Amongst the buzz and hype surrounding Google Glass, health and fitness monitoring wristbands, smart watches, implantable devices, talking cars and the rest of the burgeoning field labelled ‘wearable technology,’ an important aspect is largely overlooked if not ignored.
That aspect embraces multiple issues, from privacy of personal or confidential information to ethical behaviours we expect from companies and brands who may use wearable technology in their marketing, communication and other activities that let them reach out to consumers and employees.
It seems to me that, too often, we’re overlooking a key point that technology, wearable or otherwise, is about what people do or not do, not the shiny new objects themselves.
So I’m looking forward to the opportunity to discuss such concerns as part of a debate that will take place in London next month at the House of Commons, organized by the CIPR:
On the evening of Monday 7 July in Committee Room 10 at the House of Commons, the CIPR will be hosting a Debating Group event to debate the motion ‘Wearable Technology is an ethical nightmare for the communications, marketing and PR professions’.
Chair: Lord Clement-Jones
Proposing the motion: Stephen Davies, Founder, Substantial Digital Health
Seconding the motion: Neville Hobson, NevilleHobson.com
Opposing the motion: Stephen Waddington MCIPR, CIPR President, Digital and Social Media Director at Ketchum Europe
Seconding: Claire Walker FCIPR, Chief Executive, Firefly Communications
This a red-hot topic, in my view, one that’s swimming with “It depends…” elements, and one that we must debate and get on the attention agenda of public relations practitioners.
The debate is free to attend but you must request an invitation. Details on how to do that are on the CIPR’s event page.
- A very good perspective on wearable tech and ethics appeared in GigaOm a year ago: With wearable tech like Google Glass, human behavior is now a design problem. Worthwhile reading.