
Amazon Ring is hiring editors to push local crime news to its users - otoolep
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/05/amazon-owned-ring-wants-report-crime-news/588394/
======
jfk13
As if pushing ever more news of "crime" (much of which may be inconsequential,
entirely non-criminal trivia, judging by the kind of material mentioned in the
article) at the public will somehow make our society better/happier/safer.

Didn't _Bowling for Columbine_ suggest that a key element in America's fear-
driven and violent society, when compared to its northern neighbour, might be
the extent to which US media already focuses on such reporting (if I remember
right -- it's been a long time)? This sort of toxic, alarmist "news" is
already poisoning our social fabric; so let's double down on it and focus even
more on feeding people's fears. Great.

~~~
ranie93
Here's a relevant opinion from Newt Gingrich on the matter of perception of
violence vs. actual trends

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnhJWusyj4I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnhJWusyj4I)

~~~
rjf72
This, moreso, seems to emphasize how much partisanship has gripped everybody.
For instance homelessness is substantially down across the US. [1] But of
course certain areas, especially in California and New York, do not follow
this trend. And so for people in these regions and especially in certain areas
of them, homelessness is very much an issue, aggregate stats notwithstanding.

Imagine having the same interview, except now have an advocate for focusing on
homelessness as an issue and a journalist who keeps interjecting 'but
homelessness across the country is down!' Now furthermore, have somebody go
and insert laugh tracks when the homeless advocate speaks. People would react
to it entirely differently even though it's the exact same logic, just with
the issue being discussed swapped. I think this is mostly reflective of
partisanship, as it emphasizes that the logic itself is not what people are
mocking.

Increasingly often we mock or support logic based not on the soundness of said
logic, but whether it affirms or challenges our views and values.

\---

But more on topic I completely agree that the media holds some responsibility
(I imagine many people even outside of New York and California believe that
homelessness is on the rise, contrary to the data) but there's also the very
real issue that aggregate stats do not necessarily represent local conditions.
There are also a couple of other factors to consider.

People are much more influenced by relatively recent changes rather than
changes that happened decades ago. For instance the violent crime rate has
been increasing recently. That it's far below the levels of the 90s is
probably not much comfort for those in areas where it's increasing. Another
issue that increases in population can see a rate decrease, but the number of
incidents increase or remain stable. If the population increases 10% and the
murder rate declines 1% you'd see an increase in the number of murders
happening. That it's at a lower per capita rate is, once again, probably not
very comforting to those in the area.

[1] - [https://endhomelessness.org/homelessness-in-
america/homeless...](https://endhomelessness.org/homelessness-in-
america/homelessness-statistics/state-of-homelessness-report/)

------
michaelbuckbee
A neighbor recently got a Ring out of some security concerns (partner got
deployed for a year and they have two young kids). However, I've think it's
made things worse in some ways:

\- Every potential interaction is viewed with suspicion

\- Everybody who walks up to the door prompts an interruption wherever you are
(on your smartphone)

The local neighborhood sharing aspects of Ring strongly remind me of NextDoor,
whose suspicion raising and general uselessness can pretty much be summed up
in this tweet:

[https://twitter.com/bestofnextdoor/status/112232088963729817...](https://twitter.com/bestofnextdoor/status/1122320889637298177)

~~~
burger_moon
I have a few coworkers who recently got Ring devices. Now I see them
constantly checking their phones and watching the security footage. The level
of paranoia this device creates is pretty remarkable. These are rich tech
workers living in low crime neighborhoods too.

Having a security camera isn't a bad idea at all, but one that gets you to
check it constantly like it's instagram can't be healthy.

~~~
slimsag
As a counterpoint, I live in Arizona (hardly rich tech workers living in my
neighborhood, excluding me). Tons of people here have them and almost every
instance is either just a delivery person OR literally someone trying to steal
crap from their porch etc.

~~~
CharlesColeman
> OR literally someone trying to steal crap from their porch etc.

To significantly reduce the chance of package theft, I got a simple outdoor
cabinet (no lock) and put up a sign on my door asking deliverymen to place
packages in it. They do it 95% of the time now, so it's very difficult for a
potential package thief to know if there's anything to steal at my door.

Specifically, I got one of these and spray-painted it to match my house:

[https://www.ikea.com/gb/en/products/storage-
furniture/outdoo...](https://www.ikea.com/gb/en/products/storage-
furniture/outdoor-organising/josef-cabinet-in-outdoor-dark-grey-art-00168990/)

------
swamp40
It starts to get good halfway down:

 _I downloaded Neighbors—you can do so without owning a Ring doorbell—and
plugged in my address in boring Arlington, Massachusetts, a city of 45,000
that recorded zero murders and only seven robberies last year. It decided I
needed to know that someone in the uniform of a local lawn-care service had
recently knocked on someone’s door instead of using the doorbell and, when no
one answered, left. Also, there was a building fire two towns away, a couple
of days ago.

Also, two young people, one male, one female, wearing identical T-shirts and
lanyards with name badges, carrying clipboards—likely trying to get signatures
for some cause or another—rang a doorbell and then walked away when no one
answered. “Anyone know who they are?” the post from a Neighbors user asked,
perhaps concerned about Islamic State infiltration of the Boston suburbs.
“Call the police,” one helpful commenter replied._

------
habosa
I hate these things and all the things that go with them (NextDoor, etc). They
promote a world where we're all locked in our boxes peeking through the blinds
at each other and checking Twitter to see what's wrong.

When we don't trust each other, especially the people in our local community,
we move towards a slightly worse world.

This is part of the same phenomenon frequently discussed on Hacker News where
children are not allowed to play outside freely anymore. We're all convinced
the world is full of Bad People who need stopping.

~~~
thebigspacefuck
Nextdoor depends on where you live and who you live near. I've learned a lot
about my city and local politics from my neighbors. It's a great place to get
recommendations for local contractors. I live with a lot of nice people around
and I appreciate getting the exposure to that.

There are definitely stories about needle sightings, break-ins, and package
thefts, but I've found needles at the park and I've even had police come to my
door asking about a dead body found nearby in a tarp. It's not like staying
off of Nextdoor really stops my exposure to bad things, but I do get to learn
more about my neighbors and keep in touch with what's going on in the 'hood.

~~~
whenchamenia
Your local forums are better. If you lack them, they are easy to setup and can
become a small business.

~~~
thebigspacefuck
Can you point me to an example of a successful local forum? There's Craigslist
for buying/selling items and the local subreddit for discussions, but both of
those encompass the wider area of the city as opposed to the neighborhood.

------
vermontdevil
I live in a very affluent and safe area in Central Indiana. Yet my Next Door
and FB neighborhood group has lot of posts from people living in fear of
“rising crime” due to the constant stream of crime reporting from various
sources.

I’m fine with being “aware” of what’s happening but there needs to be sensible
curation of the info.

~~~
badwolf
Nextdoor is amazing for that! Every time a car backfires there are multiple
posts about "Gunshots in the area!?"

Helicopter flying overhead? be sure to follow the multiple "Police choppers
looking for a perp in our neighborhood!" posts.

People revel in fearmongering :(

~~~
jfk13
And then wonder why the society is so trigger-happy?

~~~
Jesus_Jones
The best summary of next door is "twitter for old people".

------
opportune
Great, now old people are going to get even more paranoid about the ever-
decreasing crime rates

------
danvoell
Please tell me this is fake news.

I turned off Ring notifications because they were, in fact, making me fear my
neighborhood. I try to be safe in my neighborhood. These notifications don't
change that. They just make me scared.

~~~
jfk13
It's "Job ID: 836421 | Amazon.com Services, Inc.", if you want to pursue the
opportunity. Doesn't mention anything about being posted on April 1st...
[https://www.amazon.jobs/en/jobs/836421/managing-editor-
news](https://www.amazon.jobs/en/jobs/836421/managing-editor-news)

------
anon4lol
I have a Ring doorbell camera and a camera in our garage, mostly to see if the
garage door is closed. The "crime alerts" are annoying, so I've basically
turned off all the notifications. Looks like amazon has figured out that crime
sells security equipment.

We had a problem with teenagers were ringing our doorbell and screaming late
at night around 1 a.m. It became a nightly ordeal, and sometimes several times
a night. Sometimes they would kick the door and run away. Surprisingly, some
of them were teenage girls. Since my wife is pregnant, I knew this had to
stop. There is no way I wanted to deal with this with a newborn infant.

The comments on NextDoor are funny to me because it is filled with wingnuts
and busy bodies. When I asked for advice on how to handle this situation, I
was shouted down by social justice warriors who told me not to call the police
because it was racist. I said fine, I'll just tell the registered sex offender
who was recently released from prison (for abducting and raping a young woman)
that there are young women harassing us, oh and by the way, all are neighbors
are conditioned to ignore their screams and we won't call the police...
because it is racist. Oddly enough, none of the social justice warriors
replied to say I shouldn't.

I called the police and posted the videos on YouTube and sent them the link.
They found them and calmly talked to them. Problem solved.

------
sandwich9
There is a new podcast called Running from Cops. It is about the TV show COPS
(the "bad boys, bad boys, what you going to do" theme show)

It goes in to how the show make viewers think there is a lot more crime going
on than there actually is. The show producers profit off this

[https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/missing-richard-
simmons/run...](https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/missing-richard-
simmons/running-from-cops-headlong-season-3)

------
vorpalhex
This is an entirely inflammatory and baseless article.

Yes, you should care a bit about local crime. If someone in your neighborhood
is stealing hubcabs, maybe it's a good idea to park in the garage. Likewise,
if there's a spat of minor vehicle burglaries, it's probably wise to make sure
your vehicle is locked.

Yeah, is some idiot going to theorize that the salesman who ignored their no
soliciting sign a secret islamist infiltrator who is casing their house?
Probably. That doesn't undo the value of the other things because silly people
exist.

On the other hand, when there are bad things happening in your neighborhood
like serious break-ins or joggers keep getting kidnapped, then you know,
harass your local police department to step up patrols and act accordingly.

Crime as a whole lowering doesn't mean crime in your neighborhood isn't
happening. Yes the world is getting more peaceful as a whole, but yes, you can
still be mugged and killed.

~~~
bb2018
My house was broken into last year. I wish I had Ring then. We never found any
leads and police were unable to do anything.

Since then I have gotten Ring and definitely feel more secure. We even found
footage of a man stealing our mail and were able to confirm with Ring app
footage from a neighbor that the man stealing the mail was the same stealing
their mail.

~~~
vageli
> My house was broken into last year. I wish I had Ring then. We never found
> any leads and police were unable to do anything.

> Since then I have gotten Ring and definitely feel more secure. We even found
> footage of a man stealing our mail and were able to confirm with Ring app
> footage from a neighbor that the man stealing the mail was the same stealing
> their mail.

In that case was, the culprit ever apprehended?

~~~
jonathankoren
As a victim of package theft, I’m going to say, no.

Even with a picture of a car, and a decent photo of a face, there’s not much
that can be done. You need a license plate. There’s no way to identify these
people.

------
RickJWagner
Crime reporting is big business. Besides 'Ring', look at the opportunistic
hyping of fake hate crimes, ala Jussie Smollett. The desired outcome is the
same: Injecting fear into people, causing them to buy something or vote a
specific way.

It's despicable. It pits people against each other.

------
danso
Back in the earlier days of the Internet, one of my first web apps I created
as a reporter was a local crime map (inspired by, but much less sophisticated
than Adrian Holovaty's chicagocrime.org [0]). This involved contacting each
police department individually and asking them to email me the data. A couple
of departments were happy, because they didn't want to pay to develop their
own online map. Others (small jurisdictions) didn't have the IT process in
place. But there were also large departments that definitely had a data
process, but declined to participate (and I didn't really have the capacity to
start a legal fight for it, since this was a side project, and I was the sole
developer).

What I had been told unofficially, even by departments that did agree to send
data, was that publicizing the data was perceived to have possible negative
consequences -- such as scaring off potential home buyers (this was during the
housing bubble). My point is that crime has always been a big draw for local
news organizations, and this includes data applications like crime maps. But
even ignoring how it might distort public perception of crime, there was
always a pretty implicit downside to a local publisher in making their own
community look like a shithole. Not just the negative feelings, but the price
of real estate (and those real estate advertisers).

From what I can tell, Ring's proposed news service is just for Ring customers?
That is, a non-Ring user (or someone not in the local geofenced area) might
not get to see the crime news for a given area, in the same way that any Web
user could visit a public crime mapper like chicagocrime.org. So the Ring news
service gets all the upside of the attention that crime news draws without the
same downsides that would usually be part of a publisher's news equation.
This, added to Ring's already inherent appeal to customers paranoid about
local crime, might lead to problematic incentives in their crime coverage.

[0] [http://www.holovaty.com/writing/chicagocrime.org-
tribute/](http://www.holovaty.com/writing/chicagocrime.org-tribute/)

------
oh_sigh
I see ads on my neighborhood nextdoor literally every 4th story about how Ring
stopped a robbery in <YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD HERE>

------
neilv
If you want just the personally important hyperlocal crime news, your local
police department might have an alerts email list that they use judiciously.
Cambridge, Massaschusetts, USA, does this well. The advisories seem to be
prompted by exceptional events/situations that people should know about (e.g.,
rash of B&E following a pattern in a particular neighborhood, or a rare
shooting). If your local PD doesn't do this, consider asking them. Email list
is vastly better than pushing you to follow them on Twitter or Facebook.

A city-wide genuine news outlet that cherry-picks important things from the
police crime log, and follows up with additional reporting, is also good. And
some awareness of the gist of it is important as a voting citizen and
community member (e.g., you should be aware that, in some neighborhoods of
your city, people might have justifiable fears of being hit by stray bullets,
or how close to home the opiod epidemic, and read some of the journalism that
personalizes ordinary people who are killed).

However, following every little hyperlocal thing exhaustively, or
reading/watching for sensationalism/entertainment doesn't sound like a good
idea, or at least is a huge time sink. Also, the reader/community comments can
be spirit-crushing.

Separately, journalism is best done without any potential conflicts of
interest. Most outlets I can think of have ownership that appears questionable
(e.g., a big company/person with an interest in influencing public perception,
or with other business before the politicians on which it's supposed to be a
Fourth Estate check), but that kind of ownership shouldn't be the norm, and we
should try to move away from that.

------
mv4
They are already relying heavily on local police force to help them sell.

Now this.

------
marktangotango
It’s propaganda 101, destabilize regimes and states by instilling fear in the
population and mistrust of institutions. The fact it’s also profitable is a
happy coincidence.

At the very least, the perception of rampant crime is a problem for local
politicians; they’re seen as incompetent and not doing their jobs. The worst?
See fascists regimes of ww2.

I own and pay a monthly monitoring fee for a home security system, not because
I value the things in my house, but out fear some nut job would try to harm my
family. This is not rational, the odds are near zero, and it wouldn’t _stop_ a
determined attacker anyway, but it is a deterrent. And I don’t want to kill
anyone, even if it is often “justified” (castle doctrine). There’s definitly
money in fear.

------
peterwwillis
They probably found that many people lose interest in their Ring if they don't
see a purpose for it, so they're manufacturing a point. The more your Ring
tells you about crime, the more afraid you'll be, and want your Ring around to
keep you informed about crime.

------
kwillets
This must be censored to protect the public from antisocial thoughts.

------
commonsense1234
nextdoor already does a great job at that. and in realtime.

------
verisimilitudes
This article seems rather inflammatory and focuses on what other news stations
do too much for an article centred around an Amazon product, I think.

I'm of the opinion that local crime reporting an neighbourhood watches and
whatnot should be handled by the actual locals, instead of a giant
corporation, but this article doesn't seem to support this view, either. I'm
left to wonder what this article would suggest, because it seems to be
suggesting doing nothing is better than locals handling it.

------
inflatableDodo
Just release a robot teddybear that threatens you if you try and leave the
house already.

------
whoisjuan
The "selling fear" narrative seems pretty far fetched and cherry picked. Crime
happens regardless of your opinions. Reporting it might actually make a
difference since it will at least help people be aware of their area safety
and attempt some organized effort to address it.

Yes, the way to address it might be buying security devices and yes, Amazon
could profit from this (but not necessarily).

Either way, crime will happen regardless and this has nothing to do with
Amazon or Ring. It's not like they are actually putting criminals in the
streets or making up stories about crime to boost sales. The article make it
almost sound like that.

The dichotomy here is whether you want to know if crime is happening around
you or you want to be oblivious about it for whatever reason or belief. That
sounds more like a choice, not like an imposition.

If you're going to demonize reporting facts or news about crimes, and you are
going to raise concerns about the potential conflicts of interest between
reporting and profits, you should start first with a sound judgement of
journalism as a whole. As far as I know most newspapers and media outlets are
for-profit businesses, so their motivations might be as obscure. And this
includes, The Atlantic, the publisher of this very article.

And that actually reminds of a wise spanish saying that seems like a good fit
for this journalistic piece: "El ladrón juzga por su condición" ... That means
"The thief judges by his condition"...

~~~
danso
Most critics of journalists, and many journalists themselves, would agree with
you that profit-motive is a main factor in deciding (consciously and
unconsciously) what gets covered as news. And stories about crime have long
been clickbait before "clicks" were a thing, e.g. the aphorism, "if it bleeds,
it leads".

Here's one interesting writeup about the "Murder of the Century" in 1897,
which is said to have sparked a new era of tabloid reporting:
[https://archives.cjr.org/review/headless_body_in_newspaper_w...](https://archives.cjr.org/review/headless_body_in_newspaper_war.php)

