Designing the informing process with streamers and bystanders in live streaming
AUTHORs: 
Yanlai Wu, 
Xinning Gui, Yuhan Luo, Yao LiAuthors Info & Claims
Article No.: 17, Pages 315 - 332
Abstract
The ubiquity of synchronous information disclosure technologies (e.g., live streaming) has heightened the risk of bystanders being unknowingly captured. While prior work has largely focused on solutions aimed only at informing the key stakeholder - bystanders, there remains a gap in understanding how device owners and bystanders mutually expect the informing process, which is critical to ensure successful informing. To address this gap, we utilized live streaming as a case study and conducted a design ideation study with 21 participants, including both streamers and bystanders. Our focus was to understand streamers' and bystanders' needs for informing regarding bystander privacy at the ideation state and derive design principles. Participants' design ideas reflected various and nuanced privacy concerns, from which we identified key design principles for future design.
References
[1]
Imtiaz Ahmad, Taslima Akter, Zachary Buher, Rosta Farzan, Apu Kapadia, and Adam J Lee. Tangible privacy for smart voice assistants: Bystanders' perceptions of physical device controls. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 6(CSCW2):1-31, 2022.
[2]
Imtiaz Ahmad, Rosta Farzan, Apu Kapadia, and Adam J Lee. Tangible privacy: Towards user-centric sensor designs for bystander privacy. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 4(CSCW2):1-28, 2020.
[3]
Gulsum Akkuzu, Benjamin Aziz, and Mo Adda. Towards consensus-based group decision making for co-owned data sharing in online social networks. IEEE Access, 8:91311-91325, 2020.
[4]
Rawan Alharbi, Mariam Tolba, Lucia C Petito, Josiah Hester, and Nabil Alshurafa. To mask or not to mask? balancing privacy with visual confirmation utility in activity-oriented wearable cameras. Proceedings of the ACM on interactive, mobile, wearable and ubiquitous technologies, 3(3):1-29, 2019.
[5]
Julia Bernd, Ruba Abu-Salma, and Alisa Frik. {Bystanders'} privacy: The perspectives of nannies on smart home surveillance. In 10th USENIX Workshop on Free and Open Communications on the Internet (FOCI 20), 2020.
[6]
Andrew Besmer and Heather Richter Lipford. Moving beyond untagging: photo privacy in a tagged world. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1563-1572, 2010.
[7]
Bitdefender. What are Private Data Leaks. https://www.bitdefender.com/cyberpedia/what-are-private-data-leaks, 2022.
[8]
Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2):77-101, 2006.
[9]
Chia-Chen Chen and Yi-Chen Lin. What drives livestream usage intention? the perspectives of flow, entertainment, social interaction, and endorsement. Telematics and Informatics, 35(1):293-303, 2018.
[10]
Hichang Cho and Anna Filippova. Networked privacy management in facebook: A mixed-methods and multinational study. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, pages 503-514, 2016.
[11]
Soumyadeb Chowdhury, Md Sadek Ferdous, and Joemon M Jose. Bystander privacy in lifelogging. In Proceedings of the 30th International BCS Human Computer Interaction Conference 30, pages 1-3, 2016.
[12]
Camille Cobb, Sruti Bhagavatula, Kalil Anderson Garrett, Alison Hoffman, Varun Rao, and Lujo Bauer. "i would have to evaluate their objections": Privacy tensions between smart home device owners and incidental users. Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies, 2021.
[13]
Matthew Corbett, Brendan David-John, Jiacheng Shang, Y Charlie Hu, and Bo Ji. Bystandar: Protecting bystander visual data in augmented reality systems. In Proceedings of the 21st Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications and Services, pages 370-382, 2023.
[14]
Tamara Denning, Zakariya Dehlawi, and Tadayoshi Kohno. In situ with bystanders of augmented reality glasses: Perspectives on recording and privacymediating technologies. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 2377-2386, 2014.
[15]
Mariella Dimiccoli, Juan Marín, and Edison Thomaz. Mitigating bystander privacy concerns in egocentric activity recognition with deep learning and intentional image degradation. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies, 1(4):1-18, 2018.
[16]
Cori Faklaris, Francesco Cafaro, Asa Blevins, Matthew A O'Haver, and Neha Singhal. A snapshot of bystander attitudes about mobile live-streaming video in public settings. In Informatics, volume 7, page 10. MDPI, 2020.
[17]
Yuanyuan Feng, Yaxing Yao, and Norman Sadeh. A design space for privacy choices: Towards meaningful privacy control in the internet of things. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1-16, 2021.
[18]
Ricard L Fogues, Pradeep K Murukannaiah, Jose M Such, and Munindar P Singh. Sharing policies in multiuser privacy scenarios: Incorporating context, preferences, and arguments in decision making. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 24(1):1-29, 2017.
[19]
Johann N Giertz, Welf H Weiger, Maria Torhonen, and Juho Hamari. Content versus community focus in live streaming services: How to drive engagement in synchronous social media. Journal of Service Management, 33(1):33-58, 2022.
[20]
Rakibul Hasan. Reducing privacy risks in the context of sharing photos online. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1-11, 2020.
[21]
Rakibul Hasan, David Crandall, Mario Fritz, and Apu Kapadia. Automatically detecting bystanders in photos to reduce privacy risks. In 2020 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP), pages 318-335. IEEE, 2020.
[22]
Noe Vargas Hernandez, Jami J Shah, and Steven M Smith. Understanding design ideation mechanisms through multilevel aligned empirical studies. Design studies, 31(4):382-410, 2010.
[23]
Hongxin Hu, Gail-Joon Ahn, and Jan Jorgensen. Detecting and resolving privacy conflicts for collaborative data sharing in online social networks. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, pages 103-112, 2011.
[24]
Haiyan Jia and Heng Xu. Autonomous and interdependent: Collaborative privacy management on social networking sites. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 4286-4297, 2016.
[25]
Ben Jonson. Design ideation: the conceptual sketch in the digital age. Design studies, 26(6):613-624, 2005.
[26]
Marion Koelle, Katrin Wolf, and Susanne Boll. Beyond led status lights-design requirements of privacy notices for body-worn cameras. In Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction, pages 177-187, 2018.
[27]
Jacob Kramer-Duffield. Beliefs and uses of tagging among undergraduates. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2010.
[28]
Airi Lampinen, Vilma Lehtinen, Asko Lehmuskallio, and Sakari Tamminen. We're in it together: interpersonal management of disclosure in social network services. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pages 3217-3226, 2011.
[29]
Yao Li, Yubo Kou, Je Seok Lee, and Alfred Kobsa. Tell me before you stream me: Managing information disclosure in video game live streaming. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 2(CSCW):1-18, 2018.
[30]
Zhicong Lu, Michelle Annett, and Daniel Wigdor. Vicariously experiencing it all without going outside: A study of outdoor livestreaming in china. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 3(CSCW):1-28, 2019.
[31]
Zhicong Lu, Haijun Xia, Seongkook Heo, and Daniel Wigdor. You watch, you give, and you engage: a study of live streaming practices in china. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pages 1-13, 2018.
[32]
Yuhan Luo, Peiyi Liu, and Eun Kyoung Choe. Codesigning food trackers with dietitians: Identifying design opportunities for food tracker customization. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1-13, 2019.
[33]
Stephann Makri, Tsui-Ling Hsueh, and Sara Jones. Ideation as an intellectual information acquisition and use context: Investigating game designers' information-based ideation behavior. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 70(8):775-787, 2019.
[34]
Ameera Mansour and Helena Francke. Collective privacy management practices: A study of privacy strategies and risks in a private facebook group. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 5(CSCW2):1-27, 2021.
[35]
Shady Mansour, Pascal Knierim, Joseph O'Hagan, Florian Alt, and Florian Mathis. Bans: Evaluation of bystander awareness notification systems for productivity in vr. In Network and Distributed Systems Security (NDSS) Symposium, 2023.
[36]
Shrirang Mare, Franziska Roesner, and Tadayoshi Kohno. Smart devices in airbnbs: Considering privacy and security for both guests and hosts. Proc. Priv. Enhancing Technol., 2020(2):436-458, 2020.
[37]
Karola Marky, Nina Gerber, Michelle Gabriela Pelzer, Mohamed Khamis, and Max Mühlhäuser. "you offer privacy like you offer tea": Investigating mechanisms for improving guest privacy in iot-equipped households. 2022.
[38]
Karola Marky, Alexandra Voit, Alina Stöver, Kai Kunze, Svenja Schröder, and Max Mühlhäuser. " i don't know how to protect myself": Understanding privacy perceptions resulting from the presence of bystanders in smart environments. In Proceedings of the 11th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Shaping Experiences, Shaping Society, pages 1-11, 2020.
[39]
Mark McGill, Daniel Boland, Roderick Murray-Smith, and Stephen Brewster. A dose of reality: Overcoming usability challenges in vr head-mounted displays. In Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, pages 2143-2152, 2015.
[40]
Francesca Mosca and Jose M Such. Elvira: An explainable agent for value and utility-driven multiuser privacy. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems, pages 916-924, 2021.
[41]
Josh Nadeau. Banking and Finance Data Breaches: Costs, Risks and More To Know. https://securityintelligence.com/articles/banking-finance-data-breach-costs-risks/, 2021.
[42]
Kavous Salehzadeh Niksirat, Evanne Anthoine-Milhomme, Samuel Randin, Kévin Huguenin, and Mauro Cherubini. "i thought you were okay": Participatory design with young adults to fight multiparty privacy conflicts in online social networks. In Designing Interactive Systems Conference (DIS), 2021.
[43]
Jan Nolin and Nasrine Olson. The internet of things and convenience. Internet Research, 26(2):360-376, 2016.
[44]
Farzad Nourmohammadzadeh Motlagh, Seyed Ali Alhosseini, Feng Cheng, and Christoph Meinel. An approach to multi-party privacy conflict resolution for coowned images on content sharing platforms. In Proceedings of the 2023 8th International Conference on Machine Learning Technologies, pages 264-268, 2023.
[45]
Joseph O'Hagan, Mohamed Khamis, Mark McGill, and Julie RWilliamson. Exploring attitudes towards increasing user awareness of reality from within virtual reality. In ACM International Conference on Interactive Media Experiences, pages 151-160, 2022.
[46]
Joseph O'Hagan, Pejman Saeghe, Jan Gugenheimer, Daniel Medeiros, Karola Marky, Mohamed Khamis, and Mark McGill. Privacy-enhancing technology and everyday augmented reality: Understanding bystanders' varying needs for awareness and consent. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies, 6(4):1-35, 2023.
[47]
Joseph O'Hagan and Julie R Williamson. Reality aware vr headsets. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM international symposium on pervasive displays, pages 9-17, 2020.
[48]
Seonghun Park, Jisoo Ha, Jimin Park, Kyeonggu Lee, and Chang-Hwan Im. Brain-controlled, ar-based home automation system using ssvep-based brain-computer interface and eog-based eye tracker: A feasibility study for the elderly end user. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 31:544-553, 2022.
[49]
Sunyup Park, Anna Lenhart, Michael Zimmer, and Jessica Vitak. " nobody's happy": Design insights from {Privacy-Conscious} smart home power users on enhancing data transparency, visibility, and control. In Nineteenth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS 2023), 2023.
[50]
Alfredo J Perez, Sherali Zeadally, Scott Griffith, Luis Y Matos Garcia, and Jaouad A Mouloud. A user study of a wearable system to enhance bystanders' facial privacy. IoT, 1(2):13, 2020.
[51]
Sandra Petronio. Brief status report on communication privacy management theory. Journal of Family Communication, 13(1):6-14, 2013.
[52]
James Pierce, Claire Weizenegger, Parag Nandi, Isha Agarwal, Gwenna Gram, Jade Hurrle, Hannah Liao, Betty Lo, Aaron Park, Aivy Phan, et al. Addressing adjacent actor privacy: Designing for bystanders, cousers, and surveilled subjects of smart home cameras. In Designing Interactive Systems Conference, pages 26-40, 2022.
[53]
Blaine A Price, Avelie Stuart, Gul Calikli, Ciaran Mccormick, Vikram Mehta, Luke Hutton, Arosha K Bandara, Mark Levine, and Bashar Nuseibeh. Logging you, logging me: A replicable study of privacy and sharing behaviour in groups of visual lifeloggers. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies, 1(2):1-18, 2017.
[54]
Leslie Ramos Salazar. Be Careful What you Post: Social Media and Reputation, 2021. https://profspeak.com/be-careful-what-you-post-social-media/, 2021.
[55]
Kavous Salehzadeh Niksirat, Diana Korka, Hamza Harkous, Kévin Huguenin, and Mauro Cherubini. On the potential of mediation chatbots for mitigating multiparty privacy conflicts-a wizard-of-oz study. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 7(CSCW1):1-33, 2023.
[56]
Florian Schaub, Rebecca Balebako, Adam L Durity, and Lorrie Faith Cranor. A design space for effective privacy notices. In Eleventh symposium on usable privacy and security (SOUPS 2015), pages 1-17, 2015.
[57]
Katrin Scheibe, Franziska Zimmer, Kaja Fietkiewicz, and Wolfgang Stock. Interpersonal relations and social actions on live streaming services. a systematic review on cyber-social relations. 2022.
[58]
Samarth Singhal, Carman Neustaedter, Thecla Schiphorst, Anthony Tang, Abhisekh Patra, and Rui Pan. You are being watched: Bystanders' perspective on the use of camera devices in public spaces. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 3197-3203, 2016.
[59]
John C Tang, Gina Venolia, and Kori M Inkpen. Meerkat and periscope: I stream, you stream, apps stream for live streams. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pages 4770-4780, 2016.
[60]
Parth Kirankumar Thakkar, Shijing He, Shiyu Xu, Danny Yuxing Huang, and Yaxing Yao. "it would probably turn into a social faux-pas": Users' and bystanders' preferences of privacy awareness mechanisms in smart homes. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1-13, 2022.
[61]
F Ted Tschang and Janusz Szczypula. Idea creation, constructivism and evolution as key characteristics in the videogame artifact design process. European management journal, 24(4):270-287, 2006.
[62]
Froukje Sleeswijk Visser, Pieter Jan Stappers, Remko Van der Lugt, and Elizabeth BN Sanders. Contextmapping: experiences from practice. CoDesign, 1(2):119- 149, 2005.
[63]
Pamela Wisniewski, Heather Lipford, and David Wilson. Fighting for my space: Coping mechanisms for sns boundary regulation. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 609-618, 2012.
[64]
Yanlai Wu, Xinning Gui, Pamela J Wisniewski, and Yao Li. Do streamers care about bystanders' privacy? an examination of live streamers' considerations and strategies for bystanders' privacy management. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 7(CSCW1):1-29, 2023.
[65]
Yanlai Wu, Yao Li, and Xinning Gui. " i am concerned, but...": Streamers' privacy concerns and strategies in live streaming information disclosure. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 6(CSCW2):1- 31, 2022.
[66]
Kaihe Xu, Yuanxiong Guo, Linke Guo, Yuguang Fang, and Xiaolin Li. My privacy my decision: Control of photo sharing on online social networks. IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing, 14(2):199- 210, 2015.
[67]
Yaxing Yao, Huichuan Xia, Yun Huang, and Yang Wang. Free to Fly in Public Spaces: Drone Controllers' Privacy Perceptions and Practices. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI '17, pages 6789-6793, New York, NY, USA, 2017. Association for Computing Machinery.
[68]
Tengfei Zheng, Tongqing Zhou, Qiang Liu, Kui Wu, and Zhiping Cai. Characterizing and detecting nonconsensual photo sharing on social networks. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pages 3209-3222, 2022.
Index Terms
- Designing the informing process with streamers and bystanders in live streaming
Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.
Recommendations
Do Streamers Care about Bystanders' Privacy? An Examination of Live Streamers' Considerations and Strategies for Bystanders' Privacy Management
CSCWLive streaming has become a popular activity world-wide that has warranted research attention on its privacy related issues. For instance, bystanders' privacy, or the privacy of third-parties captured by streamers, has been increasingly studied as live ...
Designing to Stop Live Streaming Cyberbullying: A case study of Twitch Live Streaming Platform
C&T '21: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Communities & Technologies - Wicked Problems in the Age of TechCyberbullying is widespread in online communities. The ability to protect users and platforms from the dangers of cyberbullying has become essential. In this work, we conducted a qualitative study of Twitch community to explore the design elements that ...
Cyberbullying Bystanders: Gender, Grade, and Actions among Primary and Secondary School Students in Australia
Cyberbullying is a relatively new and serious form of bullying with negative social and emotional effects on both victims and perpetrators. Like traditional bullying, cyberbullying is a social phenomenon and often unfolds in the context of a large ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Copyright © 2024 The USENIX Association.
Sponsors
- Google Inc.
- NSF
- Meta
- Bloomberg
Publisher
USENIX Association
United States
Publication History
Published: 12 August 2024
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 15 of 49 submissions, 31%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 0Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)0
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 02 Feb 2025