Slashdot Mirror
French Inquiry Launched After Live Suicide Broadcast On Periscope (bbc.com)
An anonymous reader writes: French authorities have launched an investigation after a young woman recorded her suicide which streamed live to over 1,000 connected followers on the online video app Periscope. Prosecutors in Egly, Essone, a suburb 15 miles south of Paris, confirmed they had opened the inquiry following the incident which saw the 19-year-old throw herself under a commuter train at a railway station on Tuesday.BBC reports: Previously, she had filmed herself in her flat discussing how she intended to make a video to "send a message", warning younger viewers not to continue to watch what would be a "shocking" act, it was reported. During the filming, the young woman claimed to have been raped and named her attacker, according to the reports. It is not the first time that Periscope has been linked to inappropriate content.
while live streaming???? also water is wet. Not sure what kind of investigation there is to be had here, i mean unless periscope somehow is controlling people making them be stupid on camera, but im pretty sure thats just the human ego which causes it
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
This is the 21st century's equivalent of watching an execution, slowing down and creating a traffic jam to catch a glimpse of an accident on the freeway, or gawking at someone about to jump off the roof of a building. Nothing new here: human beings are disgusting voyeurs, irresistibly attracted to other people's misery, be it in online or on a sidewalk.
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
Who is the "THEY" you are referring to here? It's not like there is a periscope producer with her hand over the cutoff button, waiting to decide if the content is no appropriate for broadcast... oh and also, does France have regulatory control over internet streaming? In the US, we've got the FCC, but they don't deal with decency on the net... only on TV, and even they couldn't stop Janet Jackson from showing off some nipple. There is no "THEY" to actively make a decision to continue broadcasting, and there never will be. It's the internet.
Which has more power: the hammer, or the anvil?
Unless Periscope knew what the content was, as it unfolded, they couldn't know they were broadcasting a suicide. So they would not be in a position to stop it.
I suppose it will unfold in the "investigation," but someone would have to watching her channel and then warn "the higher ups" at Periscope in time for them to cut it off. And frankly I can believe there are a lot more voyeurs who would just let it happen and not say a thing, even if they knew who to call/write/tweet
Behold, this dreamer cometh. Come now, and let us slay him... and we shall see what will become of his dreams.
...Periscope has been linked to inappropriate content
Exactly how is this software/company "linked" to inappropriate content in this case? Did someone from the company bully the young woman? Did someone from the company slip something into her coffee? I'm not certain how one logically links the actions of a third party to the platform they use to disseminate a message or actions.
Likewise, I'm going to avoid the "inappropriate" portion. Because that's even more silly. There's good reason we have safe harbor laws when it comes to this sort of thing. It's not Periscope's fault someone used their software to do this. It's not like they can control anyone's actions.
Poppycock! It's all poppycock!
And frankly I can believe there are a lot more voyeurs who would just let it happen and not say a thing, even if they knew who to call/write/tweet
Why didn't one of those "over 1000 followers" call the police to try to stop it? Maybe they couldn't have been in time(?) but why the Hell didn't someone try. Have we become the don't give a shit society?
Should 99,999% non-suicidal people in the population be restricted in their freedom just because the tiny rest could put themselves on camera when ending their lifes? Certainly not! Also, to me it's perfectly fine when adult people decide to end their life voluntarily, it's their life, not anyone elses. If (Futurama-style) suicide booths were available, railway commuters would not need to suffer from delays just because others don't find a more reliable method to kill themselves.
Another young person comitted suicide. Meh, just a statistic. There's little sypmathy. People who have never had to deal with depression call them 'selfish'
But a suicide streamed online... 'inappropriate content'... outrage! outrage! ban this sick filth!
I think the main problem here is that the powers that be, after spending a long long time growing fat and happy with the general addiction
of the masses to mass media entertainment, are starting to get nervous about a slow transformation of that into consumer driven content
and peoples acceptance of the messages there contained, which are not carefully filtered and cleaned by the powers that be.
There is risk here, you see, of alternative points of view.
The focus in this case should of course not be the streaming of this sad event, or finger pointing around that. It should be that a person
was left in the situation where they could not reach out to other people for help, but instead did this. Now that is not something that can
be easily changed - and rules, regulations, etc will not achieve it - there are always a few people that slip through cracks and end up in
such a bad place internally that they will do something this bad - however we are not supposed to accept that. We are supposed to believe that
if we follow the rules, and if we accept being controlled, monitored, then we will be SAFE from such things.
Events like this remind us that that is simply not true. No matter how much control we give up, no matter how many rules we accept, and
no matter how closely we are watched 'for our own good', bad things will and do happen. People make mistakes and are fallible.
Hence, they do NOT want such things to be made public.
Yes, that will definitely make someone decide NOT to publicly broadcast their own suicide.
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
Laws don't embue "them" with omniscience or absolute control over events. "They" clearly don't have "control" over filming at railway stations.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
I modded you down with "Troll".
But only because "Idiot" isn't an option.
dead person owns the copyright for at least 70 years
In usa after 9/11 think they added laws say that we can control / ban filming at any public transportation location
They haven't. For instance, from the TSA's own FAQ:
Can I film and take photos at a security checkpoint?
TSA does not prohibit photographing, videotaping or filming at security checkpoints, as long as the screening process is not interfered with or sensitive information is not revealed. [...]
Can I get some more advance notice next time?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
I don't dont know what article you read but everything ive found has been sparse on information. I don't have any idea her reasoning behind it failed justice is implied but not enough information was given to reach that conclusion.
Spotlighted? They are just after a story but maybe if there had been some coverage of whatever happend before all this this wouldn't have happened?
Inappropriate sure but without realtime monitoring and a significant added delay only so much can be done and its not cost effective.
Well its France I had assumed that they had better mental healthcare than we do here in the US but that may not be the case. How many seperate parts of the system failed for this to happen?
Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
Welcome to the inevitable result of the selfie generation and their obsession with broadcasting every detail of their life over the internet! Personally, I don't think she actually "threw herself in front of a train", I think she was just too distracted by her periscope feed to notice she was standing in front of a frickin' train!
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Sure. IF a guard on duty spots it. Out of the millions of people daily passing through a railway network in a major city. Not to mention, someone selfie videoing with their phone is both incredibly common behavior and not really want the filming ban means. The guards would probably stop someone who showed up with professional movie cameras, a lighting and sound crew, the whole 9 yards...again, IF they saw it. Some of these stations may not have any guards on duty.
The real "fix" is to eliminate these open platforms entirely. Separate the people on the platform from the moving trains with plexiglass and automatic doors that only open if the train is present and stopped. This won't stop suicides but should stop shoving murders and accidents.
Well it's not the first time Humans have been linked to inappropriate content.
People kill themselves. They do so in public sometimes. This includes online, which is part of the public. Go back to stealing taxes and writing stupid reports; this is a problem without a solution, or a solution in search of a problem.
Who is the "THEY" you are referring to here? It's not like there is a periscope producer with her hand over the cutoff button, waiting to decide if the content is no appropriate for broadcast.
I don't know about Periscope, but I know Twitch goes out of their way to flag people who have 'inappropriate' content.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
> human beings are disgusting voyeurs, irresistibly attracted to other people's misery, be it in online or on a sidewalk
People aren't fascinated by car crashes and televised suicides because they're "attracted to misery," otherwise the homeless people on that sidewalk would get a lot more attention instead of being avoided and ignored. The behaviors people are fascinated by are those that are markedly out of the ordinary. Most people aren't viscerally interested in routine mental illness, but when illness manifests as a serial killer or just a guy holding an especially wacky sign it's interesting because it's not something one sees every day.
People enjoy looking at rainbows and dramatic sunsets too.
I've heard that suicide is illegal in some places but I've never understood how it would be penalized.
It's not difficult. If the cops get a tip that you're going to murder Mr. X at 5:00 when he leaves his office, they can show up to his office at 4:45 and arrest you when you show up with a gun. Right?
With law enforcement intervention in suicide, it's the same thing, except you are Mr. X.
As far as the "penalty" for attempted suicide, the idea is that they get you into a mental hospital so you can get treatment for your suicidal tendencies. They can't commit you to a mental hospital involuntarily unless you committed a crime, thus, suicide is illegal.
but OP said "but they still decided to continue broadcasting" suggesting that someone is actively watching the stream and deciding whether a stream should continue or not... the reality is that people who get flagged do so after the fact, and only after repeated complaints.
Which has more power: the hammer, or the anvil?
that's true
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
So the government has no part in cleaning up the mess, repairing their train, investigating the rape accusation? You have some off definitions, I am sure the government should just stay out of these things though...
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?