This is a matter of human dignity, and about what kind of environment we want to live in, writes Andrew McSta

McStay, Andrew

LSE Research Online

Tech	firms	want	to	detect	your	emotions	andexpressions,	but	people	don’t	like	itAs	revealed	in	a	patent	filing,	Facebook	is	interested	in	using	webcams	and	smartphone	cameras	to	read	ouremotions,	and	track	expressions	and	reactions.	The	idea	is	that	by	understanding	emotional	behaviour,	Facebookcan	show	us	more	of	what	we	react	positively	to	in	our	Facebook	news	feeds	and	less	of	what	we	do	not	–whether	that’s	friends’	holiday	photos,	or	advertisements.This	might	appear	innocuous,	but	consider	some	of	the	detail.	In	addition	to	smiles,	joy,	amazement,	surprise,humour	and	excitement,	the	patent	also	lists	negative	emotions.	Possibly	being	read	for	signs	of	disappointment,confusion,	indifference,	boredom,	anger,	pain	and	depression	is	neither	innocent,	nor	fun.In	fact,	Facebook	is	no	stranger	to	using	data	about	emotions.	Some	readers	might	remember	the	furore	whenFacebook	secretly	tweaked	user’s	news	feeds	to	understand	“emotional	contagion”.	This	meant	that	when	userslogged	into	their	Facebook	pages,	some	were	shown	content	in	their	news	feeds	with	a	greater	number	ofpositive	words	and	others	were	shown	content	deemed	as	sadder	than	average.	This	changed	the	emotionalbehaviour	of	those	users	that	were	“infected”.Given	that	Facebook	has	around	two	billion	users,	this	patent	to	read	emotions	via	cameras	is	important.	Butthere	is	a	bigger	story,	which	is	that	the	largest	technology	companies	have	been	buying,	researching	anddeveloping	these	applications	for	some	time.Watching	you	feelFor	example,	Apple	bought	Emotient	in	2016,	a	firm	that	pioneered	facial	coding	software	to	read	emotions.Microsoft	offers	its	own	“cognitive	services”,	and	IBM’s	Watson	is	also	a	key	player	in	industrial	efforts	to	reademotions.	It’s	possible	that	Amazon’s	Alexa	voice-activated	assistant	could	soon	be	listening	for	signs	ofemotions,	too.This	is	not	the	end	though:	interest	in	emotions	is	not	just	about	screens	and	worn	devices,	but	also	ourenvironments.	Consider	retail,	where	increasingly	the	goal	is	to	understand	who	we	are	and	what	we	think,	feeland	do.	Somewhat	reminiscent	of	Steven	Spielberg’s	2002	film	Minority	Report,	eyeQ	Go,	for	example,	measuresfacial	emotional	responses	as	people	look	at	goods	at	shelf-level.LSE Business Review: Tech firms want to detect your emotions and expressions, but people don’t like it Page 1 of 3		Date originally posted: 2017-07-15Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/2017/07/15/tech-firms-want-to-detect-your-emotions-and-expressions-but-people-dont-like-it/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/What	these	and	other	examples	show	is	that	we	are	witnessing	a	rise	of	interest	in	our	emotional	lives,encompassing	any	situation	where	it	might	be	useful	for	a	machine	to	know	how	a	person	feels.	Some	lessobvious	examples	include	emotion-reactive	sex	toys,	the	use	of	video	cameras	by	lawyers	to	identify	emotions	inwitness	testimony,	and	in-car	cameras	and	emotion	analysis	to	prevent	accidents	(and	presumably	to	lowerinsurance	rates).Users	are	not	happyIn	a	report	assessing	the	rise	of	“emotion	AI”	and	what	I	term	“empathic	media”,	I	point	out	that	this	is	not	innatelybad.	There	are	already	games	that	use	emotion-based	biofeedback,	which	take	advantage	of	eye-trackers,	facialcoding	and	wearable	heart	rate	sensors.	These	are	a	lot	of	fun,	so	the	issue	is	not	the	technology	itself	but	how	itis	used.	Does	it	enhance,	serve	or	exploit?	After	all,	the	scope	to	make	emotions	and	intimate	human	lifemachine-readable	has	to	be	treated	cautiously.The	report	covers	views	from	industry,	policymakers,	lawyers,	regulators	and	NGOs,	but	it’s	useful	to	considerwhat	ordinary	people	say.	I	conducted	a	survey	of	2,000	people	and	asked	questions	about	emotion	detection	insocial	media,	digital	advertising	outside	the	home,	gaming,	interactive	movies	through	tablets	and	phones,	andusing	voice	and	emotion	analysis	through	smartphones.I	found	that	more	than	half	(50.6	per	cent)	of	UK	citizens	are	“not	OK”	with	any	form	of	emotion	capturetechnology,	while	just	under	a	third	(30.6	per	cent)	feel	“OK”	with	it,	as	long	as	the	emotion-sensitive	applicationdoes	not	identify	the	individual.	A	mere	8.2	per	cent	are	“OK”	with	having	data	about	their	emotions	connectedwith	personally	identifiable	information,	while	10.4	per	cent	“don’t	know”.	That	such	a	small	proportion	are	happyfor	emotion-recognition	data	to	be	connected	with	personally	identifying	information	about	them	is	prettysignificant	considering	what	Facebook	is	proposing.But	do	the	young	care?	I	found	that	younger	people	are	twice	as	likely	to	be	“OK”	with	emotion	detection	than	theoldest	people.	But	we	should	not	take	this	to	mean	they	are	“OK”	with	having	data	about	emotions	linked	withpersonally	identifiable	information.	Only	13.8	per	cent	of	18-	to	24-year-olds	accept	this.	Younger	people	are	opento	new	forms	of	media	experiences,	but	they	want	meaningful	control	over	the	process.	Facebook	and	others,take	note.New	frontiers,	new	regulation?So	what	should	be	done	about	these	types	of	technologies?	UK	and	European	law	is	being	strengthened,especially	given	the	introduction	of	the	General	Data	Protection	Regulation.	While	this	has	little	to	say	aboutemotions,	there	are	strict	codes	on	the	use	of	personal	data	and	information	about	the	body	(biometrics),especially	when	used	to	infer	mental	states	(as	Facebook	have	proposed	to	do).This	leaves	us	with	a	final	problem:	what	if	the	data	used	to	read	emotions	is	not	strictly	personal?	What	if	shopcameras	pick	out	expressions	in	such	a	way	as	to	detect	emotion,	but	not	identify	a	person?	This	is	what	retailersare	proposing	and,	as	it	stands,	there	is	nothing	in	the	law	to	prevent	them.I	suggest	we	need	to	tackle	the	following	question:	are	citizens	and	the	reputation	of	the	industries	involved	bestserved	by	covert	surveillance	of	emotions?If	the	answer	is	no,	then	codes	of	practice	need	to	be	amended	immediately.	Questions	of	ethics,	emotioncapture	and	rendering	bodies	passively	machine-readable	is	not	contingent	upon	personal	identification,	butsomething	more	important.	Ultimately,	this	is	a	matter	of	human	dignity,	and	about	what	kind	of	environment	wewant	to	live	in.There’s	nothing	definitively	wrong	with	technology	that	interacts	with	emotions.	The	question	is	whether	they	canbe	shaped	to	serve,	enhance	and	entertain,	rather	than	exploit.	And	given	that	survey	respondents	of	all	ages	arerightfully	wary,	it’s	a	question	that	the	people	should	be	involved	in	answering.♣♣♣LSE Business Review: Tech firms want to detect your emotions and expressions, but people don’t like it Page 2 of 3		Date originally posted: 2017-07-15Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/2017/07/15/tech-firms-want-to-detect-your-emotions-and-expressions-but-people-dont-like-it/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/Notes:This	blog	post	appeared	on	LSE	Media	Policy	Project	blog.	It	was	originally	published	on	The	Conversation.Read	the	original	article.The	post	gives	the	views	of	its	authors,	not	the	position	of	LSE	Business	Review	or	the	London	School	ofEconomics.Featured	image	credit:	Through	the	camera	lens,	by	Photos	by	Lanty,	under	a	CC-BY-2.0	licence	Before	commenting,	please	read	our	Comment	Policy.Andrew	McStay	lectures	at	Bangor	University	and	is	Director	of	the	Network	for	the	Study	ofMedia	and	Persuasive	Communication.	He	is	author	of	Privacy	and	the	Media	(Sage,	2017);	DigitalAdvertising	(2nd	ed	Palgrave-MacMillan,	2016);	Privacy	and	Philosophy	(Peter	Lang,	2014);Creativity	and	Advertising	(Routledge,	2013);	and	The	Mood	of	Information	(Continuum,	2011).	Heis	PI	on	an	AHRC	Future	Leaders	Fellowship​	(titled	‘Empathic	Media:	Theory-Building	andKnowledge-Exchange	with	Industry,	Regulators	and	NGOs’)	and	co-investigator	on	#DATAPSST!,an	ESRC-funded	seminar	series	examining	transparency	in	the	post-Snowden	leak	era.LSE Business Review: Tech firms want to detect your emotions and expressions, but people don’t like it Page 3 of 3		Date originally posted: 2017-07-15Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/2017/07/15/tech-firms-want-to-detect-your-emotions-and-expressions-but-people-dont-like-it/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/

Tech firms want to detect your emotions and expressions, but people don't like it

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online