DES MOINES, Iowa – New legal and ethical questions surrounding the business practices of Facebook seem to surface daily. But at the same time, a new survey finds most Twitter users don't realize that university researchers and others collect and analyze their 'tweets' in the name of science.

Casey Fiesler is an assistant professor at the Department of Information Science at the University of Colorado, and the coauthor of a study on how tweets are used. Of about 68 million active U.S. Twitter users, Fiesler says 268 were surveyed, with an average age of 32.

"So this was a survey, and we asked people generally how they felt about this, whether they were previously aware; and one of the striking things we found was that the majority of our participants had no idea, previously, that this was a thing that could happen," she says.

Sixty-two percent of the people surveyed did not know researchers used their tweets, and 61 percent thought it would be a breach of ethics. Twitter's privacy policy states that public information can be broadly disseminated to a wide range of users, including universities.

Fiesler says there are uses for 'tweeted' information in the name of science that may not be intended by people with Twitter accounts, but she doesn't think they need to stop using social media or lock-up their information.

"I think that most people know intellectually that Twitter is public, and I would actually say that research is one of the less harmful things that could happen with a tweet," she explains.

Fiesler says most survey respondents were more comfortable having a tweet they've posted analyzed along with millions of others, or quoted anonymously, rather than having tweets attributed to them when they are used.

"Lots of researchers also look at things like Instagram, Yelp reviews," adds Fiesler. "Anything that is just public, so that anyone on the Internet can see it, is a typical ethical heuristic, whether researchers can look at that data."

The study was funded by the National Science Foundation and recommends that researchers develop ethical guidelines and standards for mining Twitter data from users.


get more stories like this via email

A South Dakota legislative committee has begun discussions on a plan to repeal the state's grocery tax.

It has been a politically divisive issue amid calls to help residents still reeling from inflation. Nearly a dozen states impose sales taxes on food sold in supermarkets. Some have taken steps to pause or reduce taxes after major spikes in consumer prices.

Erik Nelson, associate state director of advocacy for AARP South Dakota, said the state should take similar action by eliminating its grocery tax. He pointed out there are many people out there, including older residents, who are still feeling the squeeze.

"Many times, South Dakota's low-income seniors may be having to choose between purchasing food and other vital necessities such as prescription drugs or heat," Nelson observed.

Republican Gov. Kristi Noem also supports the idea, but some members of her party plan to oppose the move when it comes up for votes. They, along with groups such as the Chamber of Commerce, argued the move could place pressure on the state budget because a key revenue source would be lost.

But Nelson suggested lawmakers need to take the long view, noting not being able to shop for enough food could be detrimental to the health outcomes of older South Dakotans.

"Seniors that have difficulty accessing and maintaining an adequate and nutritious diet," Nelson emphasized. "We of course recognize that access to healthy food is important to keeping us healthy."

South Dakota's tax on groceries is 4.5%. It is one of only three states to tax groceries at the full sales-tax rate. While concerns about the impact on revenue have been raised, Noem argued the state would still have enough available money in the general fund.

The health risks associated with gas-burning stoves have caused a recent stir and fears of a government ban on the appliances, but a Michigan lawmaker said it would be going too far.

Gas stoves are known to emit nitrogen dioxide, and without proper ventilation, studies have shown indoor air pollution can worsen, causing respiratory illnesses.

A recent study found 13% of childhood asthma cases are attributable to gas stove emissions.

Dr. John Levy, professor and chair of the Department of Environmental Health at Boston University, said the structure of a home can determine the risks.

"For many people, things like gas stoves could actually be their highest source of air pollution exposure," Levy pointed out. "That itself is important."

Rep. Bill Huizenga, R-Mich., said a prohibition on gas appliances would prevent Americans from choosing the oven which works best for them. His bill, The S.T.O.V.E. Act, or "Stop Trying to Obsessively Vilify Energy," would bar the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission from banning gas stoves.

Natural gas is used in more than a third of homes nationwide, but not every household can easily swap out their appliances, especially renters and low-income households, where the majority of asthmatic children live.

Levy pointed out studies have shown improved ventilation in these homes pays for itself when it comes to asthma-related health care costs.

"If we're thinking about folks who maybe are on Medicaid, this actually could be a wise government investment to try to reduce health care costs and health burdens," Levy contended.

The Inflation Reduction Act, passed in 2022, offers homeowners tax incentives for swapping out gas stoves for electric induction versions, as well as other energy-efficient appliances.

Levy added he would like to see a renewed focus on gas stoves to improve building codes, especially in low-income housing and disadvantaged neighborhoods.

The proposed merger between supermarket giants Albertsons and Kroger is raising alarm bells in rural communities worried about the impact on consumers, farmers, and workers. Together, the companies own 734 Albertsons, Safeway, Vons and Ralphs stores in the state, and have indicated that between 100 and 350 could be sold off.

Stacy Mitchell, co-director of the nonprofit Institute for Local Self-Reliance, said consolidation among grocery chains allows them to squeeze more profit on both ends - by lowballing farmers and raising prices for customers.

"We've seen food-production workers and farmers getting paid less, and we see consumers paying more for groceries," Mitchell said. "You've got the middlemen, including the supermarket chains, who are becoming incredibly profitable."

Albertsons and Kroger have assured workers the new owners of any stores they sell will honor union agreements.

But Chris Tilly, professor of urban planning and at UCLA, and an expert on economics said there is no guarantee.

"Workers are rightly skeptical of that, particularly because when Albertsons and Safeway merged, they spun off 168 stores, and quite soon, a lot of those stores closed," Tilly said.

Congress recently passed two bills to improve oversight of large mergers. Mitchell said the Merger Filing Fee Modernization Act will allow federal agencies to charge the companies more to review mega-transactions - so they can hire enough staff to conduct a proper review.

"The Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice are woefully underfunded in terms of their antitrust activities. The size of those agencies really has not kept pace with the growth in the economy," he said. "And we have a significant monopoly problem. "

The new State Antitrust Enforcement Venue Act will help state attorneys general keep the case in their selected courts - and prevent large companies from venue shopping to find a judge the company thinks could be sympathetic.