Microsoft Survey Shows Negative Online Interactions Affect People In Real Life (computerworld.com) 60
"Preliminary results of a new Microsoft survey show nearly two-thirds of people surveyed had at least one negative online experience that had an impact on them in the real world, ranging from a loss of trust in others, increased stress or sleep deprivation," reports Computerworld. Microsoft's chief online safety officer writes:
Both adults and teens said they became less trusting of others in the real world after a negative interaction online (adults: 31%, teens: 29%). Consequences to adults that outpaced those to teens included the older generation becoming less trusting of people online (42% of adults vs. 37% of youth), and a reluctance to participate in blogs and other online forums (23% of adults vs. 20% of teens)... The study, "Civility, Safety and Interaction Online -- 2016," polled youth ages 13-17 and adults ages 18-74 in 14 countries... Half reported being "extremely or very" worried about online risks generally, with the most common concerns being unwanted contact (43%) and various forms of harassment (39%).
Microsoft's blog post urges people to "Embrace digital civility and model healthy behaviors for young people both online and off" -- and also notes that today is World Kindness Day.
Microsoft's blog post urges people to "Embrace digital civility and model healthy behaviors for young people both online and off" -- and also notes that today is World Kindness Day.
Re: (Score:1)
How about they reverse the conditions for the survey? I'll bet a lot of people are untrusting online because of negative experiences in real life...
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Anonymity, even partial, equals cruelty (Score:4, Insightful)
You ah...looked at FB page? Or even a FB comments system on various sites including news sites in the last oh 8 years, where peoples real names are included. That's some of the most vitriolic stuff you'll ever see, because people can be identified and in turn can be intimidated. Hell look at the number of cases where someone has been "identified" for posting something that's contrary to another person, and they'll get their friends/followers/etc to try and get them fired for it. Much more difficult to do if you're anonymous. FYI: Raping and pillaging wasn't because people didn't know who was doing it. It was precisely because the loser would know exactly who was doing it to them. The entire point was intimidation, fear, and imposing their power over individuals. An individual doing it would be a nameless person in that crowd, but everyone knew who was doing it.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like the plot of the show "The Internet Ruined My Life".
Sometimes, I wish that reality was more like fiction. Then you start seeing shit like this. [i.redd.it]
Re: (Score:2)
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]ée_internationale_de_la_gentillesse
The date was moved to november 3rd. It seems the english version of the page is not up-to-date.
Re: (Score:2)
And even worse for business (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm sure that people who had negative interactions online are horrible for your ad based business.
Sticks and stones may break my bones ... (Score:4, Interesting)
Thankfully I've never been attacked with sticks and stones. And you can't be attacked with sticks and stones through the internet.
But contrary to the old saying, names can and frequently do hurt, as they are intended to do. And calling people names and any other sort of verbal abuse is very easy online. Likely much easier than it is in real life since you don't even have to see the person you are abusing.
At the same time online abuse may in some ways be less painful or threatening since your abuser is not present. A threat to do physical harm is much scarier when the person is actually right in front of you. However the sheer number of people online means you will probably be subject to much more such abuse online than in person.
On of the great things about the internet is that it can connect you to all sorts of wonderful resources. Unfortunately it also connects you to every abusive, vile, stupid (etc. etc.) person anywhere on the planet.
Re:Only if you let them (Score:4, Insightful)
True. But that's easier said than done and many people who know the rhyme still are hurt by name calling and criticism, even if they have "chosen" not to be.
You don't need to put any personal information online to be subject to abuse. If you post anything anywhere where people are allowed to comment on it, you can be subject to negative comments. You've posted anonymously. I could still have been offended by your comment and gone off on a rant and started calling you names. If you checked back to see if anybody had replied to your comment you would see that. If you are completely immune to such attacks, that's great. I suspect that quite a few people are not.
I also avoid putting personally identifiable info online because of concerns like what potential future employers might think of my personal views.
Re: Only if you let them (Score:1)
That's not the meaning of the saying. The saying is to remind you that they can't hurt you IF YOU CHOOSE to not let the words hurt you, by singing this little rhyme. It's a little ditty taught to children, so they keep words said by mean kids in school in context.
Uh, no. Like many things taught to children, however well-meant, it is a flawed and therefore dangerous lesson. Consider your choice of words, you are making being hurt out to be a choice. Making feelings a matter to be controlled and subdued. And giving no weight of burden to the offender. Rather than providing context, you are distorting it.
And while you may say that children are unable to apprehend the learned erudition of adults, that does not excuse the application of a lesson that flies in the f
Re: (Score:2)
Sticks and stones can break your bones, but names can scar you for life.
The problem with the original 'names can never hurt me' rhyme is that it teaches the children that their natural and correct reaction to emotional assault is wrong and shameful, and compounds the trauma.
It's as bad as the 'violence never solves anything' meme.
Re: (Score:1)
There was a great article in Scientific American a while back that proved that emotional pain was real pain, in the sense that it activated all the same areas of the brain that physical pain would. With that idea being supported by data, I would state that purposefully inflicting emotional pain should carry the same weight as purposefully inflicting physical pain.
We have a national crisis on our hands in terms of mental health. Perhaps one of the fuels feeding such a crisis is the extreme lack of empathy,
Re: (Score:2)
Peter Griffin would disagree with you. [youtube.com]
Re: Sticks and stones may break my bones ... (Score:2)
In other news, water is wet (Score:2)
Schizophrenia? (Score:3)
A lot of people act like "on-line" "doesn't matter" because it's "not the real world". But since the internet is really just a collection of things which exist here in meatspace, that's exceptionally stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Worse if using real name? (Score:2)
the most common concerns being unwanted contact (43%) and various forms of harassment (39%).
The two qualifiers to this would be the level of "community" where the negative interaction took place and whether the individual receiving this negative interaction was identifiable or using a pseudonym.
One can imagine that "public" humiliation would result in a worse outcome for the recipient. Where the individual could be identified in the real world. Possibly even physically encountering their abuser.
However, the level of sensitivity of individuals varies widely. Some are resilient enough to shrug o
Re: (Score:1)
They are just publishing parts of their spyware data. Since they snoop on the microphones, identities, passwords and emails of each Windows 10 user, they can correlate each windows error report, forced update and forced reboot with the swearing and other negative communication afterwards.
Re: (Score:2)
It has long* been suspected that computers fail more often when being sworn at or insulted. Now they can find out if its really true. Given how often people swear at Windows, there should be a lot of data.
* Only yesterday I was reminded of a discussion on this topic I had 30 years ago, and that it wasn't a new idea then - that discussion was about how it had applied in the 1960's.
Timely clickbait article. (Score:2)
This morning I did a mass unfollowing on Twitter. Amazing the amount of vitriol that's been going through the past few months, from people who up until this year were mostly interesting to me for their ability to entertain. That and all that bitcoin crap that I never bothered to purge. Here's hoping my feed can get back to hobbies and tech news again.
Re: (Score:1)
This morning I did a mass unfollowing on Twitter.
I cut out the middleman by not having a Twitter account, lol.
Maybe it's just me, but I don't want to "follow" anyone. I don't care what their next bon mot or timeless bit of 140-character wisdom will be. I don't want to be interrupted every minute or so by hearing about someone's "awesome lunch" or what their cat did or how Biff and Mandy are breaking up again. I guess it boils down to the fact that I just don't care.
I've looked through a lot of Twitter comments in the last several years and although some o
3 things that happend to me in the past year (Score:1)
Seems like a good thing. (Score:2)
Honestly, I think people should be less trusting of people, especially when it comes to businesses. The sooner people recognize that everyone has their own agenda then the better off everyone will be.
I lost all trust... (Score:2)
This is why you should be good and loving always (Score:1)
Yeah (Score:2)
Also, things said on the telephone affect people "in real life".
MS weak tech support affects me in real life (Score:2)