TechCrunch recently covered a new application that allows people to "stalk" others on Twitter without their knowing. Using a more palatable term, I asked people whether they actually take the time to spy. The online survey I published didn't get much response. One email suggested anonymity was an issue: "I don't really want people to know I'm spying." said the writer.
When I later asked a few friends whether they would, hypothetically speaking of course, spy on others--I got a few giggles, a couple sideways looks, and an overall admission that they would often "search for information" about people of interest without necessarily following or befriending them.
As noted in the TechCrunch post, most of the content is open to all. It would take an active removal or blocking to not allow a specific user to access your information. With hundreds and thousands of friends and followers, there has to be a good reason to do so (or too much time). So it seems that TweetStalk is simply about aggregating the information that's already there.
The bottom line is that the walls between applications and people have been coming down fast over the last couple of years. At first people complained they had no way to connect. Now it's about over-connection and, perhaps more importantly, a sense of lost control.
If you choose to participate in the groundswell, spying isn't really about spying--it's about staying connected, getting to know people better, and listening to what they were going to say anyway. And while exceptions do apply, it's often people's insecruities that are at play: more often than not, I believe people prefer to be watched than admit that they're the ones doing the watching.
Comments