From the outset, there were signs that Clubhouse was running fast the platform’s lifecycle. Weeks after its launch, it stumbled upon claims that it is allowing harassment and hate speech to increase, including large rooms where speakers are said to have made comment. Post Semitic. The startup tried to update the community guidelines and add basic reporting and blocking features, and its founders took the necessary Zuckerbergian apology tour. (“We unequivocally condemn Anti-Blackism, anti-Semitism and all forms of racism, hate speech and abuse on the Clubhouse,” read a public blog post. company in October.)
The company has also faced charges of mishandling user data, including a Stanford report suggesting that the company may have routed some of the data through servers in China, possibly giving away allows the Chinese government to access sensitive user information. (The company is committed to locking down user data and submitting it to external audits of its security methods.) And privacy advocates have faltered at the app’s positive development practices. , which involves asking users to upload their entire contact list in order to send invitations to others.
“Great privacy and security concerns, mining a lot of data, using dark models, grow without a clear business model. When will we learn? “Elizabeth M. Renieris, director of the Notre Dame-IBM Technological Ethics Laboratory, wrote in a tweet this week that compared the Clubhouse at this point to the early days of Facebook.
To be fair, there are some important structural differences between Clubhouse and the existing social networks. Unlike Facebook and Twitter, which revolve around a central, algorithmically-ordered feed, Clubhouse is organized more like Reddit – a cluster of themed rooms, moderated by users, with a ‘hallway “Center where the user can browse through the ongoing rooms.” The rooms in the clubhouse disappear after they are finished and recording a room is in violation of the rules (though it still happens), which means “viral” in the traditional sense is not really possible. Users must be invited to the “stage” of the room to speak and moderators can easily initiate rebellious or disruptive speakers, so there is less chance of a civilized discussion being taken over by scammers. And the Clubhouse has no advertising, which reduces the risk of profitability.
But there are still many similarities. Like other social networks, Clubhouse has a number of “discovery” features and aggressive growth tactics aimed at engaging new users deeper into the app, including algorithmic recommendations and alerts. personalized push and a list of recommended users to follow. Those features, combined with Clubhouse’s ability to create private and semi-private rooms with thousands of people in them, create some bad incentives and the same chance of abuse that harm the platforms. other.
The Clubhouse has also become a home for those frustrated with social media censorship and criticism of various gatekeepers. In particular, the attack on The New York Times has become the obsession of Clubhouse addicts for reasons that need another full column to explain. (In part, a room called How to Destroy the NYT has been running for hours, attracting thousands of listeners.)