Privacy (and where yours has gone)

Never in history has personal privacy been more protected by law. Yet never in history have people sacrificed their own privacy so completely. 

If you confess a sin to your pastor or priest, that member of the clergy cannot tell anyone else that you have said—not even a police officer, or a judge and jury during a trial. Your confession remains private among yourself, your confessor, and the Lord. 

Health professionals are also required to keep your information confidential. They cannot even share your information among one another for your own good without your permission. If you are in the hospital and a family member or friend (or your pastor or priest) calls the hospital for information about you, the hospital workers cannot say anything about you—not even whether you are there. 

If you are a student, your teachers cannot discuss your academic progress without your permission. If you are under eighteen, your parents or guardians have access to that information; otherwise, even they cannot know your grades unless you allow them access. A professor, teacher, or instructor cannot even give you information about your grade by email or over the telephone because of the risk that some other person may impersonate you to get this information. 

Your financial information is similarly protected. Your bank, your lending agency, your credit card company, and anyone else involved with your money cannot discuss your finances without your permission. Even your tax returns are confidential and cannot be discussed unless you have given permission for that to happen. 

To protect all this privacy, the entities that use our information frequently inform us what they are doing with the confidential information we share with them. Medical clinics, banks, credit card companies, and the like constantly bombard us with written descriptions of what information they have and what they do with it. When we see the doctor or when we open an account or take out a loan, we sign documents about our personal information. How many of us read all those documents and remember what permission we have given these entities to share that information? How many of us are careful to restrict every bank and school and health-related facility to minimal sharing? How many of us acknowledge with our signatures that we have read the documents about privacy and approved their contents—without actually having read them or even received a copy of them? 

With all this protection, no one can stop you from sharing private information where and when you choose. You can put up a poster downtown telling anyone who reads it who you are, what your health and grades and finances are, and any other personal information you choose to share. You can write a letter to the newspaper or buy an ad and tell the newspaper’s readers anything you want to share about yourself. You can write a letter to a government worker—whether elected or appointed—and anything you say about yourself in that letter becomes part of the public record which any researcher may access. You may post information about your private life on Facebook, Twitter, WordPress, or any other social media platform, and what you have revealed about yourself is available to any person or computer in the world that has internet access. 

Even the research you conduct online is publicly available, unless you take extraordinary precautions to protect your privacy. Social media platforms and search engines and internet sites all keep track of your online activity, and the things you have done on your computer are available to government agencies, corporations, hackers, and anyone else curious about your life. Anything you tell your Facebook friends is public information. Prospective employers can read about your weekend parties. Prospective thieves can preview your vacation plans. Research an illness, and medical companies target you as a prospective consumer. Look on Google once to see if there was ever a purple Volkswagen Beetle (there was), and you will receive pop-up ads from Volkswagen for months. 

Some elements of this lack of privacy bother me less than they bother most people. If my neighbor is using the internet to learn how to make a bomb and then is using the internet to buy bomb-making supplies, I don’t mind the fact that law enforcement officers will be watching my neighbor and perhaps preventing a crime from happening, or at least shortening a string of potential crimes. For that protection from violence, I am willing to allow government agents to read about my political and religious views as I express them on Facebook or WordPress; the First Amendment protects me from any negative government reaction to my opinions. 

I am less content about my permanent record being open to private corporations whose interest in my life focuses on selling me goods and services I might or might not want. My on-line shopping and on-line research have created a public profile of my life that in some ways is frighteningly accurate and in other ways is comically distorted. Because I was curious about cerebral films starring Peter Sellers (having enjoyed Dr. Strangelove, Lolita, and Being There), I now see regular Facebook promotions for the Pink Panther movies. Similar searches for various actresses appears to have convinced some corporation that I am interested in dating Russian or Asian women.  

Ignoring advertisements for things I don’t want is easy. Sensing that news stories and other items are being sent my direction based on assumptions about my opinions bothers me more. Because I am comfortable with my own beliefs, I want and value access to a wide range of opinions and information. I prefer not to have amazon or Facebook or WordPress suggest to me what I might like because of previous online activity. I prefer not to have search engines tailor my results to choices I have made in the past. I prefer not to receive telephone calls or mail selected for me by a computer because of something I have viewed online. I prefer not to have computers monitor my thinking and try to predict my thinking, out of concern that their input today may well flavor my thinking tomorrow.

Since the 1950s (if not before), science fiction writers have warned of a future world in which machines think for people and tell people what to think. We are closer to that dystopia being reality than ever before. The machines that want to serve us—and that, along the way, may begin to control us—come not from a totalitarian government or a worldwide conspiracy, but from corporations that want our money, or at least that want to generate money by selling our information.

Can Congress or other parts of the government protect our privacy? Probably not. We tend to discard privacy for convenience far more often than legislation can prevent. The more we ask government to guard our privacy, the more likely we are to surrender that privacy to government. The more we reveal about ourselves to social media and other non-government agencies, the less privacy we keep to ourselves. Our best choice is not to legislate privacy, but to preserve privacy by our individual choices. J.

11 thoughts on “Privacy (and where yours has gone)

  1. Reblogged this on Citizen Tom and commented:
    The facebook scandal has everyone a bit concerned. I tend think the concerns somewhat exaggerated. At least, I tend to think those concerns exaggerated so long as we are not stupid enough to demand government regulation and “protection”.

    What would government regulation do? Government would not prevent the information from being collected. Think about it. Does government prevent information from being collected or find some way to give itself access?

    Here is an example. One thing news media does not mention is that facebook virtually gave the Obama campaign access to all of its information for free. Did the news media have a cow? No. They just thought the Obama campaign brilliant.

    You don’t want private corporations getting invading your privacy? Then don’t tell them anything. You want to go on the Internet and not be monitored. Then you will have to pay for the privilege. When something is “free”, then you are the product.

    Works like this. Because of advertisements, TV is “free”. Sponsors pay for programs because that allows them to advertise at you. You don’t like advertisements? Then you have to pay for what you watch.

    The Internet allows advertisers to focus their advertisements. Based upon your viewing history, they place their ads. Just the next logical step.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Great post.
    Imagine being a content writer (like me). I’ve had to research all sorts of things I have zero interest in. When a meme instructing people how to check Facebook’s ad settings circulated the other day, I looked at mine and didn’t recognize myself.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Good and timely post Salvageable. I feel as you do about companies having access to my info. It’s kind of creepy but I don’t thin it’s dangerous. I am however concerned with our on line social networks being controlled entirely by a handful of big companies who get to decide what is appropriate speech. That’s not going to end well.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Some people respond by going off the grid entirely. Others (including me) limit their social media and maintain awareness of what they share. A third option is to support new competition for the handful of big companies currently in control. I don’t think things are hopeless… not yet… far from it…. J.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. I read this as I think back on a comment made by my son yesterday.
    He’s had a money investment fund that my dad set up for him when he was just a baby.
    I was the “trustee” as he was a minor—it’s one of those funds you feed but don’t use until retirement or death or so it seems.
    With him being almost 30 we decided to switch it over to him officially, getting rid of the minor trust business.
    We had to make calls, download forms, make more calls, had to go to a bank for an offical financial officer to sign off—then they wanted more info so it was back home, more forms, more trepidation…all the while we had an infant in tow… who demanded a bottle in the bank lady’s office as she opted to make us wait and wait despite this being our hometown back and no one was currently in it…
    So my son tells me how amazing it is that we, normal tax paying, law abiding folks, have to go through fire just to move what is really ours in the first place from one place to another while his wife’s identity was stolen and we are currently jumping through a zillion hoops in order to clear her good name and credit while folks across the country run up all sorts of Iphone accounts and buying thousands of dollars of phones in her name–which the police have told is to send and sell oversees…and how easy it was to get her info as we believe it happened at the hosptial when she was there giving birth—as now the baby’s social security card has mysteriously not shown up on their doorstep as shown it should have…
    and when my son went to Social Security they could not trace where it was so they’re just issuing a new one–all the while the other is just “out there” somewhere—I just love how our nightmare screwed up system, that is getting worse by the second, as tax paying, law abiding folks like us are left to simply go mad….

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Well said, Salvageable.

    Something that really concerns me is brainwashing and of course advertisers (and politicians) have been refining techniques for years. The goal is to get you to respond in a certain way and get people to buy your product. So how far can we take this creepy form of manipulation, how much influence do we have, what can we make people unwittingly do, using technology? A few troubled souls have already been led to do foolish things, totally radicalized by social media. So where does our freewill end and the moral responsibility of our handlers begin? I really don’t know, I’m just asking questions. It’s a sci fi nightmare, but I worry that we will start building assassins on line, bank robbers, spies, terrorists, out of lemmings on the internet and the real criminals will than have blood free hands.

    Liked by 4 people

    • The criminals may seem to have blood-free hands, but they are no more guiltless than was David in the murder of Uriah. Meanwhile, the best we can do is teach our children (with good examples as well as words) how to evaluate social media and maintain our identities (and our relationship with the Lord) in the face of such attempts to twist our lives for the benefit of others. J.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s