{"title":"社会倾听及其问题:预防原则能提供什么建议?","authors":"Hai Thanh Doan","doi":"10.1007/s41649-025-00369-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The World Health Organization (WHO) has recently initiated “social listening”. The first section of this paper investigates conceptual aspects of social listening. It demonstrates that the WHO’s descriptions of social listening are vague and inconsistent. Notwithstanding this, <i>possibly</i>, the WHO-envisaged social listening is constituted by three core components: (i) listening and monitoring, (ii) understanding, and (iii) engaging and nudging. It follows that there is an inherent relatedness between WHO-envisaged social listening and other “social-listening” activities. It follows that to investigate issues of or related to social listening, the inquiry should be broadened to general practices of “social listening”, and experiences related to these must be considered. In the second section, this paper finds several issues with or related to social listening, including bad faith uses, the difficulty of identifying misinformation and punishing it, the echo chambers problem, issues concerning nudging, concerns about policy preset position, concerns for the management and prioritization of resources, and concerns about overlapping between social listening activities. Thus, social listening should be subject to certain rules. In the third section, this paper argues that social listening should be subject to the precautionary principle. Doan, Nie, and Fenton projected that the central teleology, the purpose, and the modus operandi of the precautionary principle could be identified in various policy and legal instruments and propositions, accordingly, the precautionary principle entails, <i>inter alia</i>, proactive preparation for public health matters, specifically emergencies, and assessment, e.g. risk–benefit analysis, taking into account uncertainty and past experiences. They showed the normative validity and necessity of applying the precautionary principle in its “<i>moderate versions</i>” to public health matters. It follows from this and the rationale underlying and the range of rules of the precautionary principle that the precautionary principle can offer some insights, solutions, and mechanisms to remedy issues posed by or related to social listening.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44520,"journal":{"name":"Asian Bioethics Review","volume":"17 3","pages":"401 - 423"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12304371/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Social Listening and its Issues: What can the Precautionary Principle Advice?\",\"authors\":\"Hai Thanh Doan\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s41649-025-00369-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The World Health Organization (WHO) has recently initiated “social listening”. The first section of this paper investigates conceptual aspects of social listening. It demonstrates that the WHO’s descriptions of social listening are vague and inconsistent. Notwithstanding this, <i>possibly</i>, the WHO-envisaged social listening is constituted by three core components: (i) listening and monitoring, (ii) understanding, and (iii) engaging and nudging. It follows that there is an inherent relatedness between WHO-envisaged social listening and other “social-listening” activities. It follows that to investigate issues of or related to social listening, the inquiry should be broadened to general practices of “social listening”, and experiences related to these must be considered. In the second section, this paper finds several issues with or related to social listening, including bad faith uses, the difficulty of identifying misinformation and punishing it, the echo chambers problem, issues concerning nudging, concerns about policy preset position, concerns for the management and prioritization of resources, and concerns about overlapping between social listening activities. Thus, social listening should be subject to certain rules. In the third section, this paper argues that social listening should be subject to the precautionary principle. Doan, Nie, and Fenton projected that the central teleology, the purpose, and the modus operandi of the precautionary principle could be identified in various policy and legal instruments and propositions, accordingly, the precautionary principle entails, <i>inter alia</i>, proactive preparation for public health matters, specifically emergencies, and assessment, e.g. risk–benefit analysis, taking into account uncertainty and past experiences. They showed the normative validity and necessity of applying the precautionary principle in its “<i>moderate versions</i>” to public health matters. It follows from this and the rationale underlying and the range of rules of the precautionary principle that the precautionary principle can offer some insights, solutions, and mechanisms to remedy issues posed by or related to social listening.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44520,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Bioethics Review\",\"volume\":\"17 3\",\"pages\":\"401 - 423\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12304371/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Bioethics Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41649-025-00369-x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Bioethics Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41649-025-00369-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Social Listening and its Issues: What can the Precautionary Principle Advice?
The World Health Organization (WHO) has recently initiated “social listening”. The first section of this paper investigates conceptual aspects of social listening. It demonstrates that the WHO’s descriptions of social listening are vague and inconsistent. Notwithstanding this, possibly, the WHO-envisaged social listening is constituted by three core components: (i) listening and monitoring, (ii) understanding, and (iii) engaging and nudging. It follows that there is an inherent relatedness between WHO-envisaged social listening and other “social-listening” activities. It follows that to investigate issues of or related to social listening, the inquiry should be broadened to general practices of “social listening”, and experiences related to these must be considered. In the second section, this paper finds several issues with or related to social listening, including bad faith uses, the difficulty of identifying misinformation and punishing it, the echo chambers problem, issues concerning nudging, concerns about policy preset position, concerns for the management and prioritization of resources, and concerns about overlapping between social listening activities. Thus, social listening should be subject to certain rules. In the third section, this paper argues that social listening should be subject to the precautionary principle. Doan, Nie, and Fenton projected that the central teleology, the purpose, and the modus operandi of the precautionary principle could be identified in various policy and legal instruments and propositions, accordingly, the precautionary principle entails, inter alia, proactive preparation for public health matters, specifically emergencies, and assessment, e.g. risk–benefit analysis, taking into account uncertainty and past experiences. They showed the normative validity and necessity of applying the precautionary principle in its “moderate versions” to public health matters. It follows from this and the rationale underlying and the range of rules of the precautionary principle that the precautionary principle can offer some insights, solutions, and mechanisms to remedy issues posed by or related to social listening.
期刊介绍:
Asian Bioethics Review (ABR) is an international academic journal, based in Asia, providing a forum to express and exchange original ideas on all aspects of bioethics, especially those relevant to the region. Published quarterly, the journal seeks to promote collaborative research among scholars in Asia or with an interest in Asia, as well as multi-cultural and multi-disciplinary bioethical studies more generally. It will appeal to all working on bioethical issues in biomedicine, healthcare, caregiving and patient support, genetics, law and governance, health systems and policy, science studies and research. ABR provides analyses, perspectives and insights into new approaches in bioethics, recent changes in biomedical law and policy, developments in capacity building and professional training, and voices or essays from a student’s perspective. The journal includes articles, research studies, target articles, case evaluations and commentaries. It also publishes book reviews and correspondence to the editor. ABR welcomes original papers from all countries, particularly those that relate to Asia. ABR is the flagship publication of the Centre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore. The Centre for Biomedical Ethics is a collaborating centre on bioethics of the World Health Organization.