Who hasn’t heard about or commented on it this week?
Wherever I have been, whomever I have spoken to and whatever news I watched, read, listened to or scrolled, the main topic was WikiLeaks.
To some it’s devastating…destroying the fabric of diplomacy and the historic etiquette of international relations.
To others it’s been a comic relief – many of the so-called revelations are in fact funny to us the reading public – while skewering pretentious and posturing world leaders.
And, maybe to all a bit troubling, as it does seem that we blunder from issue to issue – but even that needs to be taken in context, as bottom line it’s all very human and not unlike what we’d find on Facebook…
And therein lies the dilemma.
Was this a punishable breach of privacy? Or are we all entitled to read everything?
Privacy…
On the one hand we still live in the shadow of fear of “Big Brother” and what happens when personal privacy becomes the domain of one entity. In fact, I’d posit that this is the opposite of the Facebook tell-it-all culture – where no one controls privacy – we put it all out for all to see.
So, the question is when we, marketing /business types, tell people that “we know all about you” because we track Web behavior, is that Big Brother like? Or is it something else? Maybe something less diabolical and possibly even benign?
Because what does it really mean? I know what you bought? I know what you read? I know what you looked at? Does that really equal Big Brother?
My view is no – not even close.
Lester Wunderman once told me that if people really knew how little of the information that we capture is actually useful to marketers, they’d never worry. He further said that if people knew how many marketers were not even able to use the information they should use, they’d sleep even better.
To start with, I think more of humankind than to assume I can get someone to buy what they don’t want and never should because I am in possession of some data about them. On the other hand, I’d like to believe that I could be useful to people and help them to see and acquire what they need and want at the right time, at the best price and in the most efficient way.
Now – identify theft and such are different – I do worry about that – but we can do a better job of security and have harsher laws to protect us – as we do offline.
And, less you think I am naïve and unaware – let me add that I do have a fear of too much power in any one hand, and a couple of years ago I gave testimony to a U.S. Congressional panel to that effect.
I was asked to comment on the proposed Google/Yahoo alliance and, although the clear issue was monopoly of channel (sort of obvious), I added the following thought: “If you control the algorithm, you effectively control the information it presents.” In other words, why let any one entity have the power to push you up or down or erase you at will. Not that I believe that is their intent – but why tempt? N’est-ce pas?
But let’s keep going on privacy – because I do believe it is a key issue.
While we have abdicated certain standards – it has been by choice. The notion that my election to tell anything, all or most about myself gives you the right to the same about me is offensive to me, and a violation of my personal space.
What troubles me – frankly – is not Big Brother – but little brother – the college roommate who hides a camera in the room and broadcasts your most personal moments; the “friend” who anonymously posts or tweets something about you that they are privy to and that you assumed was sacrosanct; the colleague who takes what you say out of context and tells the world; the acquaintance who makes fun of your clothing or accent or comment…you get the point.
This is the invasion of privacy that we need to think about – and maybe as a community help combat – think of it like the beer companies running “Don’t drink and drive” during the holidays.
We who want and need access to data in order to be helpful – and yes to increase our profits – need to be concerned about what others do with data – even though it’s not the same type and of course not used in the same way.
Seems to me that this is a basic human issue and maybe one appropriate for the season (if this is your season – if not, it’s all weather…) and that is respect.
In the end – that is what it all boils down to – N’est-ce pas? Basic respect for our fellow human – regardless of race, color, creed, religion, sex or sexual orientation, politics, taste in clothes, food, wine or movies….
So here is my question – have we advanced as a society? Are we heading in the right direction? Do we have a clue?
Here are two thoughts – you tell me…listen:
“Civilization is the progress toward a society of privacy. The savage’s whole existence is public, ruled by the laws of his tribe. Civilization is the process of setting man free from men. “
Ayn Rand
“It seems to me, Golan, that the advance of civilization is nothing but an exercise in the limiting of privacy.”
Janov Pelorat in Asimov’s Foundation’s Edge
Wish I knew…
What do you think?
Respect….
P.S. I add this – worth the read – and your thoughts:
Fast Company – See How You Have Been Tracked
We should all assume that very little is private. There was an old adage, “…write and say nothing that you would not want printed in the NY Times.”
Today, in the internet age, the power is shifting from those who hold secrets to those who create openness. That is our emerging reality. Is it a good thing? I believe it is too early to say for sure. The principle is right, but so far the execution is very much in question.
There’s a dichotomy in what people want with regards to privacy.
On one hand they want others, including corporations, to not have information on them. Even when opening a bank account, they have reservations about the details that are requested – what effect does your marital status actually have over your own personal bank account?
And on the other hand, they willingly broadcast every thought and detail of their lives, including their relationship status, to the whole world.
What people are missing is the fact that data gathered by a corporation is housed within that corporation, who will protect it. But information voluntarily broadcast over the internet is up for grabs by anyone with intent. And once it’s on the internet, it’s there forever.
On a side point, those same people who don’t want governments and corporations to know all about them are delighted to know everything about government and corporations through Wikileaks.
Now, I’m not saying that we should all have free access to everyone’s information – people’s or businesses’ – but people do need to apply a measure of controlled thinking to what they willingly broadcast and to how they approach the argument or privacy. Instead of being like a vegetarian who wears leather shoes.
During the Middle Age, the European woods were the “zones of unlaw” and the rest of the nations (cities, countryside,) was fully controlled by the army of the elites (aristocracy). What if today the digital space represents the “zone of unlaw” as it is not fully controlled either by nations or their respective elites.
The excellent English tale “Robin Hood” explained to all of us that the new order of the society may come from the wood. Once upon a time, Robin was a name that referred to the “Robe” (Elite’s dress: nobles and judges) and so intrinsically the Middle Age’s aristocracy. A noble spirit, “Robin Hood” reshaped the justice of its nation from the wood.
The wood (she-wolf) is also the place where Remus and Romulus have been born in the year 751 BC and have begun the founding of Rome, the city that inspired all the current laws of European nations and thus many other nations in the World.
Here in the Middle East, Lawrence of Arabia provoked a new order and created new nations (so new laws) from the deserts.
To quote René Descartes: « La vérité existe. On n’invente que le mensonge. »
So if today the wood is the digital space – without the full control of the elites – could Mr. Assange become our modern “Robin des Bois” reshape once again the World?
The battle between the Australian “Robin Hood” and the world Elites just started and already I have in mind the magnificent speech of Dolores Ibarruri: “¡No Pasarán!” …
Mr. Assange is going to be an interesting case in point — an up-bringing that under other circumstances one might construe as sad; a hatred for any authority…other than his own and a charge of rape — not from a big crushing super power — but from one of the more open and liberal countries on earth.
Credibility might be an issue here –
I heard a theory (with no evidence behind it) that the government might actually have supported leaking the information to Assange, if only because the information the leaks have given so far is so benign. Mostly it just makes the Americans look like savvy diplomats.
Impressive what a difference two years make in internet time, uh? At that time during your testimony you were worried about a potential Google-Yahoo deal, and today Yahoo couldn’t be less relevant for the industry (even though they still around, just like AOL or IBM will always be around – and we might see a MSFT-YHOO deal finally next year).
And these days Google is far from being the biggest evil on privacy matters; this role was stolen mostly by Facebook, and on the darker side the DSP platforms growing at a fast pace and amassing large chunks of cookie-pools and building your browsing behavior at a very granular level.
Not sure we can still say “it’s not Big Brother”.. I’d rather think that privacy is dead, and we’d better get along with it. As Joel mentioned, if you don’t want to see it printed on NYT, then shut up and don’t say it (neither write, nor talk, or browse, or click, or think).
As you say — a generation looking for jobs who discover that the shot of them drunk and naked didnt go over well with a prospective employer….
Who has the authority to make the legal call between consumer data that is private and personal? Internet giants (Facebook, Amazon, Twitter) give us outlets to speak but then use the outlets to increase corporate profits. In fact, whose side are they on? They act as Consumer Advocates to protect our personal information and use it to help us find information more efficiently and more accurately. But will they make sure Wikileaks (and potential wikleaks 2.0 sources) do not turn the game of sharing into the threat of revealing?
http://nyti.ms/g7hRN7
Thank you David for blogging about this. It’s a very important topic. I’m a believer in personal privacy and opting in and/or user control. I believe that people need to have the option to show more or less information to whomever they like and it should not be controlled by the likes of Facebook or Google, etc. Have we become mere puppets to all of these corporations? I had a friend whose credit card number was viewed by a store employee and from that the employee got her phone number and called and harassed her. She never used a credit card again. That’s pretty scary! If we give up privacy how do we have protection? I think that many people, mostly young are not taught or don’t think of the consequences regarding posting information or images and that’s something that needs to be addressed. I’m all for social media, as it’s part of my business, but as with everything, in moderation. Regarding Wikileaks, that’s on a different level. That’s not personal anymore. How is it different than the Pentagon Papers, etc? It’s all very complex. BTW- here’s a link that dovetails David’s regarding tracking of data: http://bit.ly/f197ut
Now here’s how you profit from this: http://i.imgur.com/64fLy.jpg