Four myths about privacy

May 01, 2014 by Jessica Martin

(Phys.org) —Many privacy discussions follow a similar pattern, and involve the same kinds of arguments. It's commonplace to hear that privacy is dead, that people—especially kids—don't care about privacy, that people with nothing to hide have nothing to fear, and that privacy is bad for business. "These claims are common, but they're myths," said Neil M. Richards, JD, privacy law expert and professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis.

"These myths are not only false, they get in the way of the kind of important conversations we need to have about personal information in a digital age. If we continue to believe privacy myths, if we think about privacy as outdated or impossible, our digital revolution may have no rules at all, a result that will disempower all but the most powerful among us.

"Our understandings of privacy must evolve; we can no longer think about privacy as merely how much of our lives are completely secret, or about privacy as hiding bad truths from society. How we shape the technologies and data flows will have far-reaching effects for the social structures of the digital societies of the future."

In an article, "Four Privacy Myths," available online via the Social Science Research Network, Richards explained why four of the most common privacy myths persist—and how we can avoid them. His arguments in brief:

"First, privacy cannot be dead because it deals with the rules governing personal information; in an age of personal information, rules about how that information can flow will be more important than ever.

Second, people (and young people) do care deeply about privacy, but they face limited choices and limited information about how to participate in the processing of their data.

Third, privacy isn't just for people with dark secrets; it's for all of us. Not just because we all have things we'd prefer weren't publicly broadcast, but more fundamentally because information is power and personal information is personal power.

Finally, privacy is not always bad for business. One of the best hopes for meaningful privacy protection in the future is for businesses to compete on privacy, and there is some evidence that this is starting to happen."

Richards noted that clearing away the myths is an essential first step to talking about privacy in a helpful and constructive way.

"It's only when we clear away the myths that we can have the essential conversations we need to have about how personal information is shaping our society, now and in the future. We may ultimately decide that we want less privacy, less control of our . But the privacy myths are stopping that conversation, those decisions, from happening. Clearing away the privacy is an important first step to let us decide as a society what kind of digital future we want to live in."

Explore further: Canada privacy czar warns against spies trawling social media

More information: For more information, visit here.

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Italy pledges to improve data privacy protection

Nov 11, 2013

The Italian government says it is taking steps to better protect the privacy of its citizens' data in the wake of revelations about the U.S. National Security Agency's surveillance work.

Recommended for you

California bans paparazzi drones

19 hours ago

California on Tuesday approved a law which will prevent paparazzi from using drones to take photos of celebrities, among a series of measures aimed at tightening protection of privacy.

Remote healthcare for an aging population

Sep 30, 2014

An aging population and an increased incidence of debilitating illnesses such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease means there is pressure on technology to offer assistance with healthcare - monitoring and treatment. Research ...

User comments : 2

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Squirrel
not rated yet May 03, 2014
They may be "myths" but equally they might be serious positions been have treated to "myth" name calling. The arguments presented above (the paper may have better ones) suggest the four so called myths may in a qualified sense make important points that need to be addressed.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (1) May 03, 2014
So we get an opinion on sacrosanct privacy from a lawyer who makes his millions by defending it. And he offers us empty rhetoric:

"information is power and personal information is personal power"

-I suppose he is 'sending a message' somewhere or other.

In the future we will trust our machines to know everything and they will judge us accordingly. Real freedom will ensue: freedom from crime, freedom from lies, freedom from insanity. We will finally be free from our animalism and our compulsion to cheat.

No one in the future will fear this.