Mediacheck

The Generational Privacy Divide

Younger people online are more willing to share info. Must they give up safeguards?

By Michael Geist, 2 Nov 2010, TheTyee.ca

fingerprint-on-keyboard.jpg

Can a more open Internet also be more privacy protecting?

Related

Last week hundreds of privacy regulators, corporate officers and activists gathered in Jerusalem, Israel for the annual Data Protection and Privacy Commissioner Conference. The conference theme focused on the perception of a growing privacy divide between generations, with older and younger demographics seemingly adopting sharply different views on the importance of privacy.

Many acknowledged that longstanding privacy norms are being increasingly challenged by the massive popularity of social networks that encourage users to share information that in a previous generation would have never been made publicly available for all the world to see. Moreover, rapid technological change and the continuous evolution of online sites and services create enormous difficulty for regulators unaccustomed to moving at Internet speed.

Given these changes, the conference asked participants to question whether privacy norms are at a breaking point with conventional laws, regulations, and principles rendered irrelevant in the face of the generational and technological shift.

The response from many participants -- both privacy experts and those studying online youth -- was that privacy remains an important value. Recent studies in the United States and New Zealand both found that people want it all: robust, interactive social networks and privacy protection.

Can you have it both ways online?

Experts pointed to two explanations to reconcile the desire to be openly online and maintain privacy. First, they noted that online social networks are merely social spaces that replicate what we commonly do socially offline, including chatting with friends, gossiping with co-workers and connecting with family. In the offline world, these activities rarely raise privacy concerns since sharing photos or discussing recent activities is not perceived to be a privacy issue. Once those activities move online, the privacy implications can become dramatically different.

Bringing offline social activities to the online environment raise a host of issues, including the notion of "collapsed context." In the offline world, we interact with many different groups, such as friends, family and co-workers, with conversations and information sharing that differs for each. In online social networks, the context for those different conversations is collapsed into a single space. Moreover, the information from online social networks never disappears and the context for a photograph, video or conversation from years earlier is often lost.

Second, privacy experts argued that social media companies make it too difficult for users to protect their privacy by establishing open privacy settings as the default. Facebook and other social media sites give users the ability to adjust those settings, yet over the past few years the default settings have steadily pushed users toward greater openness leaving hundreds of millions of users with the open privacy settings that Facebook selected for them.

Tighten the defaults and educate

Pursuing the twin goals of greater openness and protecting personal privacy may seem like an impossibility, but at least three strategies to address both desires emerged from the discussions. First, there is a need to focus on default settings by ensuring that they err on the side of greater privacy. Users should be free to make their information as openly available as they wish, but guarding against inadvertently exposing a photo, video or embarrassing comment requires default settings that enshrine privacy as the norm.

Second, education is needed on the implications of privacy, social networks and sharing information online. Online social network offer tremendous opportunities to mirror and extend our offline networks, yet many users have yet to fully grapple with differences and the potential implications.

Third, there is still a role for regulation and the law. Although it will invariably lag behind the rapid pace of technology, it is important for companies to understand the legal limits on collecting, using, and disclosing personal information and for users to know that the law stands ready to assist them if those rules are violated.  [Tyee]

1  Comments:

Login or register to post comments

  • Don_EC

    1 year ago

    Longstanding concern with privacy?

    Concern for personal privacy does seem to be prevalent, at least in North America. But although I have not researched the matter systematically, I am not so sure that this concern is as longstanding as we may currently believe. In my experience, it only takes a social practice to be present for a generation or so, to give us a collective sense that things have always been that way.

    Because of my interest in genealogy, I invest a good deal of time reading newspapers from the 18th century, and mostly from Canada. Most of these would qualify as community newspapers, but some from fairly large centres.

    I have frequently found myself amazed at the amount of personal detail that was shared liberally through those social media of the times. There are social columns, indicating the comings and goings of visitors. There are often small articles indicating that a local businessmen (sic) is off on a business trip of some kind or another. I have seen detailed reports of suicides and other family misadventures. There are often personal stories. Some of these report are in anticipation of the events; others are follow-up reports. They always include names, family affiliations, often include ages and any number of other personal details.

    In the 1960s, I recall that newspapers still had social columns and many people took pleasure in being mentioned, along with their comings and goings.

    My sense is that something happened in the last 20-30 years, probably predating computer mediated communication, that began to build a value around personal privacy. And I believe, in part, this value has served some interests more than others. For example, in situations of government, industry, or other institutions, when something goes sideways and reporters or others seek to investigate, it is more common than not to now hear phrases such as: "Because of privacy concerns we cannot comment on the specifics of that case." This is even more common than: "The matter is currently under investigation." or "The matter is before the courts."

    In saying the above, I am NOT suggesting that today, particularly with the urbanization of our society and the presence of computer mediated communication, we each do not need to be concerned about our personal privacy. I am, however, somewhat skeptical that concern for personal privacy is some long-standing, cultural value, and that the whole matter of concern for personal privacy may well serve interests other than the citizen who is the reputed focus.

    • The discussion for this story is closed. No more comments can be added.