IS PRIVACY TRULY NECESSARY?

The more information an entity holds, the more power it will wield, especially in the age of technology.

June 2013, Hong Kong, former US National Security Agency (NSA) employee Edward Snowden released nearly 200,000 pages of classified documents about the global espionage and surveillance program conducted by US and British intelligence. Snowden’s revelations have particularly attracted international attention after the media published documents related to the private information of millions of telecommunications and Internet users being spied on and collected [1]. In March 2018, the Facebook data scandal erupted when Cambridge Analytica was accused of collecting the personally identifiable information of 87 million users to influence voter opinion during the presidential campaign of Donald Trump, causing Facebook shares to plummet and Mark Zuckerberg to testify before congress [2]. Data leak scandals involving users being eavesdropped, collected and monitored have sparked a lot of cultural discussion about how individual privacy is increasingly being violated and exploited in the era of digital technology. On the other hand, the governments of other countries said it was not total surveillance but “systematic access for the purpose of serving national security”, in this case is preventing terrorism.

In most debates, when placed aside national security, social order, or business efficiency, privacy is often at a disadvantage. The advancement of social media, mobile platforms, cloud computing, and large-scale data mining has put privacy in the opposite direction of growth. Obviously the need for privacy can almost never be seen as absolute and paramount, but must be balanced with other needs such as fighting terrorism, crime and financial fraud. A privacy discussion would be a political discussion about how to balance individual interests and social interests, and still keep them separate.

1. Private things are created very slowly

Privacy itself in the current public understanding is only about 150 years old. Starting with protection, paying attention to one’s body and home, then privacy soon evolved towards protection of personal information as of now. Before that, it is not known whether people have always instinctively desired privacy, but for nearly 3,000 years of history, cultures have mostly prioritized wealth and convenience over privacy.

In the early days of history, when humans were still living together as hunter-gatherer populations, the need for survival often overshadowed the desire for privacy. In the wild, being left alone or separated from the tribe would be very scary and almost a certain death. To the first ancient cities from the 6th century BC to the 4th century, the Greeks and Romans had buildings with open architectures, from museums, garden houses to public bathing and toilets. Most Romans lived in crowded apartments with thin walls to hear all the noises around them. During this period, a house with open-air architecture was also a way to flaunt wealth. And in Rome, having sex in public is not taboo. Athenian philosophy, on the other hand, seems to still deal with privacy, as can be seen in the work of Socrates and the Greek philosophers, of having a distinction between “outside” and “inside”, between public and private, between society and solitude. There are always conflicts between the subjective desire for solitude and seclusion, and the objective need to depend on others [3]. Or Aristotle’s distinction between the public sphere of politics, or political activism -polis, and the private sphere of the -oikos family, as two separate spheres of life [4]. Siddhartha and other Buddhist masters, with their hermit journey in search of truth, can also be seen as pioneers in detaching oneself from society in order to focus on the struggle with the ego. The same thing happened with Christian saints around the fourth to thirteenth centuries, when monks removed themselves from the distractions of civilization in search of truth.

The end of the Middle Ages ushered in the Renaissance, and the foundations of privacy also began to be built around 1400–1600. Before Johannes Gutenberg invented the printing press in 1439, studying in a quiet environment was a luxury of the elite for centuries, and people often read books in public until book printing became popular [5]. The advent of Gutenberg’s mass production of books with moveable letters permanently changed the structure of society, the rate of literacy increased rapidly, and the education monopoly of the elite was affected, and reinforced the learning process of the lower classes [6]. From here, reading and thinking alone becomes an applied aspect of privacy. Similarly, the individual bed is also a modern invention. As one of the most expensive items in the whole house, a large bed would be a social gathering place in the past. Guests were invited to sleep with their families and servants. The bedroom is even a place for the rich to receive guests or discuss business [7]. Or the fact that “a newlywed couple climbs into bed in the presence of family and friends, displaying the sheets the next day as proof that the marriage is consummated”[8] shows, sex isn’t exactly a private matter back then. However, after the impact of the Black Death taking away more than 100 million lives, attitudes about personal hygiene changed, and privacy in the bedroom began to be considered. During the Renaissance, mirrors remained an expensive luxury furniture item that only the very rich could own, made by coating glass with an amalgam of tin and mercury. How one perceives their appearance before, is entirely dependent on the surface of the rivers or the polished bronze mirrors, which, of course, are not the desired reflection. By 1835, German chemist Justus von Liebig had developed a modern mirror made of silver-coated glass, which allowed mirrors to be produced on a mass scale [9]. And for the first time in history, ordinary people had the opportunity to own their own mirrors for their homes, opening the way for people to spend more time observing and taking care of their appearance and also facing themselves more often.

The first industrial revolution took place in the second half of the 18th century and the first half of the 19th century, with outstanding progress in the field of production, fundamentally changed the socio-economic, cultural as well as technology leading to many things being created to serve in human life, from clothing, housing or furniture. The smaller the society, the larger the number of customers. Of course, people would want each person to have a bed, each nuclear family to live in a house… rather than large groups of people living and sharing material things with each other. Besides, technology systems such as mail systems, education, health care, information management… also being divided into units to manage at the individual level and now each person has to manage a lot of information about themselves, while not needing (and shouldn’t) know about other’s. Privacy now gradually appears as a necessity and was perfected thing to this day.

The history of privacy clearly shows that there is a close relationship between it and the evolution of technology. Historically, privacy has been associated with wealth, as poverty means less privacy as families share common spaces with almost no physical separation. However, in the past 150 years, with the development of science and technology from the invention of the camera to telecommunications technology such as postcards and telephones, to the explosion of information technology with the advent of Internet, the existential value of the right to privacy is demonstrated through technology’s invasion of personal information. New technologies often bring new ways of communicating, with family members, neighbors and even strangers.

In the world of technology, people are starting to leave digital “footprints” that need to be managed carefully, such as photos, videos, phone calls, emails, computer notes, browsing history, credit records, private messages… They are both difficult to manage and dangerous while easy to steal or control by platform owners. This makes privacy become one of the most concerning issues of the 21st century.

2. Importance and threats

At its most basic, privacy is closely related to almost every aspect of a person, and has been described as the right to be alone in freedom, control, and self-determination. Through history, privacy has been associated with home, personal correspondence or family life. This correlation can be seen as a way to control the situation. From the fourteenth to the eighteenth centuries, people could get sued for eavesdropping or reading private messages [10]. And since the end of the 19th century until now, privacy has been moved to a series of new types of personal information such as identity, address, bank account, etc. Used frequently in common as well as in philosophical, political, and legal discussions, but “privacy” has no single or precise definition. Different countries will have different laws and opinions, and each individual will have a different view of this right. Most commonly, privacy is viewed as the ability of an individual or a group to keep themselves or information about themselves private, and thus express themselves selectively [11]. In this sense, privacy can be divided into two distinct aspects, a relationship and an information flow. Privacy in a relationship can be about allowing someone into a room, or being allowed to touch one’s body, signifying physical and spatial privacy. The privacy of an information flow involves the collection, storage and processing of personal data such as names, addresses, credit records, health records, etc.

American law professor Alan F. Westin in his book “Privacy and Freedom” (1967) [12] gives a comprehensive description of the four key aspects of privacy. First is the need for personal autonomy, which is very important for the formation and development of each person’s personality. Privacy plays a role in supporting psychological development and normal functioning. Next, people need privacy as a way of emotional release. Because life creates a lot of stress that affects individuals physically and psychologically, everyone needs some lonely time. And this period of time is a much-needed opportunity to relax, to be yourself, to let go of stress and expectations or other emotions without fear of influence or ridicule. The third aspect is the ability to freely evaluate and make decisions. Each individual needs to accumulate personal experiences to shape his personality. Solitude and the opportunity to reflect on the past are essential for creativity, just as individuals need space and time to process the vast amount of information in life. Finally, there is the need to communicate within a limited and protected framework, which is especially important and necessary in the crowded urban life. The value of privacy is recognized when each individual has the opportunity to share their thoughts with family, friends and associates.

Privacy is essential in one’s normal behavior to facilitate social interaction, and is a prerequisite for forming relationships. The level of intimacy in a relationship is largely determined by the amount of personal information that can be revealed. A person can reveal confidential information that cannot be told to anyone, to someone who can be trusted. What a person says to his or her spouse will be completely different from what one might say to a colleague. The same is true for functional relationships, where an individual can speak to his or her therapist and be assured that no one else can know about what they talk about. Privileged relationships, whether personal or functional, require a certain degree of openness and trust, and can only take place with assurance that any disclosed information will be kept confidential. In other words, privacy has intrinsic value because it allows a person to control information about himself, and allows different levels of intimacy to be maintained with different people, as well as allows a person to freely define relationships with others and define oneself. Thus, privacy is also connected with an individual’s dignity, respect and self-esteem, and is always demanded on a natural and widespread level.

So what happens when privacy is threatened and controlled? If individuals know that their actions and attitudes are regularly observed, commented on and criticized, their behavior will change suddenly, the expression range will also be significantly reduced, thereby rarely doing anything that deviates from socially acceptable behaviors. Psychological studies indicate that if a person is constantly observed, his or her attitudes become conformist and submissive [13]. Professor Alan F. Westin also points out that surveillance and publicity are powerful tools for social control. Most people are afraid to stand apart or be different, if that happens under scrutiny, and they will simply choose to make compliance decisions in line with the expectations of a standard system.

Journalist Glenn Greenwald, who was one of the first people to have access to Edward Snowden’s top secret documents during his TED talk, mentioned a comprehensive model of governance proposed by Jeremy Bentham in around the eighteenth century [14]. Accordingly, during the Industrial Revolution, institutions became so large that management could not concentrate on controlling each individual subordinate, and Bentham proposed a design with the idea that he called the Panopticon — a circular prison. The idea of ​​this design allows all prisoners of a prison to be within sight of a single guard from the observation facility, without inmates being able to tell if they are being watched. This architecture consists of an observation tower placed in the center, and surrounded by cells built in a closed circle. In theory, the guard couldn’t watch all the cells at once, but because inmates couldn’t tell when they were being watched, they were forced to act as if they were being watched. And thus, prisoners are forced to effectively regulate their behavior by complying with the regulation [15]. Later, the twentieth century philosopher Michel Foucault realized that this model could even be applied to any institution related to managing people such as schools, offices, hospitals, factories. Therefore, he also believes that the Panopticon model is also an effective way to control society without having to apply the extreme measures of authoritarian regimes. Glenn Greenwald later criticized total surveillance as a clever method but still more effective than tightening laws or social norms, because the Panopticon has created a mental prison that paralyzes and smothers people’s misguided ideas.

Protecting privacy from excessive surveillance is considered necessary for an individual to be free to be himself. Everyone needs a moment to break social norms, create a few deviations that can have minor under control consequences to help define personality and spark creativity. An individual needs to be able to behave in ways that are not dictated by the surrounding society, or moments of unconventional thinking or acting. If all of this is recorded and made public, it means that an individual loses the ability to be who he is, thus also a loss of dignity. In countries with developed democracies, freedom and creativity, as well as the ability to develop a unique personality, are emphasized and encouraged. As Alan F. Westin said, “Democratic societies rely on publicity as a form of control over government, and privacy as a shield of group or individual life.”

The more information an entity holds, the more power it will wield, especially in the age of technology. The more someone knows about us, the more they can predict our actions and influence future decisions. One aspect of power is the ability of one person to motivate another to think or do something that the other person would not think or do otherwise. Sometimes you can get a person to voluntarily do something they never thought they would do, and that’s called power. In the digital age, power can be sorting algorithms, persuasive applications, customized and personalized advertising optimized from user information to influence one’s judgment and decision. And that is also how Cambridge Analytica collected personal information of Facebook users through an application called “thisisyourdigitallife”, which generated more than 5000 data points including location, personal information, personality and psychology of more than 220 million Americans — as proudly described by the company’s director, Alexander Nix. The above data is detailed enough to generate psychographic profiles that suggest which types of advertising are most effective to persuade a specific individual, in a particular location, for certain political events, which within the scope of this data scandal is the 2016 US presidential campaign, or the Brexit campaign and the Trinidad election [16].

But beside companies, individuals are also wary of control coming from governments. Since World War II, because of the need to spy on each other between the Allies and Axis, governments have gradually developed programs and systems to comprehensively monitor telecommunications, by collecting acts of intelligence, eavesdropping and tracking user data. Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the US government has passed the Patriot Act to significantly expand the government’s authority to monitor and intercept the telecommunications of both foreigners and domestic citizens. On June 5, 2013, The Guardian published information regarding NSA surveillance activities based on the leak of classified documents by Edward Snowden, which revealed many of the NSA’s global surveillance programs and CIA in cooperation with telecommunications companies and European governments. The controversy surrounding the Snowden data leak has prompted journalists and activists to write about similar surveillance programs in the UK, Germany and France. It is a fact that governments around the world can always require commercial entities to disclose customer data when it comes to crime investigation, national security and regulatory system enforcement. Companies — telecom service providers like AT&T and Verizon have always felt an obligation, and sometimes are compelled by law to cooperate, but they are also bound by the responsibility to protect customers’ personal data, so balancing the two is a tricky issue. With the rise of terrorism, the need of governments for data held by private companies has increased worldwide. This expands the government’s requirements for private databases, which might be called “systematic access”, to include, of course, direct access upon subpoena. With more and more information on personal purchases & communications being held, at least 3 developments have prompted governments to increasingly covet this information,

- Concerned about emerging threats that could endanger national security from terrorist organizations.
- Benefits in monitoring, tax collection and other management objectives.
- The growth of big data from businesses will increase the ability of government monitoring agencies to find useful information.

We can see that at the national level and when it comes to management, security and military issues, privacy will hardly be guaranteed to be in absolute confidentiality. Because citizens are individuals living in a country, and the interests of this largest collective will always come first. Governments need information, including that of individuals, to be able to effectively manage and protect the security of their citizens. But citizens also need to be protected from surveillance and excessive use of these personal data.

3. The paradox of privacy and the absolute zero

It’s not surprising that apps and websites today seem to know where we live, how old we are, what movies we like or what food we eat. And we find it great that these services seem to be tailored and customized for each individual, making them convenient and user-friendly by reducing the time spent finding the wrong things. Most people like to be predictable and suggest what’s appropriate, like the way they walk into a familiar restaurant with a familiar waiter.

When asked if people are concerned about their personal information being shared online, the answer will most likely be yes. However, only a very small percentage of people actually take the necessary actions to protect their privacy. And this is known as the privacy paradox when users express concerns about their own privacy, but are willing to freely disclose information in exchange for convenience from services [17]. Humans are social animals, although we instinctively desire privacy, we cannot resist the need to join, live and communicate in a group. That’s why we often share photos, videos, articles on social networks — like Facebook. Nowadays, people are used to sharing data about their daily activities on online platforms, and while still worried about their personal information being stolen, they still tend to reveal them easily. One possible explanation for this is that people find it difficult to associate a particular value with privacy and thus do not appreciate the need to keep that information secure. Or they may believe that the desired goal outweighs the potential risks such as making personalized experiences more enjoyable despite the possibility that tech companies could use their data for profiling purposes, or even selling that information to other parties. This is most evident when a large part of us neglect to read privacy policies before installing apps or joining any social networking platform. And this is a step that opens the way for applications from third parties, or vendors, to intervene and control users’ data when they install applications. Once the data is collected, it will not be difficult to create a psychological profile from your personal identity, interests, and habits, thereby creating customized and personalized advertisements according to your online identity. This partly explains why we feel as if we are being eavesdropped and monitored, when what we have just said or discussed will appear in the next day’s advertisements, about a gadget we are wanting or the food we are craving.

Privacy can be viewed as a powerful freedom right when an individual’s desire needs to be protected from prying eyes, or government control and coercion. But it’s also not absolute. We live our lives as members of one or more societies such as family, friends, school, workplace, volunteer organization, sports club, city, nation. These societies are not just about preferences, but by the nature of social animals like humans, we need relationships to sustain our lives and shape individuals. So every individual has an obligation to share personal information so that any meaningful relationship can be maintained such as friends, family, spouses or community. Of course, family, marriage, and friend relationships require a higher level of information sharing to be more intimate. And participating in a collective on a larger scale, such as an office or a country, information about an individual’s past, current circumstances, ideas and aspirations is necessary. An employer like a business, or an entity that manages people like a government will require a certain amount of this information to be able to manage it effectively.

Ultimately, privacy and the obligation to share information should ideally be balanced. While privacy is an emphatic aspect of liberal thought, discipline is the counterbalance that enables an individual to bring out the best in himself to a suitable extent. The unrestrained freedom of the individual can cause collective conflicts of interest, but total surveillance and control creates the illusion of totalitarianism, repeating the mistakes of authoritarian regimes. Therefore, the desire for privacy of each individual cannot be absolute, because the desire to integrate into society is also equally strong. This requires us to strike a balance between freedom and discipline, only then can our privacy be properly respected.

And don’t forget to read the terms of privacy and data security policy before installing apps and joining any social networking platform.

___________

References:

[1] G. Greenwald, “NSA collecting phone records of millions of Verizon customers daily,” the Guardian, 06-Jun-2013. [Online]. Available: https://www.theguardian.com/.../nsa-phone-records-verizon.... [Accessed: 09-Sep-2021]

[2] “Cambridge Analytica and Facebook: The Scandal and the Fallout So Far (Published 2018),” The New York Times, 2021 [Online]. Available: https://www.nytimes.com/.../cambridge-analytica-scandal.... [Accessed: 09-Sep-2021]

[3] Privacy: Studies in Social and Cultural History. Routledge, 2017 [Online]. Available: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/.../privacy-barrington-moore. [Accessed: 09-Sep-2021]

[4] J. Roy, “‘Polis’ and ‘Oikos’ in Classical Athens,” Greece & Rome, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 1–18, 1999 [Online]. Available: https://www.jstor.org/stable/643032. [Accessed: 09-Sep-2021]

[5] R. B. Winans, “The Growth of a NovelReading Public in LateEighteenthCentury America,” Early American Literature, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 267–275, 1975 [Online]. Available: https://www.jstor.org/stable/25070682. [Accessed: 09-Sep-2021]

[6] “Johannes Gutenberg | Printing Press, Inventions, Facts, Accomplishments, & Biography | Britannica,” Encyclopædia Britannica. 2021 [Online]. Available: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Johannes-Gutenberg. [Accessed: 09-Sep-2021]

[7] Fagan, B., & Durrani, N. (2019). Strange Bedfellows. “What We Did in Bed: A Horizontal History” (pp. 104–123). New Haven; London: Yale University Press. doi:10.2307/j.ctvnwbx2v.9

B. Fagan, “The bizarre social history of beds,” The Conversation, 13-Sep-2019. [Online]. Available: https://theconversation.com/the-bizarre-social-history-of.... [Accessed: 11-Sep-2021]

[8] “A History of Private Life, Volume II: Revelations of the Medieval World (Page 132, 133) — Georges Duby, Phillippe Ariès, Georges Duby,” Harvard.edu, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php.... [Accessed: 10-Sep-2021]

[9] J. Castro, “Who Invented the Mirror?,” livescience.com, 28-Mar-2013. [Online]. Available: https://www.livescience.com/34466-who-invented-mirror.html. [Accessed: 10-Sep-2021]

[10] D. J. Solove, “A Brief History of Information Privacy Law,” 2006. [Online]. Available: https://www.semanticscholar.org/.../6f0b36b6ae8d95d66a830.... [Accessed: 10-Sep-2021]

[11] Cambridge Dictionary, “privacy,” @CambridgeWords, 08-Sep-2021. [Online]. Available: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/.../dict.../english/privacy. [Accessed: 09-Sep-2021]

[12] “Privacy and Freedom. By Alan F. Westin. New York: Atheneum Press, 1967. $10.00,” Social Work, Oct. 1968, doi: 10.1093/sw/13.4.114-a. [Online]. Available: https://academic.oup.com/.../article.../13/4/114/1872392. [Accessed: 10-Sep-2021]

[13] J. Yu, P. Tseng, N. G. Muggleton, and C.-H. Juan, “Being watched by others eliminates the effect of emotional arousal on inhibitory control,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 6, Jan. 2015, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00004. [Online]. Available: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4299288/. [Accessed: 09-Sep-2021]

[14] TED, “Glenn Greenwald: Why privacy matters,” YouTube. 10-Oct-2014 [Online]. Available: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcSlowAhvUk&t=825s. [Accessed: 09-Sep-2021]

[15] “Panopticon | penal architecture | Britannica,” Encyclopædia Britannica. 2021 [Online]. Available: https://www.britannica.com/technology/panopticon. [Accessed: 09-Sep-2021]

[16] E. Graham-Harrison and C. Cadwalladr, “Revealed: 50 million Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach,” the Guardian, 17-Mar-2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.theguardian.com/.../cambridge-analytica.... [Accessed: 09-Sep-2021]

[17] S. Barth and M. D. T. de Jong, “The privacy paradox — Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior — A systematic literature review,” Telematics and Informatics, vol. 34, no. 7, pp. 1038–1058, Nov. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2017.04.013. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/.../pii/S0736585317302022. [Accessed: 09-Sep-2021]

Further reading:

https://medium.com/.../the-birth-and-death-of-privacy-3...

https://www.scu.edu/.../resources/why-we-care-about-privacy/