Is Privacy Dead In The Age Of Digital?

As part of the wonderful Saturday night lecture series, Anne Anderson came to talk on the topic of privacy in today's digital environment. It was a really gripping talk that followed on wonderfully from the Unbound talk given by Lauren Currie and Kate Andrews (see previous post).

Anne began her talk with some of her views on how she saw the notion of privacy changing. There is a fine line between privacy and secrecy, and in order for people to feel safe yet free, the right balance must be struck. The UK has the highest number of CCTV cameras in the world, does this make it the most safe? This is a interesting issue. Why are we, as members of this surveillance society, so unconcerned about the number of pervasive ways of gathering information about our lives? Why do we not question what happens to all of the data collected about us each day? Do CCTV cameras really help prevent crime at all? In some instances it has been shown that they do, such as in car thefts in private car parks, but it has been also shown that they do little in the prevention of street crime. In fact, additional street lights have been shown to be more effective against this crime. The benefits of using such technology must be justified in relation to the costs.

Other types of new technology are also playing a part in altering the current view of privacy in society. With the emergence of more and more social networking websites and applications with our data, information about us and our lives is becoming available to a huge number of people, in the private and public domain. Anne commented on the generally poor “privacy policies” these sites often have. They are apparently often updated with new policies without he users consent. People do not often appreciate the true publicity of the content they post on their personal sites. Drunken photos or inappropriate content is clearly visible to anyone, not just the originally intended viewers. This raises a new ethical issue that prospective employers, teachers etc. must face. Should the actions of a person illustrated on their facebook account impact on their chances of getting a job or university place? Anne was unsure if it was morally right to do so, but a member of the audience questioned this by saying that surely these websites were an extension of the public domain, and asked whether Anne would ignore such acts if she saw them in reality in front of her? A very intriguing point.

New technology of course has always been seen as a possible way of invading people's privacy. With the invention of the first cameras, there was public outcry that they would be far too invasive and should be banned immediately. I feel that we are often in too much of a rush to exploit or develop new “cutting edge” technology without fully understanding the implications, or using the current technology really effectively.

Society always dictates how technology is used and its meaning. This can be seen in the invention of MSN Messenger, Text messages and camera phones. Anne talked about the

introduction of the “click” sound on camera phones to try to prevent inappropriate photos being taken. The social view on privacy has radically changed. In 1984, the term Big Brother was seen as suppressive, today people actually want to be watched 24/7 by millions of people! The topic of “sousveilance” was mentioned in line with this. The position of the watcher is now shifting from “The Man” to joe public as there is a greater popularity of public media broadcasting such as YouTube and Wikipedia. Timmothy Pryde asked the question about privacy when people openly post their thoughts etc. on sites such as Twitter. A difficult question to answer, but Anne was interested in this also, and suggested that possibly this was a form of people invading their own privacy, and said that the implications were still unknown.

Anne Anderson concluded her presentation with her personal privacy principles:

1. My default is private

2. No more that what is needed

3. Real penalties for data spillages

4. Informed consent

5. Expectations governed by strict rules

I feel these are some good points to follow to help keep our privacy. If you have any of your own please post them up (if you want to disclose them of course!)

So how do we design for privacy? What are the solutions? I feel that this is a really exciting new niche in design that is yet to be fully explored, and it is our responsibility to consider it.

P