Lie Detector Company Threatens Researchers, Draws Much More Attention To Research
from the how-about-a-common-sense-detector dept
Slashdot points us to a story of a lie detector manufacturer, Nemesysco, who apparently was so upset with a report from some Swedish researchers in a technology journal, that they threatened legal action against the journal and the researchers, claiming that they would sue for defamation if the article wasn't taken down. Since the basic point of the journal article was that the lie detecting technology that Nemesysco was betting on simply could not work, you can understand why they might be upset about it. But calling it defamation is highly questionable.If the information presented in the article was wrong why not just counter it and point out why it's wrong? Threatening defamation lawsuits and trying to shut up the researchers just makes it look like Nemesysco has something to hide. And, indeed, true to the Stresisand Effect, the article reports that the researchers have received a lot more attention for their research since the threats were issued: "It was hardly their intention. But since the article was withdrawn, I have received lots of mail and requests for copies of the article. The article would not have been read to this extent if the company had simply ignored it in silence." Who knows whether or not Nemesysco's lie detector works, but its common sense detector is apparently on the fritz.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: lie detector, research, streisand effect
Companies: nemesysco
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
The main use of polygraphs is to coerce confessions. It helps in those situations where police have a fair amount of physical evidence or a perp who knows he did wrong and wants to confess.
After going through the polygraph test, the officer giving test will say that the perp failed and then ask, in a kind and fatherly way, "Do you want to tell me what really happened?"
In a surprising number of instances the perp will give a confession right then and there. (Of course the perps are asked if they choose to waive their Miranda rights before taking the test.)
However, for this entire system to work the general public has to believe that polygraphs are fairly accurate. That's the main reason polygraph companies are so anal about stuff like this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Defamation...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Polygraph Schmolygraph
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Polygraph Schmolygraph
One of the tools used for bullying in the businessworld is the fees charged by Libel lawyers. This intimidates an editor/publisher even more effectively than the police can.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nemesysco shouldn't be able to sue for libel unless they can show that the researchers purposefully falsified data in order to discredit Nemesysco, but in the same vein, the researchers shouldn't be throwing around words like "charlatantry" unless they're ready to prove that Nemesysco is purposely promoting technology that they don't themselves believe to be effective.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The only thing worse...
Think about it. The only reason most countries don't have thought-crime laws is because "thought-crimes" are pretty much undetectable and/or unprovable. If there ever gets to be an effective, reliable lie-detector, you can rest assured that governments will abuse the technology. You can bet your life on it.
--
www.chl-tx.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
this issue has nothing to do with polygraph
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fair and balanced?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4681630/Charlantry_in_forensic_speech_science__A_probl em_to_be_taken_ser
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
lie detector
[ link to this | view in chronology ]