The Value of Digital Privacy in an Information Technology AgeThe Value of Digital Privacy in an Information Technology AgeA weekend getaway in Vegas…$400, dinner at a fine restaurant…$200, digital privacy in the information technology age…PRICELESS. No value can be put on the importance of digital privacy in today’s world of the Internet. There are numerous technologies that allow individuals to research citizens’ private data. Websites such as Facebook, Intelius, and Spokeo allow for easy access to individuals’ personal information.
Technologies That Allow Research of Private DataFor today’s generation, Facebook has become as conventional as the telephone. You will not find many people functioning in today’s technological environment without a Facebook page. With so many people using the website, it has become a prime source in gathering personal data about individuals. So many users post personal information about where they work, what schools they attend, what vacations they’ve taken, the names/ages of theirs kids, and much more. And, of course, there are usually pictures to go along with all of the unsolicited information that’s posted. Social networking sites usually allow their users to join and host their information for free. These companies sometimes make their money by helping marketers to target advertising campaigns–a service for which advertisers pay tremendously. This creates profit for social networking companies as they provide a free service to users (Petryni, 2013).
The Problem
Facebook’s use of the social media sites is the same as where it uses “telephone information,” the data that has the best chance of keeping others from tracking up. For example, in a survey of 500 social media users by researchers at Boston University, we asked participants if they received or did not receive a personal phone call at their school. The survey included only those who reported receiving phone calls or visits in a given month and who sent their personal information to Facebook’s servers, usually within 1 hour. If you don’t receive a personal phone call at school, either the user did so out of an interest in getting that phone call or you didn’t. Our survey included more than 25,000 Facebook users between 2010 and 2014, and not a single one had any relationship to one of the other social media platforms. Facebook does not track or share a user’s personal location and is not obligated to keep track of the “if” or “when.” Moreover, Facebook’s privacy policy on this topic provides, “If you contact Facebook to receive personal information, the data may be publicly available for public inspection.” In other words, there is nothing Facebook can do to keep a private user’s personal information on its servers. Facebook users have no right to know what personally identifiable information this user has about them, although the social networking site provides their personal information to people they contact directly.
Our survey’s design is unique in its design. It was designed for a broad subset of new users seeking to participate in a new technology as an additional way for Facebook to attract new members, and not to the extent of the traditional data collection or tracking of the previous users. We use anonymized personal identification details for the same reason we would use the personal identification details of a private user. But a privacy policy that encourages users to opt-out of such data collection and tracking should not prohibit Facebook from collecting other information about new users. For reasons described in the next section about privacy, we find it likely that if users choose to opt-out of such analytics, then Facebook is unlikely to continue collecting their personal data. Even if we assumed that Facebook uses only anonymization to collect their personal information. And that’s not all. Facebook could not be held liable for those who choose to use Social Media to collect and link their data.
It all boils down to what was true and what was untrue in this survey. As we point out before, in this case the two were false: Facebook was the first to offer privacy as a condition of receiving user’s personal information on social networks. The privacy policy in our study included an exception because, as noted, Facebook is liable for “when” data collection and tracking of user’s profiles. And it didn’t address the privacy problem with privacy. A user needs to get the relevant data before he receives or wants it in place. The best way to protect privacy is to give the user reasonable expectation of privacy. As well, Facebook’s privacy policy does not allow private users to opt-out of “when” data collection and tracking of social networks or their user’s privacy. Instead, Facebook requires users to have a choice between opting-out or opting out of data-collection and tracking. It’s a decision that is up to the user—in this case, users—to make, and there are no incentives for privacy. So the “why” question is unanswered. What we conclude in this section is that social networking services that give users opt-out from collection of personal information about their profile are in a position to become “companies of the future” and should not be viewed as the new “companies with benefits” (Petryni, 2013). We can only conclude that privacy protections must apply to social platforms, and it can’t be assumed Facebook will be responsible for making privacy available in the future. And it should. This is
The Problem
Facebook’s use of the social media sites is the same as where it uses “telephone information,” the data that has the best chance of keeping others from tracking up. For example, in a survey of 500 social media users by researchers at Boston University, we asked participants if they received or did not receive a personal phone call at their school. The survey included only those who reported receiving phone calls or visits in a given month and who sent their personal information to Facebook’s servers, usually within 1 hour. If you don’t receive a personal phone call at school, either the user did so out of an interest in getting that phone call or you didn’t. Our survey included more than 25,000 Facebook users between 2010 and 2014, and not a single one had any relationship to one of the other social media platforms. Facebook does not track or share a user’s personal location and is not obligated to keep track of the “if” or “when.” Moreover, Facebook’s privacy policy on this topic provides, “If you contact Facebook to receive personal information, the data may be publicly available for public inspection.” In other words, there is nothing Facebook can do to keep a private user’s personal information on its servers. Facebook users have no right to know what personally identifiable information this user has about them, although the social networking site provides their personal information to people they contact directly.
Our survey’s design is unique in its design. It was designed for a broad subset of new users seeking to participate in a new technology as an additional way for Facebook to attract new members, and not to the extent of the traditional data collection or tracking of the previous users. We use anonymized personal identification details for the same reason we would use the personal identification details of a private user. But a privacy policy that encourages users to opt-out of such data collection and tracking should not prohibit Facebook from collecting other information about new users. For reasons described in the next section about privacy, we find it likely that if users choose to opt-out of such analytics, then Facebook is unlikely to continue collecting their personal data. Even if we assumed that Facebook uses only anonymization to collect their personal information. And that’s not all. Facebook could not be held liable for those who choose to use Social Media to collect and link their data.
It all boils down to what was true and what was untrue in this survey. As we point out before, in this case the two were false: Facebook was the first to offer privacy as a condition of receiving user’s personal information on social networks. The privacy policy in our study included an exception because, as noted, Facebook is liable for “when” data collection and tracking of user’s profiles. And it didn’t address the privacy problem with privacy. A user needs to get the relevant data before he receives or wants it in place. The best way to protect privacy is to give the user reasonable expectation of privacy. As well, Facebook’s privacy policy does not allow private users to opt-out of “when” data collection and tracking of social networks or their user’s privacy. Instead, Facebook requires users to have a choice between opting-out or opting out of data-collection and tracking. It’s a decision that is up to the user—in this case, users—to make, and there are no incentives for privacy. So the “why” question is unanswered. What we conclude in this section is that social networking services that give users opt-out from collection of personal information about their profile are in a position to become “companies of the future” and should not be viewed as the new “companies with benefits” (Petryni, 2013). We can only conclude that privacy protections must apply to social platforms, and it can’t be assumed Facebook will be responsible for making privacy available in the future. And it should. This is
The Problem
Facebook’s use of the social media sites is the same as where it uses “telephone information,” the data that has the best chance of keeping others from tracking up. For example, in a survey of 500 social media users by researchers at Boston University, we asked participants if they received or did not receive a personal phone call at their school. The survey included only those who reported receiving phone calls or visits in a given month and who sent their personal information to Facebook’s servers, usually within 1 hour. If you don’t receive a personal phone call at school, either the user did so out of an interest in getting that phone call or you didn’t. Our survey included more than 25,000 Facebook users between 2010 and 2014, and not a single one had any relationship to one of the other social media platforms. Facebook does not track or share a user’s personal location and is not obligated to keep track of the “if” or “when.” Moreover, Facebook’s privacy policy on this topic provides, “If you contact Facebook to receive personal information, the data may be publicly available for public inspection.” In other words, there is nothing Facebook can do to keep a private user’s personal information on its servers. Facebook users have no right to know what personally identifiable information this user has about them, although the social networking site provides their personal information to people they contact directly.
Our survey’s design is unique in its design. It was designed for a broad subset of new users seeking to participate in a new technology as an additional way for Facebook to attract new members, and not to the extent of the traditional data collection or tracking of the previous users. We use anonymized personal identification details for the same reason we would use the personal identification details of a private user. But a privacy policy that encourages users to opt-out of such data collection and tracking should not prohibit Facebook from collecting other information about new users. For reasons described in the next section about privacy, we find it likely that if users choose to opt-out of such analytics, then Facebook is unlikely to continue collecting their personal data. Even if we assumed that Facebook uses only anonymization to collect their personal information. And that’s not all. Facebook could not be held liable for those who choose to use Social Media to collect and link their data.
It all boils down to what was true and what was untrue in this survey. As we point out before, in this case the two were false: Facebook was the first to offer privacy as a condition of receiving user’s personal information on social networks. The privacy policy in our study included an exception because, as noted, Facebook is liable for “when” data collection and tracking of user’s profiles. And it didn’t address the privacy problem with privacy. A user needs to get the relevant data before he receives or wants it in place. The best way to protect privacy is to give the user reasonable expectation of privacy. As well, Facebook’s privacy policy does not allow private users to opt-out of “when” data collection and tracking of social networks or their user’s privacy. Instead, Facebook requires users to have a choice between opting-out or opting out of data-collection and tracking. It’s a decision that is up to the user—in this case, users—to make, and there are no incentives for privacy. So the “why” question is unanswered. What we conclude in this section is that social networking services that give users opt-out from collection of personal information about their profile are in a position to become “companies of the future” and should not be viewed as the new “companies with benefits” (Petryni, 2013). We can only conclude that privacy protections must apply to social platforms, and it can’t be assumed Facebook will be responsible for making privacy available in the future. And it should. This is
Intelius is one example of a people search where various types of information can be obtained about individuals. By inputting only a name, anyone can acquire someone’s age, a list of previous addresses as well as relatives. Additional information that can be gathered is date of birth, phone numbers, emails and social networking information. This information can easily be used in identity theft.
Another way of gathering personal data is through the website Spokeo. This website is similar to Intelius, displaying the same types of personal data. Additionally, it accesses electronic “public records” that contains private information. Courts and government agencies at all levels of government are increasingly making public records available on websites (Public Records on the Internet, 2006). Spokeo also allows searches by usernames or e-mail addresses. This site provides summaries of social networks, blogging sites, dating sites, photo sites, online shopping sites and lots more. No detail is off limits.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Public Access to InformationAlthough the thought of private information being available to anyone online is a scary thought, it has its pro and cons. The advantages are primarily to those performing the research. For example, employers can easily investigate potential job candidates before they grant an interview. Information,