Hang On, Help Is On Its Way- The Drawbacks of Crowd-sourcing- by Liam Calvert #5
Recent events in Nepal have aptly demonstrated the growing role social media platforms like Twitter, Skype, and Facebook are playing when a disaster strikes. Survivors use these sites to keep in touch with the outside world after the event has transpired, media outlets draw upon them to access the most recent information, and sympathetic onlookers utilise their affordances to help those left in need as a result of the disaster (Gao et al 2011). Indeed, the awesome influence social media exerts cannot be denied. Nevertheless, despite this power, social networking sites frequently hamper the sharing of vital information, the distribution of resources, and the effective coordination of disaster relief plans among disparate organisations (Gao et al 2011).
Although crowdsourcing platforms can offer precise and timely information about a crisis, the majority of current applications still fall short in supporting disaster relief efforts (Gao et al 2011). More importantly, these kinds of sites often prevent relief organisations from collaborating effectively with each other (Gao et al 2011). For instance, micro blogs and crisis maps (like the one pictured above), can potentially hinder a unified response, resulting in multiple organisations responding to a request for help at the same time (Gao et al 2011).
Another notable shortcoming of crowdsourcing relates to the fact that the data collected from social media sites, while sometimes useful, does not always provide all the right information necessary for a successful disaster relief effort (Gao et al 2011). Indeed, the questionable accuracy of geo-tagging and the content that accompanies them are far from guaranteed (Gao et al 2011). A geo-located tweet for example, does not necessarily indicate the true geo-location point (Gao et al 2011). Additionally, deceptive reports from malicious tricksters might appear as genuine requests for help on a crisis map (Gao et al 2011).
Lastly, many current crowdsourcing platforms do not have adequate security features for relief organisations (Gao et al 2011). For example, crowdsourcing applications that are publicly accessible for reporting are also publicly available for viewing (Gao et al 2011). This can subsequently create clashes when vital decisions must be made about where and when relief resources are needed (Gao et al 2011). Indeed, in some rare cases, spiteful groups have even targeted relief workers themselves, so publicising details about relief efforts could endanger their well-being (Gao et al 2011).
A simple way of overcoming the drawbacks mentioned above is information verification. As highlighted by Heather Ford (2012), verification enables voices from the disaster site to be heard clearly and accurately – voices that are often muffled by the mediating influence of traditional media (Ford 2012). To that point, Ford emphasises that successful verification hinges on relief organisations contacting people near reported incidents, speaking to journalists, and investigating the identities of those who have sent in reports (Ford 2012).
In any event, crowdsourcing paired with applications like crisis maps for example remain powerful tools in the arsenal of humanitarian agencies and relief organisations alike. However as highlighted throughout this post, a greater number of lives will no doubt be saved as governments and NGO’s find better ways to apply the integration of social media, crowdsourcing, and other collaborative tools to existing disaster relief systems (Gao et al 2011).
Ford, H. 2012, ‘Crowd Wisdom’, Index on Censorship, pp. 33-39
Gao, H., et al 2011, ‘Harnessing the crowdsourcing power of social media for disaster relief’. ARIZONA STATE UNIV TEMPE, pp.1-14