adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Media

Doctors are now social media influencers. They aren’t all ready for it. – MIT Technology Review

Published

 on


You should not, as VanWingen initially suggested, wash your produce in soap and water—it’s better to just rinse fruits and vegetables in cold water because soap residue can cause digestive issues. And his suggestion to leave groceries outside or in the garage for a few days before bringing them into your home needed a clarification that this would not be a safe procedure for perishable goods. 

VanWingen lobbied YouTube to let him edit the video and remove the portion with potentially harmful advice, but there wasn’t much he could do aside from take the whole thing down. He decided against that, instead littering the video’s description with updates linking to new and more accurate information. But, he says, he still stands by the majority of the advice in the video. 

“If you associate Dr. VanWingen with misinformation, that weighs on me extremely heavily,” he says. Compared to others, he says, his mistake was innocent and would be unlikely to have dire consequences. “There are doctors that I’ve seen that are promoting, like for instance, hydroxychloroquine and maybe even promoting fear,” he says, referring to the unproven and, according to the FDA, potentially dangerous covid-19 treatment that was promoted by President Trump. “That is certainly not where I would see myself coming from. ” 

300x250x1

“There are doctors I’ve seen promoting hydroxochloroquine and maybe even promoting fear.”

And the people who can get views for a medical message on social media aren’t necessarily the ones most qualified to craft it. Eric Feigl-Ding, an epidemiologist who now has a large following on Twitter thanks to his evocative tweets about Covid-19, has found his expertise and analysis questioned by other epidemiologists. 

Varshavski, that is Doctor Mike, became YouTube’s go-to medical expert after a 2015 Buzzfeed article about his Instagram account dubbed him the “hot doctor.” And although he often stresses to his audience that “expert opinion,” including his, is “the lowest form of evidence,” his viewers fans are more likely to trust what he says in his videos than they are to track down and read a randomized controlled study on the same topic. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, if the information is sound and clearly presented—and he described his role during the pandemic as essentially turning himself into a mouthpiece and platform for the CDC, WHO, and leading experts in the field.   

But it’s easy to lose that balance. 

“If you are a doctor and you’re popular and people look to you for guidance, and you believe your expert opinion without any kind of research to substantiate it outweighs that of the guidance from the CDC and WHO, you’ve crossed the line,” he says. 

And that’s the central challenge: people will turn to the internet for information during a health crisis, whether it’s their own or one facing the entire world. But the best, most accurate information isn’t always packaged and optimized in a way that is appealing to a curious public searching for certainty. For every CDC video about the latest studies on the coronavirus, there’s someone out there claiming to be the one person out there willing to tell you what “doctors don’t want you to know.” That gets combined with a president who is amplifying potentially dangerous ideas so that they become significant news stories. 

Doctors becoming brands

There’s another challenge faced by these doctor-influencers, too: branding and money. Personalities like Doctor Mike can make accurate information interesting by becoming influencers, but they also have to figure out a way to do that without falling into ethical quicksand. 

People become famous online by becoming human brands. But “turning ourselves into brands can also drive people in a different direction,” said Chiang. “Some people out there are aligning us with big pharma already. The last thing they want to see is that we are selling a product or idea.” 

Varshavski, like many content creators, takes sponsors for his Instagram and YouTube accounts, but said he has to make sure that those sponsorships don’t look like medical endorsements. Chiang, who also serves as the Chief Medical Social Media officer for his hospital, has to carefully screen which TikTok challenges he participates in, and the songs he uses with them, to avoid associating his image and that of his profession with something offensive or tasteless. Chiang is informative on TikTok, but he does it while engaging effectively with how people already use the app. And that’s not always something doctors are capable of—or interested in—trying to learn how to do.  

“Historically there’s never been any sort of teaching in medical training in how to communicate on a public level with our communities and our patients,” said Chiang.

Online fame takes maintenance and skill to a degree that most people underestimate. And, especially for doctors and other people who work in fields that are targets of disinformation, there are some more serious risks. Chiang points out that some companies will simply steal content from medical professionals on social media and use them to sell their products. And, battling medical misinformation online can make those who believe it angry, potentially endangering the personal safety of doctors who try to take it on. 

But Chiang and Varshavski say thesay that the risks are worth it, especially if having more doctors online helps people find better information about their health. 

And, as doctors who are both on the internet and treating real patients, they can see how misinformation impacts their patients first-hand. Varshavski treated five covid-19 patients in one recent weekend with mild symptoms, and each asked for hydroxychloroquine, a risky possible treatment that can cause serious heart issues in some patients. Some told Varshavski that they heard about the treatment on TV. 

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Media

B.C. online harms bill on hold after deal with social media firms

Published

 on

The British Columbia government is putting its proposed online harms legislation on hold after reaching an agreement with some of the largest social media platforms to increase safety online.

Premier David Eby says in a joint statement with representatives of the firms Meta, TikTok, X and Snapchat that they will form an online safety action table, where they’ll discuss “tangible steps” toward protecting people from online harms.

Eby added the proposed legislation remains, and the province will reactivate it into law if necessary.

“The agreement that we’ve struck with these companies is that we’re going to move quickly and effectively, and that we need meaningful results before the end of the term of this government, so that if it’s necessary for us to bring the bill back then we will,” Eby said Tuesday.

300x250x1

The province says the social media companies have agreed to work collaboratively with the province on preventing harm, while Meta will also commit to working with B.C.’s emergency management officials to help amplify official information during natural disasters and other events.

The announcement to put the Bill 12, also known as the Public Health Accountability and Cost Recovery Act, on hold is a sharp turn for the government, after Eby announced in March that social media companies were among the “wrongdoers” that would pay for health-related costs linked to their platforms.

At the time, Eby compared social media harms to those caused by tobacco and opioids, saying the legislation was similar to previous laws that allowed the province to sue companies selling those products.

A white man and woman weep at a podium, while a white man behind them holds a picture of a young boy.
Premier David Eby is pictured with Ryan Cleland and Nicola Smith, parents of Carson Cleland, during a news conference announcing Bill 12. (Ben Nelms/CBC)

Eby said one of the key drivers for legislation targeting online harm was the death of Carson Cleland, the 12-year-old Prince George, B.C., boy who died by suicide last October after falling victim to online sextortion.

“In the real world we would never allow a company to set up a space for kids where grown adults could be invited in to contact them, encourage them to share photographs and then threaten to distribute those photographs to their family and friends,” Eby said when announcing the legislation.

The premier said previously that companies would be shut down and their owners would face jail terms if their products were connected to harms to young people.

In announcing the pause, the province says that bringing social media companies to the table for discussion achieves the same purpose of protecting youth from online harm.

“Our commitment to every parent is that we will do everything we can to keep their families safe online and in our communities,” said Eby.

Ryan Cleland, Carson’s father, said in a statement on Tuesday that he “has faith” in Eby and the decision to suspend the legislation.

“I don’t think he is looking at it from a political standpoint as much as he is looking at it as a dad,” he said of Eby. “I think getting the social media giants together to come up with a solution is a step in the right direction.”

Business groups were opposed

On Monday, the opposition B.C. United called for a pause to Bill 12, citing potential “serious legal and economic consequences for local businesses.”

Opposition Leader Kevin Falcon said in a statement that his party pushed Eby’s government to change course, noting the legislation’s vague language on who the province can sue “would have had severe unintended consequences” for local businesses and the economy.

“The government’s latest retreat is not only a win for the business community but for every British Columbian who values fairness and clarity in the law,” Falcon said.

A white man wearing a blue tie speaks in a legislature building.
B.C. United Leader Kevin Falcon says that Bill 12 could have had unintended consequences. (Chad Hipolito/The Canadian Press)

The Greater Vancouver Board of Trade said they are pleased to see the legislation put on hold, given the “potential ramifications” of the proposal’s “expansive interpretation.”

“We hope that the government chooses not to pursue Bill 12 in the future,” said board president and CEO Bridgitte Anderson in a statement. “Instead, we would welcome the opportunity to work with the government to develop measures that are well-targeted and effective, ensuring they protect British Columbians without causing unintended consequences.”

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Media

Trump poised to clinch US$1.3-billion social media company stock award

Published

 on

Donald Trump is set to secure on Tuesday a stock bonus worth US$1.3-billion from the company that operates his social media app Truth Social (DJT-Q), equivalent to about half the majority stake he already owns in it, thanks to the wild rally in its shares.

The award will take the former U.S. president’s overall stake in the company, Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG), to US$4.1-billion.

While Mr. Trump has agreed not to sell any of his TMTG shares before September, the windfall represents a significant boost to his wealth, which Forbes pegs at US$4.7-billion.

Unlike much of his real estate empire, shares are easy to divest in the stock market and could come in handy as Mr. Trump’s legal fees and fines pile up, including a US$454.2-million judgment in his New York civil fraud case he is appealing.

300x250x1

The bonus also reflects the exuberant trading in TMTG’s shares, which have been on a roller coaster ride since the company listed on Nasdaq last month through a merger with a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) and was snapped up by Trump supporters and speculators.

Mr. Trump will be entitled to the stock bonus under the terms of the SPAC deal once TMTG’s shares stay above US$17.50 for 20 trading days after the company’s March 26 listing. They ended trading on Monday at US$35.50, and they would have to lose more than half their value on Tuesday for Mr. Trump to miss out.

TMTG’s current valuation of approximately US$5-billion is equivalent to about 1,220 times the loss-making company’s revenue in 2023 of US$4.1-million.

No other U.S. company of similar market capitalization has such a high valuation multiple, LSEG data shows. This is despite TMTG warning investors in regulatory filings that its operational losses raise “substantial doubt” about its ability to remain in business.

A TMTG spokesperson declined to comment on the stock award to Mr. Trump. “With more than $200 million in the bank and zero debt, Trump Media is fulfilling all its obligations related to the merger and rapidly moving forward with its business plan,” the spokesperson said.

While Mr. Trump’s windfall is rich for a small, loss-making company like TMTG, the earnout structure that allows it is common. According to a report from law firm Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, stock earnouts for management were seen in more than half the SPAC mergers completed in 2022.

However, few executives clinch these earnout bonuses because many SPAC deals end up performing poorly in the stock market, said Freshfields securities lawyer Michael Levitt. TMTG’s case is rare because its shares are trading decoupled from its business prospects.

“Many earnouts in SPACs are never satisfied because many SPAC prices fall significantly after the merger is completed,” Mr. Levitt said.

To be sure, TMTG made it easier for Mr. Trump to meet the earnout threshold. When TMTG agreed to merge with the SPAC in October, 2021, the deal envisioned that TMTG shares had to trade above US$30 for Mr. Trump to get the full earnout bonus. The two sides amended the deal in August, 2023 to lower that threshold to US$17.50, regulatory filings show.

Had that not happened, Mr. Trump would not have yet earned the full bonus because TMTG’s shares traded below US$30 last week. The terms of the deal, however, give Mr. Trump three years from the listing to win the full earnout, so he could have still earned it if the shares traded above the threshold for 20 days in any 30-day period during this time.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Media

B.C. puts online harms bill on hold after agreement with social media companies

Published

 on

The B.C. government is putting its proposed online harms legislation on hold after reaching an agreement with some of the largest social media platforms to make people safer online.

Premier David Eby says in a joint statement with representatives of the firms Meta, TikTok, X and Snap that they will form an online safety action table, where they’ll discuss “tangible steps” towards protecting people from online harms.

Eby says the social media companies have “agreed to work collaboratively” with the province on preventing harm, while Meta will also commit to working with B.C’s emergency management officials to help amplify official information during natural disasters and other events.

300x250x1

“We have had assurance from Facebook on a couple of things. First, that they will work with us to deliver emergency information to British Columbia in this wildfire season that (people) can rely on, they can find easily, and that will link into official government channels to distribute information quickly and effectively,” Eby said at a Tuesday press conference.

“This is a major step and I’m very appreciative that we are in this place now.”


Click to play video: 'B.C. takes steps to protect people from online harms'
3:56
B.C. takes steps to protect people from online harms

 


The announcement to put the bill on hold is a sharp turn for the government, after Eby announced in March that social media companies were among the “wrongdoers” that would pay for health-related costs linked to their platforms.


The email you need for the day’s
top news stories from Canada and around the world.

At the time, Eby compared social media harms to those caused by tobacco and opioids, saying the legislation was similar to previous laws that allowed the province to sue companies selling those products.


Click to play video: 'Carol Todd on taking action against online harms'
5:46
Carol Todd on taking action against online harms

 


Last August, Eby criticized Meta over its continued blackout of Canadian news outlets as wildfires forced thousands from their homes.  Eby said it was “unacceptable” for the tech giant to cut off access to news on its platforms at a time when people needed timely, potentially life-saving information.

“I think it’s fair to say that I was very skeptical, following the initial contact (with Meta),” Eby said Tuesday.

Eby said one of the key drivers for legislation targetting online harm was the death of Carson Cleland, the 12-year-old Prince George, B.C., boy who died by suicide last October after falling victim to online sextortion.

The premier says in announcing the pause that bringing social media companies to the table for discussion achieves the same purpose of protecting youth from online harm.

“Our commitment to every parent is that we will do everything we can to keep their families safe online and in our communities,” the premier said in his statement.

 

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending