This paper argues online privacy controls are based on a transactional model of privacy, leading to a collective myth of consensual data practices. It proposes an alternative based on the notion of privacy coordination as an alternative vision and realizing this vision as a grand challenge in Ethical UX
DOCUMENT
Journalist en auteur Huib Modderkolk doet onderzoek naar een wereld die voor de meeste mensen verborgen blijft. Mendeltje en Ruud spreken hem over cyberspionage, privacy en digitale geopolitiek. Hoe doe je onderzoek naar iets dat geheim is? En hoeveel risico lopen we in een tijd waarin ons leven zich online afspeelt? En spelen wij als Nederland echt in de Champions League van de cyberspionage? Huib neemt ons mee undercover!
MULTIFILE
According to Johnson & Grandison (2007), failure to safeguard privacy of users of services provided by private and governmental organisations, leaves individuals with the risk of exposure to a number of undesirable effects of information processing. Loss of control over information about a person may lead to fraud, identity theft, reputation damage, and may cause psychosocial consequences ranging from mild irritation, unease, social exclusion, physical harm or even, in extreme cases, death. Although pooh-poohed upon by some opinion leaders from search engine and ICT industries for over a decade (Sprenger, 1999; Esguerra, 2009), the debate in the wake of events like the tragic case of Amanda Todd could be interpreted as supporting a case for proper attention to citizens’ privacy. Truth be told, for a balanced discussion on privacy in the age of Facebook one should not turn towards the social media environment that seems to hail any new development in big data analysis and profiling-based marketing as a breathtaking innovation. If the myopic view of technology pundits is put aside, a remarkably lively debate on privacy and related issues may be discerned in both media and scientific communities alike. A quick keyword search on ‘privacy’, limited to the years 2000-2015, yields huge numbers of publications: Worldcat lists 19,240; Sciencedirect 52,566, IEEE explore 71,684 and Google scholar a staggering 1,880,000. This makes clear that privacy is still a concept considered relevant by both the general public and academic and professional audiences. Quite impressive for a subject area that has been declared ‘dead’.
MULTIFILE
Human rights groups are increasingly calling for the protection of their right to privacy in relation to the bulk surveillance and interception of their personal communications. Some are advocating through strategic litigation. This advocacy tool is often chosen when there is weak political or public support for an issue. Nonetheless, as a strategy it remains a question if a lawsuit is strategic in the context of establishing accountability for indiscriminate bulk data interception. The chapter concludes that from a legal perspective the effect of the decision to litigate on the basis of the claim that a collective right to group privacy was violated has not (yet) resulted in significant change. Yet the case study, the British case of human rights groups versus the intelligence agencies, does seem to suggest that they have been able to create more public awareness about mass surveillance and interception programs and its side-effects
LINK
Smart speakers are heralded to make everyday life more convenient in households around the world. These voice-activated devices have become part of intimate domestic contexts in which users interact with platforms.This chapter presents a dualstudy investigating the privacy perceptions of smart speaker users and non-users. Data collected in in-depth interviews and focus groups with Dutch users and non-users show that they make sense of privacy risks through imagined sociotechnical affordances. Imagined affordances emerge with the interplay between user expectations, technologies, and designer intentions. Affordances like controllability, assistance, conversation, linkability, recordability, and locatability are associated with privacy considerations. Viewing this observation in the light of privacy calculus theory, we provide insights into how users’ positive experiences of the control over and assistance in the home offered by smart speakers outweighs privacy concerns. On the contrary, non-users reject the devices because of fears that recordability and locatability would breach the privacy of their homes by tapping data to platform companies. Our findings emphasize the dynamic nature of privacy calculus considerations and how these interact with imagined affordances; establishing a contrast between rational and emotional responses relating to smart speaker use.Emotions play a pivotal role in adoption considerations whereby respondents balance fears of unknown malicious actors against trust in platform companies.This study paves the way for further research that examines how surveillance in the home is becoming increasingly normalized by smart technologies.
DOCUMENT
In this paper we explore the extent to which privacy enhancing technologies (PETs) could be effective in providing privacy to citizens. Rapid development of ubiquitous computing and ‘the internet of things’ are leading to Big Data and the application of Predictive Analytics, effectively merging the real world with cyberspace. The power of information technology is increasingly used to provide personalised services to citizens, leading to the availability of huge amounts of sensitive data about individuals, with potential and actual privacy-eroding effects. To protect the private sphere, deemed essential in a state of law, information and communication systems (ICTs) should meet the requirements laid down in numerous privacy regulations. Sensitive personal information may be captured by organizations, provided that the person providing the information consents to the information being gathered, and may only be used for the express purpose the information was gathered for. Any other use of information about persons without their consent is prohibited by law; notwithstanding legal exceptions. If regulations are properly translated into written code, they will be part of the outcomes of an ICT, and that ICT will therefore be privacy compliant. We conclude that privacy compliance in the ‘technological’ sense cannot meet citizens’ concerns completely, and should therefore be augmented by a conceptual model to make privacy impact assessments at the level of citizens’ lives possible.
DOCUMENT
The flexible deployment of drones in the public domain, is in this article assessed from a legal philosophical perspective. On the basis of theories of Dworkin and Moore the distinction between individual rights and collective security policy goals is discussed. Mobile cameras in the public domain reflect how innovative technological tools challenge public authorities in new ways to balance between privacy and security. Furthermore, the different dimensions of privacy and the distinction between the three types of the value of privacy are reviewed. On the basis of the case study of the Dutch Drones Act, the article concludes that the flexible deployment of mobile cameras in the public domain is not legitimate from a normative perspective. The legal safeguards in the Netherlands are insufficient to protect the value of privacy. Therefore, further restrictions such as prior judicial review should be considered.
LINK
Following the rationale of the current EU legal framework protecting personal data, children are entitled to the same privacy and data protection rights as adults. However, the child, because of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection. In the online environment, children are less likely to make any checks or judgments before entering personal information. Therefore, this paper presents an analysis of the extent to which EU regulation can ensure children’s online privacy and data protection.
DOCUMENT
Het is voor CX-professionals één van de belangrijkste vraagstukken binnen de snel digitaliserende economie. En het vraagstuk wordt alleen maar groter: hoe moeten we omgaan met de privacy van de klant terwijl dezelfde consument vraagt om meer gepersonaliseerde dienstverlening?
LINK
Het is voor marketeers en CX professionals één van de belangrijkste vraagstukken binnen de snel digitaliserende economie. En het vraagstuk wordt alleen maar groter: hoe moeten we omgaan met de privacy van de consument, terwijl dezelfde consument vraagt om meer gepersonaliseerde dienstverlening? Wat kunnen marketeers en CX-professionals doen om een balans te vinden tussen de kansen en de risico’s in het gebruik van persoonsgegevens?
LINK
