Pax Can Now Discreetly Report Drivers

Lissetti

Rebel Honey Badger
Article Manager
Moderator
Uber introduces new feature to let riders ‘discreetly’ snitch on their drivers

Is your driver texting

By Andrew J. Hawkins@andyjayhawk Feb 19, 2020, 11:12am EST


Uber updated its app to let riders “discreetly” report instances that may not rise to the level of an emergency but still made them feel unsafe while on a trip. The examples that Uber gives include “harsh braking,” “inappropriate remarks,” or a driver who isn’t paying attention to the road. But I’m sure many people who use Uber can come up with a litany of ways to use this new reporting feature.

Lately, Uber has been trying to strike a balance between improving safety for riders and recognizing that drivers can be victims, too. The company recently released its first safety report, in which it disclosed that 3,045 sexual assaults occurred during Uber trips in 2018. Additionally, nine people were murdered during Uber rides, and 58 people died in auto-related crashes. Interestingly, Uber said that drivers reported being victims of assaults at roughly the same rate as riders.

20200219_220528.jpg


20200219_220612.jpg


20200219_220630.jpg


20200219_220504.jpg



Uber introduced an in-app panic button in 2018 that lets riders contact 911 at the touch of a button. But obviously, not all safety instances require calling the cops. Now, riders can subtly snitch on their drivers from right in the app. Uber says the feature is intended to give riders the opportunity to report inappropriate behavior during a trip, when it’s on the top of their mind, rather than at the end of the trip. The feature is available starting today in the US and Canada.

“By eliminating barriers to reporting safety issues, our goal is to encourage more reporting which will ultimately help make the app safer for everyone,” Uber says.

The hope, of course, is that this new feature isn’t abused by riders to report their drivers for insignificant slights, like not driving fast enough or failing to comport themselves in a way that’s expected by the rider. Riders already hold a lot of sway over drivers through the rating system. Drivers are routinely deactivated for falling below a certain level. Riders can be deactivated, too, but that happens much less frequently.

Back in the day, we had taxis and passengers — and no illusions of community. Taxis also had partitions between drivers and riders and probably for good reason. But ride-sharing companies have ushered in an era of part-time drivers, fist-bumps, and an evolving dynamic in the car that Uber is still struggling to define.

 

waldowainthrop

Well-Known Member
I have such mixed feelings about this. So many drivers need this feedback. So many passengers could abuse this feature. Uber has so many ways to misuse this feedback.

Is anyone else impressed by the journalist at The Verge for writing:

The hope, of course, is that this new feature isn’t abused by riders to report their drivers for insignificant slights, like not driving fast enough or failing to comport themselves in a way that’s expected by the rider. Riders already hold a lot of sway over drivers through the rating system. Drivers are routinely deactivated for falling below a certain level. Riders can be deactivated, too, but that happens much less frequently.
This hero actually did his research and shows empathy for workers.
 

Lissetti

Rebel Honey Badger
Article Manager
Moderator
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #5
I have such mixed feelings about this. So many drivers need this feedback. So many passengers could abuse this feature. Uber has so many ways to misuse this feedback.
That's what I was thinking. That if Pax dont get their way, i.e. AUX cord or fast food drive thru, there are so many ways they could abuse this feature.

What really caught my eye was the "inappropriate remarks." That could mean anything. As I was reading that I was thinking, "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you"....
 

The Gift of Fish

Well-Known Member
Uber's scared and this is just them clenching up. They have already lost their licence to operate in London because of safety issues. Uber doesn't care about pax safety otherwise they would have implemented all this on day one in 2009. I doubt that there will be too many consequences of this for drivers - it wouldn't make sense for Uber to unnecessarily cull its driver resource. This is just surface gloss.
 

doyousensehumor

Well-Known Member
This hero actually did his research and shows empathy for workers.
Naaaaaaaaaahhh
I don't buy that.

Uber just rolled out twice-as-easy reporting drivers, to counteract negative news reports of dangerous drivers. This increases pax revenue. Uber makes a press release to self promote (aka advertising).

The Verge takes that, and adds a catchy title with the word "Snitch". This draws readers to click on the news article, thus get ad clicks.

Author spends 95% of the article passing on the safety PR spin, handed to him by uber.

Reader leaves article, more inclined to use Uber, while knowing to look out for the EZ report feature, which he is now more likely to use.

Your "hero" was looking out for taking Uber's PR and turning it into ad revenue. Uber is using perception of safety to promote more revenue.

They both know what they are doing, and are good at it.
 
Last edited:

tohunt4me

Well-Known Member
No pay increases to be seen. What a @@@@ing joke. Want professional service? pay for it.
Exactly !

Try this on a Bus !

Bus Driver has no phone mount !

Less Incentive to Drive each day.
Post automatically merged:

I have such mixed feelings about this. So many drivers need this feedback. So many passengers could abuse this feature. Uber has so many ways to misuse this feedback.

Is anyone else impressed by the journalist at The Verge for writing:



This hero actually did his research and shows empathy for workers.
Uber wont share the feedback.
Post automatically merged:

Naaaaaaaaaahhh
I don't buy that.

Uber just rolled out twice-as-easy reporting drivers, to counteract negative news reports of dangerous drivers. This increases pax revenue. Uber makes a press release to self promote (aka advertising).

The Verge takes that, and adds a catchy title with the word "Snitch". This draws readers to click on the news article, thus get ad clicks.

Author spends 95% of the article passing on the safety PR spin, handed to him by uber.

Reader leaves article, more inclined to use Uber, while knowing to look out for the EZ report feature, which he is now more likely to use.

Your "hero" was looking out for taking Uber's PR and turning it into ad revenue. Uber is using perception of safety to promote more revenue.

They both know what they are doing, and are good at it.
How about an Article on the Tipping App. !

THEY STILL HAVENT LEARNED TO USE THAT YET !!!
 

waldowainthrop

Well-Known Member
Naaaaaaaaaahhh
I don't buy that.

Uber just rolled out twice-as-easy reporting drivers, to counteract negative news reports of dangerous drivers. This increases pax revenue. Uber makes a press release to self promote (aka advertising).

The Verge takes that, and adds a catchy title with the word "Snitch". This draws readers to click on the news article, thus get ad clicks.

Author spends 95% of the article passing on the safety PR spin, handed to him by uber.

Reader leaves article, more inclined to use Uber, while knowing to look out for the EZ report feature, which he is now more likely to use.

Your "hero" was looking out for taking Uber's PR and turning it into ad revenue. Uber is using perception of safety to promote more revenue.

They both know what they are doing, and are good at it.
You know authors almost never choose the titles of their articles, right?

I do agree that journalists are often susceptible to corporate PR but this is not an egregious example of it. This is way better than a typical rideshare mainstream news article – can a third party correct me on this if I am wrong?

This Uber feature will probably have more bad than good consequences for drivers. This article is as close as a non-opinion journalist can get to admitting that.

As far as calling the journalist out, I rarely see a journalist say anything positive or neutral at all about drivers except when they are victims of a crime. The news media is broadly staunchly anti-labor. As far as I am concerned, this is a slight counter-example.
 

doyousensehumor

Well-Known Member
You know authors almost never choose the titles of their articles, right?
I didn't say the author did 🤷‍♂️ What difference does it make who at The Verge made that decision?
I do agree that journalists are often susceptible to corporate PR but this is not an egregious example of it. This is way better than a typical rideshare mainstream news article – can a third party correct me on this if I am wrong?
You need a 3rd party to confirm that this article is little more than uber PR?

See, like Uber themselves, The Verge uses the illusion of "caring" to draw in the client. This makes the reader feel important. "They care about ME!" More likely to click on The Verge articles, generate more ad revinue.

ONE sentence in the whole article is what you are banking on for this arthor to be a "hero".

Want to debate how that one sentence reads from the pax's shoes?
 

waldowainthrop

Well-Known Member
I didn't say the author did 🤷‍♂️ What difference does it make who at The Verge made that decision?
All the difference in the world, at least to me. There is the written piece, the journalist, the editor, and the news organization. All of these layers have their own interests which are frequently aligned but not always the same.

You need a 3rd party to confirm that this article is little more than uber PR?

See, like Uber themselves, The Verge uses the illusion of "caring" to draw in the client. This makes the reader feel important. "They care about ME!" More likely to click on The Verge articles, generate more ad revinue.

ONE sentence in the whole article is what you are banking on for this arthor to be a "hero".

Want to debate how that one sentence reads from the pax's shoes?
By “third party” I meant a sanity check from other UP members who could tell me if I’m being crazy by reading an ostensibly “corporate-friendly” piece as instead vaguely interested in driver issues. I’m so unused to seeing a journalistic piece that seriously mentions the driver’s perspective for even a sentence which is why I highlighted that one sentence.

In a sea of news articles that barely acknowledge drivers except as criminals or as tools of the company they work for, it’s interesting to see a journalist even vaguely acknowledge that drivers have interests too. They even mentioned drivers as equally likely as passengers to be victims of sexual assault, which is old news to people here but isn’t covered much.

As far as what The Verge (the company) wants, they are all over the place. They know their readers, but they probably imagine their readers and advertisers as having a multitude of perspectives. I used to read The Verge regularly years ago when they would alternate between publishing populist consumer-friendly articles that occasionally criticized their own investors, alongside gadget articles that often served their own advertisers as much as anyone else. Tech news is a complicated business and I’m glad I’m not in it.

@doyousensehumor I think we are on the same page about the issues at hand, except for our close reading of a single article. I wouldn’t even defend The Verge in general as I haven’t read it much recently.
 
Last edited:

Fuzzyelvis

Well-Known Member
Uber introduces new feature to let riders ‘discreetly’ snitch on their drivers

Is your driver texting

By Andrew J. Hawkins@andyjayhawk Feb 19, 2020, 11:12am EST


Uber updated its app to let riders “discreetly” report instances that may not rise to the level of an emergency but still made them feel unsafe while on a trip. The examples that Uber gives include “harsh braking,” “inappropriate remarks,” or a driver who isn’t paying attention to the road. But I’m sure many people who use Uber can come up with a litany of ways to use this new reporting feature.

Lately, Uber has been trying to strike a balance between improving safety for riders and recognizing that drivers can be victims, too. The company recently released its first safety report, in which it disclosed that 3,045 sexual assaults occurred during Uber trips in 2018. Additionally, nine people were murdered during Uber rides, and 58 people died in auto-related crashes. Interestingly, Uber said that drivers reported being victims of assaults at roughly the same rate as riders.

View attachment 418492

View attachment 418493

View attachment 418494

View attachment 418496


Uber introduced an in-app panic button in 2018 that lets riders contact 911 at the touch of a button. But obviously, not all safety instances require calling the cops. Now, riders can subtly snitch on their drivers from right in the app. Uber says the feature is intended to give riders the opportunity to report inappropriate behavior during a trip, when it’s on the top of their mind, rather than at the end of the trip. The feature is available starting today in the US and Canada.

“By eliminating barriers to reporting safety issues, our goal is to encourage more reporting which will ultimately help make the app safer for everyone,” Uber says.

The hope, of course, is that this new feature isn’t abused by riders to report their drivers for insignificant slights, like not driving fast enough or failing to comport themselves in a way that’s expected by the rider. Riders already hold a lot of sway over drivers through the rating system. Drivers are routinely deactivated for falling below a certain level. Riders can be deactivated, too, but that happens much less frequently.

Back in the day, we had taxis and passengers — and no illusions of community. Taxis also had partitions between drivers and riders and probably for good reason. But ride-sharing companies have ushered in an era of part-time drivers, fist-bumps, and an evolving dynamic in the car that Uber is still struggling to define.

If you're that worried about your safety get out of the car.
 

troothwilltriumph

New Member
Translation: tap on "My driver doesn't have a phone mount" for a free ride.

Let more unwarranted deactivations begin...
Honestly I have & use one but rarely use just makes sense for phone to be up there

90+% of my rides are same route to airport & usually the same 9 hotels within a mile of homebase & rematches not headed to my area are cancelled,

Just beat em to the punch it's another useless feature that's security theater, every ride that hasn't been airport or didn't tip has been 1 starred and immediately requested for an unmatch yet this billion dollar super smart algo keeps sending me rides that don't go to the airport, doh cancel as I drive by should of followed the code since they didn't reply to my pretext but I didn't oh well back in bed within 5 minutes while they just wasted 10 & now have to wait another 10 minutes for a math flunkie who will work for 1 mcchicken profit or free

Wasting everyone's time why should they care eventually some idiot picks em up & they get a cut

Show details Nationwide.
 
Top