Introduction
Information and communication technology (ICT) refers to the act of accessing and gathering of information. The main mode of accessing data and information is internet. Internet being an open and public platform, some privacy and security concerns related to ICT exist. For example, almost everyone knows now that tracking cookies constantly collect data regarding the browsing habits of the online users and based on the information jam their inbox with spams. This tracking data is also sold to many marketing agencies which use that data to feed users with advertisements and product information. These information and spams are most of the time undesired. It is an interesting thing to ask whether the internet service providers should track almost everything we do. There are some directives trying to address the issue of privacy in this age of information and communication technology. For example, directives regarding the usage of encrypted data exchange and digital signatures are clear but the level at which the individual data should be collected is still a grey area. This essay will discuss upon different aspects of privacy of ICT users, giving an insightful glimpse into various problems and solutions as indicated by some of industry gurus. This essay will further probe at what level the personal data disclosure should be stopped and the pros and cons of that.
Privacy: Why is it important?
As indicated in the European Union report, privacy is a democratic right for all of us. What level of privacy we want should be defined by us and not by others. European Parliamentary Technology Assessment (EPTA) has classified the factors affecting privacy into five broad categories due to the advancement in ICT. Security is definitely one of the most important factors. Other areas identified are access to information, convenience, societal interaction and economic benefit (EPTA 2006). EPTA also indicated that other areas which can affect privacy are e-governance and e-health.
Joe F. Thompson in his article “Identity, privacy and Information Technology” called identity theft as the “crime of the twenty first century” (Thompson, 2012). The most important privacy concern is to protect one’s sensitive personal information. Let’s take an example. Credit history is definitely a personal information sensitive and private to a person. In the past due to the lack of data access from everywhere and localized databases, it was difficult to acquire data regarding credit scores and other private personal information. However, with the advent of ICT, now even the data of a person staying in a remote location is available everywhere. This makes the personal data vulnerable than ever before. This makes privacy even more important than before.
Australian government also came up with a similar concern around privacy in the wake of ICT. Australian government addressed the issue of privacy earlier than most of the other governments in the world. Australian government came up with an application which monitors the disclosure of personal credit score information to different agencies. This application not only provides valuable data to the government about the credit score disclosures but also prevents disclosure to cross border entities and direct marketing agencies (AIC, 2014).
J. J. Britz of the University of Pretoria defined why privacy is required in a very unique way. He says that privacy is the building block to freedom and human dignity (Britz, 2007). Respecting a person’s privacy translates into respecting a person’s right to freedom.
Dimensions of Privacy
Dimensions of Privacy are defined differently by different people. J. J. Britz defined the dimensions as private communications, privacy of the body, personal information and information about one’s possessions (Britz, 2007). For example, in this age of ICT many people get their medical reports online and also keep them in their mails or cloud storage devices. They probably do not want to disclose their medical information to all. However, any compromise of the email domain by the hackers can make his private information public. In earlier days when it was paper based medical record keeping, this was not possible until and unless there was a robbery in the hospital where the medical information was stored or the medical papers were robbed from the house. Internet and online databases have made this a much easier process. In the words of J.J. Britz, privacy is related to information and information in this world is becoming highly impersonal (Britz, 2007).
Gary Marx on the other hand came up with a different idea of privacy and information technology. He said there is no clear dimension of privacy. In fact he says that privacy dimensions change depending on the situation (Marx, 1999). For example, one may want to disclose information about his location while searching for a restaurant nearby but the same person may not be willing to disclose his location when he is on a private holiday. So technology is not the main problem according to the argument of Gary Marx. It is the usage which is causing privacy concerns (Marx, 1999). For example, camera and recording devices are used for long to record nicer moments of life but those same devices when used by investigative agencies to collect private information becomes a privacy concern. According to Gary Marx, privacy issue is a byproduct of information, communication and technological advancements. This will continue to haunt us but he argues that with the advancement of technology not only new methods come into effect raising privacy concern but also create opportunities to address them as well. The basic issue for him is not the advancement in ICT but the social condition. He argues that as a society if we can define what private domain is and what is not, then and only then privacy can be maintained. Privacy issue is a societal problem and not a technological problem.
Privacy and Changing Relationships
Privacy is often challenged by new technologies. Agre and Rotenberg detail in their essay that the relationship between privacy and technology will bring in some new culturally specific relationships which were not present in the past. In this new environment some people will do wrong and they will still feel that the new technological environment is incapable of punishing them or they have not done anything wrong (Agre and Rotenberg, 1997). Furthermore, this thing will not remain constant and continuously evolve. As privacy laws continuously evolve, so does the avenue for wrongdoing by the wrongdoers. This sense of evolving relationship between privacy and technology will create a unique cultural setup. For example, moral responsibility for data protection regulation is unclear to many. This is one area interpreted by many in many different ways. This causes confusion in terms of creating law as well as understanding the violation of privacy. In recent times due to the advent of social media, the concept of “digital persona” is becoming a part of an individual’s social image as told by Agre and Rotenberg (Agre and Rotenberg, 1997). Agre and Rotenberg say that privacy is nothing but control over that digital image. In many cases the person loses control over his projections to the world and in that process loses some privacy. He then blames the technology or the social media for that. This brings out a strange cultural relationship between a social media user and the social media (technological platform) where the person is interested in using the social media which to some extent opens up one’s personal life. On the other hand, the same person is concerned about the privacy of his identity.
Heather Ormerod, the Canadian privacy commissioner, says that the relationship between the communication and information technology and the users are continuously evolving. In the article published in Canadian data privacy website, she pointed out that even few years back more than 74% of the total communication medium users used to take basic steps to protect privacy but in the last few years the relationship evolved a lot (PCC, 2011). However, still most of the people in Canada actually access the internet and data from unsecured wi-fi networks like in airports and coffee shops. Unlike Agre and Rotenberg who argued that the concept of privacy would continuously evolve creating confusion in the mind of the users and violators of privacy, Heather said that privacy scenario with time would get better. Heather says that the definition of privacy is not changing (PCC, 2011). The way data is stored probably has changed but the information a person wants to protect remains same. So all the legislations already know what needs to be protected. The only question that remains is how to protect that information in this era of ICT.
Conclusion
Privacy has become a big concern in this age of Information technology. In fact, Joe F. Thompson said that privacy violations and identity theft would be the “crime of the twenty first century”. Governments are often cited as the main responsible parties to protect one’s privacy by identifying proper measures and implementing them. Australian and European Union have created privacy bodies and information technology to protect the personal information of people. However, as the information technology continuously evolves the law should also evolve accordingly to remain relevant.There are different dimensions of privacy. Dimensions like private communications, privacy of the body, personal information and information about one’s possessions are identified by J.J. Britz. However, Gary Marx says that there is no clear dimension of privacy. Any privacy dimension we define today may not hold true tomorrow. He also argues that technology which often helps define different dimensions of privacy is actually not detrimental to privacy. In fact technology which creates privacy concern can be equally effective in the reduction of privacy concern as well. Finally, many argue that this advancement in technology and privacy concern will create a typical cultural relationship in the society. According to Agre and Rotenberg, in this ICT era there will be new brand of privacy violators who will either think they cannot be punished or they have not done anything wrong by obtaining information. Agre and Rotenberg believe that the root of the problem is the evolving definition of privacy in this age of communication and information. However, Heather argues in a completely different line. She says that the privacy parameters are not actually changing but the way information about the privacy parameters are stored is changing. The problem lies in not identifying what needs protection but how privacy information needs to be protected.
Work Cited
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (AIC). 2014. Privacy Law Reform. Australian Government. Viewed on 14th January 2014 <http://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy/privacy-act/privacy-law-reform>
Privacy Commissioner of Canada (PCC). 2011. Communications technologies putting privacy at risk, poll finds. Viewed on 14th January 2014 <http://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy/privacy-act/privacy-law-reform>
Thompson, Joe F. 2012. Identity Privacy and Information Technology. Viewed on 14th January 2014 < http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0267.pdf>
Gross, David. 2014. Policy Advocacy. USCIB. Viewed on 14th January 2014 < http://www.uscib.org/index.asp?documentID=3624>
Britz, J. J. 2007. Technology as a threat to privacy: Ethical Challenges to the Information Profession. University of Pretoria, South Africa. Viewed on 14th January 2014 < http://web.simmons.edu/~chen/nit/NIT'96/96-025-Britz.html>
Rogerson, Simon. 1998. The Ethics of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in Business. Viewed on 14th January 2014 < http://www.ccsr.cse.dmu.ac.uk/resources/general/ethicol/Ecv8no2.html>
EPTA. 2006. ICT and Privacy in Europe. European Parliamentary Technology Assessment. Viewed on 14th January 2014 < http://www.ta-swiss.ch/?redirect=getfile.php&cmd%5Bgetfile%5D%5Buid%5D=523>
Marx, Gary T. 1999. Privacy and Technology. MIT Press. Viewed on 14th January 2014 < http://web.mit.edu/gtmarx/www/privantt.html>
Agre, Philip E and Rotenberg, Marc. 1997. Technology and Privacy: The New Landscape. MIT Press. Viewed on 14th January 2014 < http://polaris.gseis.ucla.edu/pagre/landscape.html>
ICT Control. 2014. Privacy Policy. Viewed on 14th January 2014 < http://www.ictcontrol.eu/Privacy-policy.aspx>
