Privacy Is Dead, Long Live Privacy!
Two Diverging Perspectives on Current Issues Related to Privacy
Abstract
Abstract: Privacy is a hotly debated topic in academia and society. The digitalization of our world has had enormous implications for our privacy. Some researchers and public figures agree that privacy has changed substantially, that we are living in a post-privacy world, and that we need to address privacy differently. Conversely, others maintain that privacy remains a relevant concept in our society, and that, although facets and degrees of privacy change, the conceptual core and societal relevance remain unchanged and intact. In this paper, we discuss the current state and future of privacy, presenting two opposing stances on four central questions: Has privacy changed? Is privacy dead? Have we lost control over our own privacy? How should we react? With this dialogue we hope to provide an overview of current positions on privacy by presenting divergent lines of reasoning and thinking, while outlining potential paths forward.
References
1975). The environment and social behavior. Brooks Cole.
(1977). Privacy regulation: Culturally universal or culturally specific? Journal of Social Issues, 33(3), 66–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1977.tb01883.x
(2018, April 21). Michal Kosinski: Living in a post-privacy world (No. 42). https://engineering.stanford.edu/magazine/article/michal-kosinski-living-post-privacy-world
(2021). OSD2F: An open-source data donation framework [Preprint]. SocArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/xjk6t
(2017). Big data analytics and the limits of privacy self-management. New Media & Society, 19(4), 579–596. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815614001
(2017). Online privacy concerns and privacy management: A meta-analytical review. Journal of Communication, 67(1), 26–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12276
(2020). Towards an integration of individualistic, networked, and institutional approaches to online disclosure and privacy in a networked ecology. Current Opinion in Psychology, 36, 118–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.05.004
(Bier, W. C. (Ed.). (1980). Privacy: A vanishing value. Fordham University Press.
2020). Digital trace data collection through data donation. ArXiv:2011.09851 [Cs, Stat]. http://arxiv.org/abs/2011.09851
(2020). Linking loose ends: An interdisciplinary privacy and communication model. New Media & Society, 1461444820905045. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820905045
(2020). The practical and ethical challenges in acquiring and sharing digital trace data: Negotiating public-private partnerships. New Media & Society, 22(11), 2058–2080. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820924622
(2019). After the “APIcalypse”: Social media platforms and their fight against critical scholarly research. Information, Communication & Society, 22(11), 1544–1566. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2019.1637447
(1982). Privacy and communication. Annals of the International Communication Association, 1, 206–249.
(2013). Incorporating data literacy into information literacy programs: Core competencies and contents. Libri, 63(2). https://doi.org/10.1515/libri-2013-0010
(2018, April 4). Cambridge Analytica and Facebook: The scandal and the fallout so far. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/04/us/politics/cambridge-analytica-scandal-fallout.html
(2014).
(The privacy process model . In S. GarnettS. HalftM. HerzJ. M. MönigEds., Medien und Privatheit (pp. 105–122). Karl Stutz.2019).
(Das Privacy Paradox aus psychologischer Perspektive [The privacy paradox from a psychological perspective] . In L. SpechtS. WerryN. WerryEds., Handbuch Datenrecht und Digitalisierung (pp. 305–323). Erich Schmidt Verlag.2016). An extended privacy calculus model for SNSs – Analyzing self-disclosure and self-withdrawal in a representative US sample. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 21(5), 368–383. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12163
(2015). Is the privacy paradox a relic of the past? An in-depth analysis of privacy attitudes and privacy behaviors. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(3), 285–297. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2049
(2021). Development and validation of an Algorithm Literacy Scale for Internet users. Communication Methods and Measures, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2021.1968361
(2015). Data protection: Special Eurobarometer 431 [Unpublished work]. www.ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_431_en.pdf
. (2018). Computational research in the post-API age. Political Communication, 35(4), 665–668. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2018.1477506
(2018). Explaining the privacy paradox: A systematic review of literature investigating privacy attitude and behavior. Computers & Security, 77, 226–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2018.04.002
(2013, June 11). Edward Snowden: The whistleblower behind the NSA surveillance revelations. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance
(2019). Open Humans: A platform for participant-centered research and personal data exploration. GigaScience, 8(6), Article
(giz076 . https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giz0762022). How to protect privacy in a datafied society? A presentation of multiple legal and conceptual approaches. Philosophy & Technology, 35(1), Article
(3 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-022-00497-42018). Datenschutz als Privatheitsschutz oder Datenschutz statt Privatheitsschutz?
([Data protection as privacy protection or data protection instead of privacy protection?] Europäische Grundrechte, 45(9), 244–254.2019). Overcoming terms of service: A proposal for ethical distributed research. Information, Communication & Society, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2019.1627386
(1971). The assault on privacy. Michigan Law Review, 69(7), 1389–1397. https://doi.org/10.2307/1287551
(2014).
(Die Enden des Privaten. Geschichten eines Diskurses [The ends of privacy. History of a discourse] . In S. GarnettS. HalftM. HerzJ. M. MönigEds., Medien und Privatheit (pp. 243–258). Karl Stutz.2019). A new model for industry–academic partnerships. PS: Political Science & Politics, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096519001021
(2015). Data literacy: In search of a name and identity. Journal of Documentation, 71(2), 401–415. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-02-2014-0026
(2013). Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(15), 5802–5805. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1218772110
(1967). The intruders: The invasion of privacy by government and industry. American Political Science Review, 61(4), 1142. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055400224416
(2020). Data sharing in the context of health-related citizen science. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 48(S1), 167–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073110520917044
(2014). Networked privacy: How teenagers negotiate context in social media. New Media & Society, 16(7), 1051–1067. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814543995
(2020). How online privacy literacy supports self-data protection and self-determination in the age of information. Media and Communication, 8(2), 258–269. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v8i2.2855
(2021). Behavioral contagion on social media: Effects of social norms, design interventions, and critical media literacy on self-disclosure. PLoS One, 16(7), Article
(e0254670 . https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.02546702018).
(Privatheit in der Online-Kommunikation [Privacy in online communication] . In W. SchweigerK. BeckEds., Handbuch Online-Kommunikation (2nd ed., 1–12). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-18017-1_16-12021). Darknet: Waffen, Drogen, Whistleblower: Wie die digitale Unterwelt funktioniert
([Darknet: Weapons, drugs, whistleblower: How the digital underworld functions] (3rd ed.). C. H. Beck.2020). The Sisyphean cycle of technology panics. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(5), 1143–1157. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620919372
(1964). The naked society.
(2020). The social utility of “data literacy”. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(2), 208–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1707223
(2010). Communication privacy management theory: What do we know about family privacy regulation? Journal of Family Theory & Review, 2(3), 175–196. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2589.2010.00052.x
(2014). Public perceptions of privacy and security in the post-Snowden era. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2014/11/12/public-privacy-perceptions/
. (2018). Enlightenment now: The case for reason, science, humanism, and progress. Viking.
(2010). The state of media literacy. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 54(4), 675–696. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2011.521462
(2016). Why we share: A uses and gratifications approach to privacy regulation in social media use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 60(1), 61–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2015.1127245
(1974). Attack on privacy. Judson Press.
(1969). The death of privacy. Random House.
(2018). Factfulness: Ten reasons we’re wrong about the world – and why things are better than you think (1st ed.). Flatiron Books.
(2007). Das Ende der Privatsphäre: Der Weg in die Überwachungsgesellschaft
([The end of privacy: The way into a surveillance state] (1st ed.). C. Bertelsmann.2015). Data and Goliath. The hidden battles to collect your data and control your world. W. W. Norton.
(1979). Privacy: How to protect what’s left of it (1st ed.). Anchor Press.
(Sobel, L. A.Ed. (1976). War on privacy. Facts on File.
2020). Social media used in Germany 2020. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1059426/social-media-usage-germany/
. (2000). The end of privacy. St. Martin’s Griffin.
(1874, August 4). The abolition of privacy. p. 4. https://www.nytimes.com/1874/08/04/archives/the-abolition-of-privacy.html
. (1904). Walden: My life in the woods. George Routledge & Sons.
(2020). The social media privacy model: Privacy and communication in the light of social media affordances. Communication Theory, 31(4). https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtz035
(2015).
(Do people know about privacy and data protection strategies? Towards the “Online Privacy Literacy Scale” (OPLIS) . In S. GutwirthR. LeenesP. HertEds., Reforming European data protection law (Vol. 20, pp. 333–365). Springer.2020). Privacy is power. Why and how you should take back control of your data. Bantam Press.
(2010). Ende der Privatheit
([End of privacy] . Der Spiegel, 2, 58–69.2017). Privacy by disaster? Press coverage of privacy and digital technology. European Journal of Communication, 32(3), 189–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323117689994
(2018, April 11). The key moments from Mark Zuckerberg’s testimony to Congress. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/11/mark-zuckerbergs-testimony-to-congress-the-key-moments
(1967). Privacy and freedom. Atheneum.
(1999). The end of privacy: How total surveillance is becoming a reality. Distributed by W.W. Norton.
(2019). The age of surveillance capitalism. The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. Profile Books.
(