something I’ll remember for years. She told me that life streaming should include everything, and that Scoble did the right thing.
On a related note I read Ben Elton’s latest novel Blind Faith on the way to the States, and it’s all about life streaming (note that it’s not available in the US until June). To quote Amazon on the book:
Imagine a world where everyone knows everything about everybody. Where what a person “feels” and “truly believes” is protected under the law, while what is rational, even provable is condemned as heresy. A world where to question ignorance and intolerance is to commit a Crime against Faith.
Imagine it. Or just wait until After The Flood.
On a hot Sagittarian morning in the year 56 ATF, Trafford Sewell struggles to work through the usual crowds of near-naked commuters. He is confronted by the intimidating figure of his Parish Confessor. Why has Trafford not been streaming his every moment of sexual intimacy onto the community website like everybody else? Does he think he’s different or special in some way? Better than his fellow man and woman? Does he have something to hide?
Ben Elton imagines a post-apocalyptic society where religious intolerance combines with a confessional sex-obsessed, self-centric culture to create a world where nakedness is modesty, ignorance is wisdom and privacy is a dangerous perversion. A chilling vision of what’s to come? Or something rather closer to what we call reality?
It’s a challenging book, perhaps in line with Keensian thinking (as in Andrew Keen). But intellectually it raises very good questions about privacy and where we draw the line on what we share online, and in those terms I’d highly recommend reading it.
I still believe that some things should remain private. I’ve embraced Twitter in a big way, and I constantly update it, but most of what goes on in my family life remains private. Blogging even more so, it’s not as immediate as Twitter anyway. A visit to Justin.tv in particular shows people streaming their lives 24/7 and while I can see some appeal in doing a show, the thought that my every move may be watched sickens me.
We can’t do a multi-stage survey using our voting plugin for WordPress, so I’ve split the options into age categories. My hunch is that younger people (Gen Y and the new Gen Z) are more open to complete life streaming than those in Gen X and older. There is a heavier level of cynicism amongst the younger generation, a cynicism that seems to dictate that live and unedited is ultimately the only truth as opposed to the heavily slanted, and edited main stream media.
Leave a comment or vote below, it will be interesting to see what others think. If you disagree with me so be it, Sarah Meyers proved to me that some people believe there isn’t a line.
- Yes (30+)
- Yes (22-30)
- Yes (10-22)
- No (30+
- No (22-30)
- No (10-22)
Total Votes: 1076
Started: January 20, 2008
I agree there should be a line – but you shouldn’t draw the line for anyone but you. All of our lines are different. And they are all just fine, thank you very much.
http://lagesse....life-streaming/
Arbron’s Taxxons are set to destroy the new Yeerk pool. ,
It’s a case of Privacy vs Exhibitionism. I think it really boils down to the individual. If you aren’t comfortable, just don’t do it… If you are, who am I to say anything?
http://RichGrad.com
Personal Development for the Book Smart
Human societies developed rules about private stuff vs public stuff for a reason. Those rules differ from place to place, but there’s a lot of commonality. A couple having sex, a bloke having a poo, arguments that resolve interpersonal tensions so a friendship can continue and many more all happen in private.
Perhaps some things happen in private precisely to they can be forgotten, so the social myth which binds us together can continue.
I agree that the rules are changing massively — just as they must have when we moved into cities. In the Middle Ages, people had sex with others in the room simply because shared bedrooms were the norm (except for the very rich). The new generations will find the new rules more comfortable because they’re the ones making the rules!
But to suggest that all privacy is now gone is nothing but zealotry.
Thanks for the polling. 42 year old wondering if there shouldn’t be a “Lifestreaming– and just why the f*** would I want to do that anyway?” choice..
ROFL.
Duncan’s position on the issue immediately made me think of those people whose eyes just go wide open whenever they realize that somewhere, two men are having sex — *with each other*.
Hey, Scoble wants to share the love — why not?
In the real world, everyone wants privacy. GenZ hasn’t experienced many things in life. When one is older they always look back at dumb mistakes they made. I am sure a lot of the ‘ openness’ being bantered about on the web today will be something that in years to come will come back to bite them in their ass. Being totally open with everything may bring about future problems with their career, their personal relationships, and possibly their families. IMHO people who flaunt every detailed happening in their life is are merely seeking attention and are not very secure. They’re seeking acceptance and approval in order to validate their existence. It’s actually sad to see so many people discard their privacy just to be one of the crowd. Kinda of like our government, taking away our privacy for the sake of ‘ our” security. In which case we deserve neither if we buy into it.
I find it interesting that the ages of the people voting skew so heavily into the “older” category – the one in which I will confess fit myself. As far as keeping things private, I think there’s just a plain sense of human decency that gets totally lost when absolutely anything and everything becomes a matter of public record. Just because you CAN do something, doesn’t mean you SHOULD do something.
I’m all for transparency, open discourse and people having the freedom to express themselves. I believe very strongly that our online conversation moving forward will be centered around video – a medium that tends to reveal more than say just the printed word. But we should be careful about how much we give away our privacy … we may find one day that we want it and it will no longer be there.
@Steel – WTF? You both chastise people for expressing freedom and complain about the government reducing our freedoms all in one paragraph?
You are confusing two very fundamental things – the privacies I am guaranteed by our constitution, and the right of self expression guaranteed by the very same document!
It is presumptuous for you to think you know what is best for the “kids” who hang it all out there. Personally – I like it. I like it when people are not afraid to hide behind societal “rules” or social stigmas.
Nothing bites your harder in the ass then a secret uncovered (ask Gary Hart, etc, etc). These “kids” are living honest open lives.
I think it is amazing. I think it is revolutionary. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
AW
I just think that somewhere there should be a line, plain and simple. I may be wrong (Sarah Meyers thinks that I am) so hence this post. If you think I’m wrong convince me, but don’t label me as a homophobe, remember I’m Australian after all, not some Huckabee voting loon from somewhere in the middle of America 
don’t be daft. I was born and bred in Sydney so no, that wouldn’t make my eyes go wide
@Duncan – I don’t understand why people always state this like you did, “I was born and bred in Sydney”. Were you not, in fact, bred and THEN born in Sydney?
Chicken, egg… etc.
To each his/her own. People should have the means to say what they want, within the law. Other people should also have the means to completely ignore it, whether by filtering or other means.
Some things are just supposed to remain private.
Don’t have to wait until ATF.. lifestreaming will be commonplace with a decade, when mobile internet takes over. Might not be everything of everybody, but would that make big difference?
@ #12 Tech Slice – what? And from who? Are the Who and the What the same? Always? Or do the Who and the What vary?
And if they do, who decides when the “Who and the What” are Right and Wrong?
Not me. What is right for me is wrong for others. What others think is right is often wrong for me – in which case I just tune out.
It’s much more fair to allow me to tune out then it is to prevent someone else from expressing themselves.
Don’t you think?
free will, ain’t it a beach – just be glad you have that option
instead of it being controlled by a communist government – and then some
I wish Scoble would chime in…
Interesting article Duncan, but is there really an issue here? I think the majority of people nowadays would agree with you — they value their privacy. Obviously, some people, for whatever reason, have no problems sharing every detail, down to the most intimate, with anyone interested. But until a sizable minority starts advocating life streaming, or whatever you want to call it, as a way of life in our society, this is probably a non-issue. Maybe in a couple of years, or a even decades, will this become relevant. In my opinion, for most people the issue, with regards to privacy, is how do we maintain it in an increasingly online, interconnected society.
@Rob La Gesse
ok, egg/ chicken etc, the point I was trying to make though is that Sydney is the gay capital of the South. Tolerance comes naturally to Sydney siders…perhaps unfortunately unlike others in Australia, or the United States for that matter. I had my fair share of gay friends in Sydney, and even today I have no issues there at all.
It’s easy to say that your life is an open book when you’re a member of the dominant paradigm. There’s not much that a heterosexual young white upper-class person, living in a “nice” part of a big city really has to worry about by lifestreaming, frankly. The risk level involved is simply not that high.
When you have children, or if your politics, sexual desires, habits, or beliefs are out of the mainstream, or if you have other aspects of your life that make you vulnerable, then the potential risk increases when you reveal everything to the world.
There’s plenty of ways to share parts of your life without putting yourself or your family at risk. This is the real world, where being gay can get you fired, where kids are abducted our of their bedrooms, where women are raped, and where celebrities are stalked or even murdered by their own fans.
Life is random and difficult enough as it is, why increase the odds against you by inviting more trouble?
I have to say with my lifecasting experience (24/7)…
You forget the camera is on and then your like oh $#$( …. i just got out of the shower and walked into my room or i picked my nose and damn forgot the camera was on….
It’s fun, but leaving it on 24/7 can lead to embarrassing moments .. that are all archived for the world to see… YIKES
the tin is that we decide what to share… Scoble wanted to share the birth of his son… good for him… he decided to share t with others (known and unknown) I would have shared it only with my family or friends, than made an announcement. But the good of Internet and freedom combined together is that we can decide what to share… and we have to be conscious that those information would take paths that we weren’t considering, because others will share them with us. We make the privacy… but there will be always a line marking what can be shared and what has to be private.
It’s not about privacy anyway, it’s about human dignity. The founding fathers of the USA never thought to write down much in the bill of rights other than search and siezure about privacy related issues. At that time, privicay, should I say basic human dignity was a given just as much as your right to drink water.
The problem is, greed has trumped dignity, and now we have the mess we are in. If you think Google knows too much about you know, wait untill the double click integration is complete.
good post marc!
good post indeed
john
dishonestrealtor.com
Duncan – what has being an Aussie got to do with not being homophobic? I, like you, am an Aussie and while I’m not homophobic I know plenty of guys who are – just drive west from Sydney for about 20 minutes and proclaim your man-love – then you’ll see how many homophobes there are while they kick the shit out of you.
At any rate, I do actually agree with you that there should be a line. Some things are best left private. Just because you can be a total exhibitionist doesnt mean you should. As a father of 4 young children I doubt my wife would appreciate it if I spilled my guts on everything that happened in our life.
I don’t get the “should” part of this question. I share my life 24/7 on webcams (I’m 25, started my webcam when I was 19) and pretty much the only thing I don’t really want to share is sitting on the toilet, but it doesn’t really feel like a matter of “should”. In the time I’ve been doing this, I’ve run up against this resistance from others in the form of an obligation to privacy. I fully support privacy as a right, but not an obligation. I (and anyone else) can choose what to make public vs. private. As long as I have this choice, where does right and wrong even come into it?
Lifestreaming the birth of our son should only be between my wife and me. Who the hell else has any reason to get involved in that decision?
But, now that Duncan has stuck his foot into our private lives and our decision-making process (can I come over to your house Duncan and criticize your lifestyle decisions?) let’s discuss.
We had dozens of friends who were following every tweet. Real-life friends, too. You know, the kinds that don’t blog and aren’t into technology. It saved us TONS of emails and phone calls cause everyone knew what was going on and didn’t need to call us to find out how things were going.
I’d HIGHLY recommend that other people use the public Internet to keep their families and friends involved in such life events like the birth of new kids. I can’t think of a negative thing that happened to us. Well, other than Duncan thinks its his right to tell us that it was stupid, or something like that.
Well worth the risk, it seems to me.
@Scoble and Duncan
I wish I could be a fly on the wall the next time you two guys meet up.
Wow … I just checked out the results of your little survey and found it interesting that a majority of your readers (or those that bother to answer surveys) are over 30 … refreshing considering “we’re apparently the old guys” in this industry. Also interesting is the fact that the vast majority agree with you Duncan – on that question anyway.
I also found it amusing that your lower range of age groups starts at the tender age of 10 (10 – 22) …. how many 10 year olds read TechCrunch or would be capable of absorbing anything posted here?
(I expect to wake up tomorrow and find myself spammed to hell by an army of prepubescent, mouse wielding pre-teens! … bring it on you little snot rags … bring it on).
There’s a big difference between twittering a lifestreaming event and video streaming an event. And I assume the twitters were not explicitly describe, as would be a live streaming of a birth. So I’m surprised you found the twittering shocking.
Lifecasting doesn’t have to be 24/7 as the rule, it’s up to the individual always. I’m wondering if Sarah made more of an off the cuff remark about lifecasting to generalize, rather than, that it should include everything as an absolute.
But I am surprised, considering Sarah’s stalker event just under a month ago. There definitely is some privacy issues, and activities that must be guarded during lifecasting. See stalker, http://www.just.../stalker_ian007
So, it’s a mixture of both, not one way or the other. And it’s up to the individual, some don’t mind showing it all, and then some are sickened showing their every move. lol
I’ll be reading that book. I think there ARE important issues around this, whether it’s for better or for worse, as it represents a shift in the way society and individuals perceive and express themselves and that is worthy of intellectual debate – which may or may not take place here:).
it’s just pixels, what is real about it??
@ Rob La Gesse
Someday, you may find the need to invoke your rights to privacy, but it won’t be available to you. Once you ” hang it all out there”, as you state, it will be very hard to recover. My point about the gov’t is that no wonder they don’t protect privacy;we Americans are too willing to give it up and too damn lazy to fight to protect it.
Ben Elton! The most hypocritical, sell-out, Labour-luvvying pile of sh*t ever to walk this unfortunate Earth. Not a name I ever expected to see in a TechCrunch article.
Thanks for the heads-up about the book though, I’d quite like to read it and I probably wouldn’t have noticed it otherwise. Although Elton is a terrible, terrible human being, I’ve read a couple of his books and he’s an OK writer, and it’s an interesting premise.
There is no such thing as the real world. Just the world. Reminds me of a comment people often make: “Life is strange”… Yeah, compared to what?
Communities ebb and flow in private and public. Individuals and relationships flow back and forth between private and public. Sharing the private with the world so there is no difference might solve a lot of problems. I am interested in reading the book. But it also may not change anything or make things worse. Will jealousy disappear? Will envy or lazyness? Will I still pick my nose… and eat it?
Yes, but it would never get to the level it does in the book- and if it does, what’s wrong with ‘near-naked’ people? Well only half of it is wrong.
http://simongeo...googlepages.com
I know this was just an informal poll to spur broad discussion, but I suspect you would see differences (and an even more revealing indication of the demographics of readership) if you broke out categories for “28-35″, “35-44″ and “45 and over”. Many readers of tech blogs are 35 and older, and seem to have a very hazy grasp of the concerns of those under 30.
Quote “There is a heavier level of cynicism amongst the younger generation, a cynicism that seems to dictate that live and unedited is ultimately the only truth as opposed to the heavily slanted, and edited main stream media.”
We need to stop giving the young generation so much credit. From the time they are teens till 20s / marriage, their self-esteem and identity are defined by how popular they are. Hence their need for broadcasting everything about themselves, it makes them feel connected and popular. When some unsavory details about their personal lives bite them in the ass later on, then they will realize that it isn’t such a good idea to bare your soul to everyone. They won’t learn this lesson till they are older.
We can discuss this up and down, pro and cons. It is still a matter of your _own_ choice. Like your choice to be gay/lesbian. To buy a Mercedes or Honda. To have short hair or longer hair. If you like it to be watched (maybe a bit extravagant … chichi … ) then do it. Maybe there are an audience who love it, who like to watch you. Its the same discussion with Big Brother show itself … either you watch it or you are bored to death. It’s a choice – and with everything you do, it does have consequences/outcomes.
- with kind regards
Michael.
This article should never have been written. What a person chooses to lifecast is his or her own business. If Scoble doesn’t feel that Twittering the birth of his son is an issue, then it’s not because it is his life. Maybe it bothers Duncan Riley, but what he chooses to make transparent regarding his life is his choice as well.
I was told about a person live blogging the birth of his child last week. http://www.trea.../blog/index.php. It sounds strange but it isn’t. They wanted to share the event and lots of twitter people jumped in to send messages of support. Don’t get me wrong, I think there are some hard lines to be drawn on appropriateness for something that can be viewed by anyone but i don’t think a kid getting born is anywhere near the line.
If I am subscribing to someone’s “lifecast”, I’d like the option of setting some sort of content filter. I don’t want to see you on the toilet or in the car picking your nose but you may get off on me seeing that for some crazy reason.
We could have settings like Acquaintance, Friend, Loved One, Stalker, etc.
It’s certainly an interesting idea for a book – we could use more … er, better science-fiction, social commentary novels.
Oh, and if you’re hell bent on reading it now just buy the UK version or an ARC. There’s plenty available out there. I may even pick one up and review it.
http://www.alib...tle=blind+faith
And while I’m wading in on this topic, why exactly doesn’t Elton do a video reading? Everyone really should IMO, but the topic of Blind Faith sort of begs for it.
http://usedbook...reading-videos/
Duncan – Great post.
In the case of streaming where the person(s) being streamed are knowingly putting themseleves out there makes no big difference in terms of privacy. Why should I have to draw the line for them? It’s their choice. Heck I don’t want to see a guy’s wife giving birth, but if I don’t like what I see or hear – muchless they way it makes me feel, I turn it off or surf somewhere else. Privacy is a matter of who owns and is streaming the content. The choice is ultimately their own.
Lifecasting has its place for a segment of the population that is heavily–perhaps disproportionately–represented here.
But when you start talking about privacy and audience scoping, you’re getting closer to what we’ve created in Radar (http://radar.net), which Erick profiled on TechCrunch a few months back:
http://www.tech...ation-starters/
Whether it’s Scoble’s child-birthing or a family event or what you’re eating right now, audience is important. So is context. And consequently so is privacy.
Ask your friends and family who aren’t readers of TechCrunch.
I think there will always be people who want to show it all and there will always be people who want to see it all and that’s ok. If you don’t want to see everything then don’t watch.
#3 talks about society and culture. As a student of anthropology, technology has always shaped and changed who we are. I am a witness to all this because I influence and study Internet culture. Culture is a relative term that is used to describe the things we do because of what we have learned in the past. Learned behavior, or culture, is what takes people and puts them in groups located in different locations around the world. Culture can be seen in ever small thing we do.
I think about the culture in Snow Crash by Neal Stephenson. It’s in the way the characters move, dress, interact, walk, and confide in and around others. “Life streaming” is what we call “Life cast” and it changes the way you interact with others, dress, act and behave. Technology has always shaped our culture and it will continue to do so.
Insightful post btw