Why Chicago’s Mayor should reconsider social media monitoring
By: Desmond U.Patton Phd
Tags: BlackLivesMatter, Chicago, Criminal Justice, Social Media, AI

I’m an associate professor of social work and sociology at Columbia University and for the past 8 years, I’ve studied the social media communication of Chicago’s Black youth. Since completing my Ph.D. at the University of Chicago in 2012, I’ve spent countless hours with Black youth on the south and west side of the city, interviewed violence outreach workers and directors, and analyzed thousands of social media posts from Black youth who live in toughest neighborhoods in Chicago. I’ve made some mistakes in my research that include an overzealous approach to identify violent and aggressive speech from Black youth without first centering on their experiences, embracing their humanity, and seeking to understand why they were on social media in the first place.

I have learned more from listening to youth than monitoring their social media communication.

Here are a few thoughts that Mayor Lori Lightfoot and the future task force might consider:

1. Monitoring social media to capture “aggressive” communication isn’t a prevention tool. In the SAFElab we have found that threatening or aggressive conversations usually come days after calls for help. In fact, rarely did we encounter a threatening post that wasn’t attached to deep and complicated trauma.

2. AI (Artificial Intelligence) and other technology tools are extremely bad at deciphering context. In addition, humans who don’t share the same culture, language, or community history can also be really bad at interpreting language and context on social media. It is often the case that Black speech is misinterpreted as hateful or aggressive when using AI tools.

3. Social media monitoring, without consent, breaks down forms of trust that are needed to develop prevention strategies that keep people safe while protecting their humanity.

4. Social media monitoring is rarely if at all, deployed in predominantly White communities. Why is that? This new task force should engage in a PROP (Privilege, Race, Oppression, Power) analysis of any social media plans before deployment.

5. If you don’t do this right, it will inevitably become the new “stop and frisk” and eventually a digitally supported new Jim Crow or what Ruha Benjamin calls the “New Jim Code.”

I do, however, think there are some potential opportunities.

First, you should radically involve youth and community members in the decision-making process, technology development and integration of any technology tools that will live in their communities.

Second, I do believe social media and AI (with consent) can help identify community strengths, can serve as an alternative needs assessment, and can surface critical needs that the Mayor’s office should attend to (e.g. public safety, COVID-19 testing, environmental conditions, etc).

Third, this is the perfect opportunity for interdisciplinary collaborations that move outside of law enforcement. For example, partnerships with the READI program could help youth and young adults get involved in technology workforce development and training that allow community members to create safe and ethical technologies that work for their communities.

The task force should develop a set of non-negotiables when using social media for public safety. This should include tough conversations around how do we keep everyone safe while protecting their privacy and their humanity.