Translation.
Our AI can't cope and keeps red flagging farmers, wasting our time.
Interpol wants to put an end to the online scam known as "pig butchering" – through linguistic policing, rather than law enforcement. The international police agency announced it will no longer use the term because it makes victims feel bad, which in turn discourages reporting of the crime. "The term comes from fraudsters …
do they think no system saves these ?
Both your complaint, and the last half of the article are bizarre. What's to criticise here?
They've publicly announced that they've decided to change the terminology they used - because it has possible harmful effects, i.e. upsetting victims even more and putting them off reporting the crime. Who knows whether that's actually true - but it's what they've decided. They've had their change of heart, and having told everyone they've done so - they've then gone back and edited their previous statements to conform to the new language they've chosen to employ. Then put an note on the edited previous statements to say how and why they've edited them.
What are you complaining about?
This post has been deleted by its author
The thing is, the stated purpose is to make sure that victims of the scam have an easier time reporting that they were victims, which... yeah, that's okay? Like the goal is to improve reporting rates.
It's the same logic that they changed “monkey pox” to “mpox”, because it improved reporting rates. Which is what you want in the first place, because you can't solve the problem if you don't know it's there.
If cutting down the stigma helps make the problem more visible, or allows more people to come forward, that's fine. You'd need to do more than just change the name of the crime, but it really is an okay first step.
Fully agree.
Names influence strongy how humans think about a fact, thing or situation, even themselves.
That's why name-calling used by most kids and some politicians is so frighteningly effective in giuding perception of the recipients, and this name probably was chosen with the specific intent to shame/blame the victim into not reporting the scam.
So while I do get the references to "rewriting history" in the article, I do not see a good reason the press should (continue to) help the scammers to achieve their goal.
"Names influence strongy how humans think about a fact, thing or situation, even themselves."
Yes, but something else has been lost in this renaming : just how devastating it often is to the victims.
So could aspects of "romance baiting" be interpreted as a variant on "Play it mean to keep them keen" and play down the harm ?
Just trying to widen the considerations.
Nomenclature is important, pig-butchering is a term that many potential victims might never look-up - despite their need to know what it refers to.
Romance fraud is too narrow, it's not necessarily through romance - and the implicit gullibility, shame, associated.
I prefer "victim farming" scams as a cover-all term, you would look that one up if you didn't know it, and it captures the complex, deliberate multi-stage process involved.
"name probably was chosen with the specific intent to shame/blame the victim into not reporting the scam."
Maybe. My guess is that it is easier to victimize someone if you dehumanize them first. The job is a lot harder if you relate to the person as a fellow human being (for the majority of non-sociopaths)
Chairperson: "Hi, everyone; welcome to this month's meeting of 'Interpol Managers' Roundtable.' As you all know, it's nearing the end of the year, and consequently, appropriations time is soon approaching.
"The thing I'd like you all to think about is this: how can we raise our organisation's positive standing in the international community in general, and in our member nations' politicians in particular?"
Manager A: "Hey, I've got an idea ..."
In order to be able to apply a term to something you've both got to know the term and what it refers to. Victims become victims because they don't recognise the latter until it's too late. If they don't recognise that they're unlikely to know the name, whatever alternative gets substituted.
However having PR people onboard to complain to the media is probably easier than recruiting and training more investigating officers to try to get a few scum into court. A good clearing-up ratio and the possibility of redress and getting money back is likely to be the more effective at getting reporting up.
If we've learned anything from the last 20 years of politics, it's that you can take this "removing the stigma" thing to another level. If you were an American legislator, and you had a piece of basically nefarious legislation that took away human rights and legalized some sort of offensively evil domestic policy, you give it a happy patriotic name.
Say, for example, you want to give police forces the right to enter any premise without a warrant at any time, effectively negating a fundamental constitutional right. You'd call it the "Personal Space And Privacy Protection Act," or "Defending And Protecting Ameraca's Homes Against Intrusion Bill."
"Romance Baiting" is a good start, but it still has a negative spin. Maybe "Friendship Investing" or, yes... "He was a participant in Supportive Relationship Cultivation."
"SRC: Supportive Relationship Cultivation." You're welcome.
"And in an effort to rewrite history, the agency has gone back through old press releases and replaced the now taboo term."
Messing with the chronicles of the past including the recent past has very grave risks if history is any guide which of course it wouldn't be any more.
Even the most abhorrent crimes can euphemised by the criminally disingenuous and could be applied to retrospectively to history's worst perpetrators.
Even "show respect to the victims" is a bit dubious as even the presumably unintentional use of "to" rather "for" indicates to me the futile "signalling" nature of the whole exercise. One might empathize or have sympathy for those who have succumbed to romance fraud (which is a much better description as it encompasses both the romantic deceit and financial fraud) but I am fairly sure enhanced respect for poor sod/soddess isn't in the race.
This post has been deleted by its author
I was thinking along the same lines, there are plenty of other techniques apart from romance, which crooks can use to manipulate their victims into providing them with evermore money, e.g., getting them to "invest" into some (fake) assets. Here, there is a full spectrum ranging from the classical Ponzi-scheme to full-on fake crypto assets.
Most of the examples I see are *not* romance scams, but they do involve a supposedly random person striking up a long-term friendship with the mark. The initial contact is made to look like it's a fluke.. somebody reaches out to you on WhatsApp and asks "Are you the wombat doctor?" to which you reply "No, but I *love* wombats!" which of course the bad actor already knows - and then they very slowly reel you in.
I do agree that "pig butchering" is a pretty horrible phrase, but it does differentiate it from other types of scams including *actual* romance scams (which are typically West African in origin, rather than East Asian pig butchering). Some other phrase would be better, doesn't even have to be accurate I suppose.. BEC (businesses email compromise) fraud often involves no compromise, or even email.
Looking at it from the victim's PoV it is demeaning to the victims, who are feeling pretty vulnerable at this point. Facing up to the fact you have been played like a banjo at an Ozark hoedown taken advantage of is very difficult for a lot of people to accept, given that the people running the scam have taken great trouble to make it seem real.
So yes, let's make an early New Years resolution to leave the hog butchering for barbecues at parties and family gatherings in future.
Mines the belted raincoat for "Walking down mean streets."
Friend of mine has been online dating on-and-off over this year. And boy - it's a mean old world out there! Although I suppose I've been getting free entertainment from all the stories...
She's probably got past initial messages on the dating site to the chatting on Whatsapp stage of things about 20-30 times. Of which 3 have turned out to be scammers. 10-15% is a lot. Although my sample size isn't very high. Two were just after iTunes vouchers - at least at first. The other wanted £8,000 to invest in his company. Which seems a bit steep for a first offer - I'm guessing he was still learning his trade and hadn't worked out to ask for a small amount first to get the victim used to paying you.
I know 2 people who are married to people they met online (and one more that's engaged) but all of them have some eye-opening stories to tell.
My favourite being the guy who met a lovely woman and got on so well they went on a second date. At which they've had a nice meal, and a chat and are now on the dancefloor. Only for her to say, "don't freak out. But that's my husband over there. And he likes to watch."
There seems to be a lot of that about as well...
I hired a painter for my house a while back. He told me about his girlfriend, who he had met online... and never in person. Apparently she's the heir to some big fortune but can't quite get ahold of the money yet, just needs a bit of help, going to come to the US and marry him once she does, etc. The lawyer he talked to said it was all legit and encouraged him to (keep) sending funds.
Pretty sure (though he didn't say) that "she" arranged the lawyer. I think he was $50,000 in the hole and counting, and I *COULD NOT* convince him it was a scam.
"In contrast, the term 'romance baiting' – which is already used by some law enforcement agencies and online safety experts – acknowledges the sophisticated tactics and emotional manipulation used by fraudsters to build trust with their victims. It places the spotlight squarely where it belongs: on the actions of the perpetrators, rather than those of the victims."
Link to key Reference Material from 2010 (viz Sunday).
It'd be nice if they were going to make up a term for something that already has one if they'd pick a term that's accurate,. Romance baiting? I'm not even sure if the most common scenario involves romance. I've read about victims where they just posed as a new friend, no romance involved.
I don't expect the US media at least to change their terminology. After all people don't report 'I was in a pig butchering scam', they describe meeting someone and giving them money over time. I don't see how what term it has affects reporting the crime; and if it did, I would not want to report I was in a romance baiting when there was no romance involved.
Gullible the avoided word, This is just an electronic version of the old lonely hearts con What's hinted at is that no one wants to take center stage as being so gullible as to fall for one of the two oldest scams (if you don't count I;'m from the government). Now must dash off I to send some money to a Nigerian refugee.