Grindr has stated that they will stop sharing as much information as they have been, namely the HIV status of its users, but is a sorry good enough?
Have you deleted Facebook yet? What about Grindr? I did do a tech cleanse last week where I deleted my yahoo and hotmail accounts. Yep, I still had those, but knowing that breaches in security have already happened, it was time to delete … delete … delete. Will I do another cleanse and get rid of two of The Most Time Consuming Social Network Apps (Are Revealed)?
Yes, Grindr is #1 and Facebook is #2 (read the article linked above to see where Instagram surprisingly comes in). Do we have the cajones to cut the ties with these two powerhouses of social media?
In a post I shared my HIV status with Grindr – now I feel betrayed on the new statesman, the author Matt Jones elaborates:
Grindr is an app which uses locational data to help users, mainly gay and bisexual men, find other users in the area. Users are able (but not obliged) to state their HIV status on their profile; as a young gay man living with HIV, I recently put on my profile that I’m positive and undetectable. Despite being very open about my status, and not posing a risk to anyone, it was still a difficult decision to say to hundreds of strangers: “I’ve got HIV”.
But that was a consenting choice. Yes, it is public – anyone can download Grindr – but I also consider the app to be a safe space where, broadly, I know what type of person will see my status. I did not consent to Grindr sharing that data with others, and was a gross breach of the trust I’ve placed in the app.
The company has long been a supporter of the LGBTQ+ community and PLWHIV, but rather than showing any contrition or trying to make amends, Grindr has vehemently defended its actions in a fiery Tumblr post. – newstatesman.com
Well, hmmm. What did you think of that ? You can read some of the comments on tumblr, like …
What an empty, unoriginal statement. This is the faceless chest pic of PR responses.Just when you think a company…
You guys should just close up now. No one cares about your efforts or industry standards. You betrayed the LGBT community in more than just the one way.
I can see that companies can dot their i's and cross their t's, but sometimes you need to put that heart over the i so it shows that you actually care.
From Axios.com, we learn that more than Grindr users and those of us in the LGBTQ+ community are taking note of the "issue."
Democratic Senators Edward J. Markey and Richard Blumenthal on Tuesday sent a letter to the CEO of Grindr, demanding answers to questions about Grindr's privacy policies.
A Grindr spokesperson told Axios: "We welcome the questions about our policies and always look for opportunities to improve." – Axios.com
Well, the senators did ask questions, 13 of them to be exact. Here is some of the letter.
Where are you on this? Does Grindr need to go to Washington? Or are they okay with what they did? As a business, they put out there what they do with users' information and they followed through and did it. It's not their fault we all skip down to the bottom and click agree.
Is the issue similar to Martin Shkreli's doings? Sure, you can raise the price of medication and make tons of profit, but should you?
I still have my Grindr. It comes in handy when I travel to different countries or some corners of the country that don't have a larger and better pool of real men on Scruff and Growlr with personalities and bios with actual faces and information.
And I think that is what amazes me. Grindr is the app where we see the least amount of info about the guy on the other side. Men on Scruff and Growlr are more open and informative. But, we do share this kind of information on other dating apps like Sruff and Growlr. Do we need to look at their best practices, too?
I still have Grindr and my 18 other hook up apps that I "use for research," but then again, I still have my AOL email address from 1994 and use it every single day.
This post shares the opinions of one of the contributing writers of Instinct Magazine. It does not represent the magazine's beliefs or the beliefs of the other Contributing Writers.