Comments on: Increasing signal-to-noise on H1N1/Swine flu http://www.ppeach.com/blog/2009/04/increasing-signal-to-noise-on-h1n1swine-flu/ Healthcare/Startups/Web Mon, 17 May 2010 08:24:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Ah1n1 http://www.ppeach.com/blog/2009/04/increasing-signal-to-noise-on-h1n1swine-flu/comment-page-1/#comment-3066 Ah1n1 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 08:33:05 +0000 http://www.ppeach.com/blog/?p=310#comment-3066 well done job<br>good link! well done job
good link!

]]> By: Ah1n1 http://www.ppeach.com/blog/2009/04/increasing-signal-to-noise-on-h1n1swine-flu/comment-page-1/#comment-3050 Ah1n1 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 01:33:05 +0000 http://www.ppeach.com/blog/?p=310#comment-3050 well done job<br>good link! well done job
good link!

]]> By: pieter http://www.ppeach.com/blog/2009/04/increasing-signal-to-noise-on-h1n1swine-flu/comment-page-1/#comment-1110 pieter Wed, 06 May 2009 03:10:12 +0000 http://www.ppeach.com/blog/?p=310#comment-1110 What's interesting, and not surprising in the least, is that the popular usage of the term "Swine flu" has persisted in this way, despite all authorities switching to, and trying to get other people to use the term "H1N1 flu". There has been a misunderstanding around the origins of this particular strain, as it's not not necessarily clear it comes from entirely from pigs. A small decision right at the start of this event by the CDC and WHO to use this term has led to the unnecessary culling of >300k pigs in Egypt (some suggest the Egyptian government had alternative motives in the pig cull), and some (how much?) damage to the pig industry globally. Vegetarians might not have an issue with this, but the principle is still clear. It demonstrates the need to consider the names of these potentially significant media events very carefully, and have them be as neutral as possible. I suspect the term "swineflu" will persist for a while yet. What’s interesting, and not surprising in the least, is that the popular usage of the term “Swine flu” has persisted in this way, despite all authorities switching to, and trying to get other people to use the term “H1N1 flu”. There has been a misunderstanding around the origins of this particular strain, as it’s not not necessarily clear it comes from entirely from pigs. A small decision right at the start of this event by the CDC and WHO to use this term has led to the unnecessary culling of >300k pigs in Egypt (some suggest the Egyptian government had alternative motives in the pig cull), and some (how much?) damage to the pig industry globally. Vegetarians might not have an issue with this, but the principle is still clear.
It demonstrates the need to consider the names of these potentially significant media events very carefully, and have them be as neutral as possible. I suspect the term “swineflu” will persist for a while yet.

]]> By: Melina Chan http://www.ppeach.com/blog/2009/04/increasing-signal-to-noise-on-h1n1swine-flu/comment-page-1/#comment-1108 Melina Chan Wed, 06 May 2009 02:48:31 +0000 http://www.ppeach.com/blog/?p=310#comment-1108 Fascinating post Pieter. One thing I've noticed as a person that uses Twitter through the webpage is that Swine Flu has been prominent in the "Trending Topics" feature over the past few days. If I'd not previously heard anything about the potential pandemic, I might've clicked on the link for Twitter to show all posts containing that keyword and been bombarded. When doing this, it appears that for sure there are many more tweets mentioning Swine Flu humourously or in passing than there are tweets that *sound* reputable. NOT an effective way to get a good picture of the lay of the land from reliable information sources. But in the case that an individual has not heard anything about it, and no one they are following (or trust for that sort of information) is tweeting about it, then one could just click to find out more. As I did with "Gretel" when the Logies were airing. There was a much clearer message coming through, in that case though :) Fascinating post Pieter.

One thing I’ve noticed as a person that uses Twitter through the webpage is that Swine Flu has been prominent in the “Trending Topics” feature over the past few days. If I’d not previously heard anything about the potential pandemic, I might’ve clicked on the link for Twitter to show all posts containing that keyword and been bombarded. When doing this, it appears that for sure there are many more tweets mentioning Swine Flu humourously or in passing than there are tweets that *sound* reputable. NOT an effective way to get a good picture of the lay of the land from reliable information sources.

But in the case that an individual has not heard anything about it, and no one they are following (or trust for that sort of information) is tweeting about it, then one could just click to find out more. As I did with “Gretel” when the Logies were airing. There was a much clearer message coming through, in that case though :)

]]> By: pieter http://www.ppeach.com/blog/2009/04/increasing-signal-to-noise-on-h1n1swine-flu/comment-page-1/#comment-904 pieter Tue, 28 Apr 2009 22:17:09 +0000 http://www.ppeach.com/blog/?p=310#comment-904 Good points, although the ratio can always be better. On this particular issue speed of information retrieval isn't currently important, so traditional media for distribution is adequate. I don't think social media can add much more than listening to the nightly news at the moment. Hyperlocal issues might spring up, but I can't think of anything particular right now. There are ways of minimising distribution of misinformation though and every bit helps. Social media has the potential to be full of it, and on this particular issue it already is. It wasn't ever going to be any other way. Absolutely, focusing on people/resources that you know and can rely on will will definitely happen naturally. Like always though, when people get desperate, they'll often believe anyone that can give them false hope over reality, its just human nature, and in that situation you have room for exploitation. Good points, although the ratio can always be better. On this particular issue speed of information retrieval isn’t currently important, so traditional media for distribution is adequate. I don’t think social media can add much more than listening to the nightly news at the moment. Hyperlocal issues might spring up, but I can’t think of anything particular right now.
There are ways of minimising distribution of misinformation though and every bit helps. Social media has the potential to be full of it, and on this particular issue it already is. It wasn’t ever going to be any other way.
Absolutely, focusing on people/resources that you know and can rely on will will definitely happen naturally. Like always though, when people get desperate, they’ll often believe anyone that can give them false hope over reality, its just human nature, and in that situation you have room for exploitation.

]]> By: Ross Hill http://www.ppeach.com/blog/2009/04/increasing-signal-to-noise-on-h1n1swine-flu/comment-page-1/#comment-903 Ross Hill Tue, 28 Apr 2009 21:40:13 +0000 http://www.ppeach.com/blog/?p=310#comment-903 I don't think the ratio actually matters, as long as we can figure out which profiles know their stuff. The fake Stephen Conroy's of the world are a problem. It's really a social issue and we already know which friends we trust for certain types of information. If someone keeps posting innaccurate stuff we just stop listening to them. I don’t think the ratio actually matters, as long as we can figure out which profiles know their stuff. The fake Stephen Conroy’s of the world are a problem.

It’s really a social issue and we already know which friends we trust for certain types of information. If someone keeps posting innaccurate stuff we just stop listening to them.

]]>