Week 12 Readings

I am generally a private person, but I'll usually answer direct questions with direct answers. In that scenario, I retain the choice of whether or not to answer. Data mining and tech companies don't respect the choice though.
The argument that data collection in exchange for coupons is equitable is laughable. I rarely, if ever, use coupons. When I do, more often it's a paper coupon clipped from a newspaper or generic flyer, i.e. not digital or personally identifiable.
The problem with privacy rights activists is that they present vague arguments for privacy legislation. Even this week's block of readings were light on concrete examples. Mostly the argument is your personal data could potentially be used against you. And until someone experiences that, it presents a difficult scenario to envision. Perhaps elderly citizens believe in privacy more because they remember events like the "Red Scare" in the 50s led by Sen. McCarthy. Older people remember careers and lives ruined because someone once attended a communist rally during college or read a newsletter. Then, years later, this incident was revealed in the U.S. Senate and some individuals lost everything. How many people under 40 would immediately recognize the term "Hollywood Blacklisting" in reference to that time period?
I think privacy advocates should push comparisons of data collection further than dystopian sci-fi references. It's been over 20 years since I read Orwell's 1984. I'm sure that's true for a lot of people. I get the connection, but it isn't as prevalent in my mind due to how long ago I read it. Maybe activists would have a better shot at convincing the public if they compare data mining to actual crimes.

Extortion -The obtaining of property from another induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right.
Coercion -
The intimidation of a victim to compel the individual to do some act against his or her will by the use of
psychological pressure, physical force, or threats. 

Think about it. Apps aren't trying to physically harm you, but app creators do think they have an official right to your data. Why Angry Birds requires access to my contacts list is beyond me, but if I want to play, that's part of the price. Many digital services and apps require the user to hand over information to use a product, but are intentionally vague about what happens with the info. If the user knew more details, would they still want to participate?

Kidnapping -
The crime of unlawfully seizing and carrying away a person by force or Fraud, or seizing and detaining a person against his or her will with an intent to carry that person away at a later time.
Generally, kidnapping occurs when a person, without lawful authority, physically [transports] (i.e., moves) another person without that other person's consent, with the intent to use the abduction in connection with some other
nefarious objective.

If you accept the idea that online profiles and data constitute a digital version of self, then companies are collecting "people" for their own uses. Digital data mining could be viewed as kidnapping user's virtual identities.

These two examples might be a stretch, but the point is they would resonate with the public more than digital doomsday prophesies.

Another issue for privacy advocates to think about are programs like Intrado's Beware. Used by the Fresno PD, Beware uses an address to mine information about residents, assigns a potential threat level and then the officer on scene receives the result.
Here's a link to an article about it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/the-new-way-police-are-surveilling-you-calculating-your-threat-score/2016/01/10/e42bccac-8e15-11e5-baf4-bdf37355da0c_story.html

First, it's not always accurate. Information about previous residents can be included in assessing the threat. Also, Intrado won't explain how the program works or how it forms conclusions.
It's not hard to imagine police officers behaving differently when given green vs red threat assessments. Racial profiling is illegal, digital profiling should be as well.

I like the way Europe approaches digital privacy, but I do have some issues with "The Right to be Forgotten." Legitimate news should not be erased because a person doesn't like the information reported. But I do agree with the idea of relevance being used as a metric for removing information. I think European support of digital privacy law stems from lesson learned under various governments over time. The U.S. never experienced fascism or dictators as government leaders. In that regard, Americans may be a little naive when it comes to the possibilities of a public under constant and secret surveillance.

Personally, I'll trade a little security for a little more privacy.