Privacy Myths
Every day, it seems that we are assaulted by a new privacy issue – each more sensational than the last. The media appear to have determined that few things are as attention grabbing as a headline describing a new privacy breach or state-sponsored surveillance. Worse, however, is the opportunity these provide for, presumably, well-meaning individuals to speculate on the declining state of privacy in today’s society. They advance myths, which unless refuted, are destined to become prophecy.
As privacy professionals, we are all committed to building and preserving a society where personal information is both respected and protected. Privacy by Design, of course, is born of the belief that privacy is a cornerstone on which our essential freedoms rest. If we lose our privacy, there will shortly be little to distinguish our nations from totalitarian regimes. As Benjamin Franklin said, “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
The opinions expressed by privacy nay-sayers align with three broad, occasionally overlapping, myths.
Myth 1:"Privacy is dead."
Myth 2:"No one cares about privacy anymore."
Myth 3:"Enhanced security means diminished privacy."
Collected below, for your consideration, are several examples of media reports advancing these myths and brief rebuttals.
Ultimately, the best rebuttal is an active and well-informed privacy community – one advocating the Principles of Privacy by Design.
Please help to advance the cause of privacy. Whenever you encounter negative assertions regarding privacy in the media, reach out to the author and challenge their premises. Introduce them to Privacy by Design and this website. Also, please remember to applaud those with a positive message. Share your experiences with us. Using the button below, identify the claims made in your local media. Reach out to us if you believe we might be able to help.
Myth 1: Privacy is dead.
A wealth of information exists about all of us. New technologies have made it increasingly simple for organizations to collect, analyze, share and search for even the most sensitive personal information. It’s too late to reverse the trend, so we should all just get over it.
| • |
"Your Data for Sale." Time Magazine, March 21, 2011. |
| • |
"You have zero privacy anyway. Get over it." Scott McNealy, CEO Sun Microsystems. Wired, January 26, 1999. |
| • |
"Wither Privacy – Expecting privacy in an online world is silly but that doesn’t mean you have to be reckless." Lawrence Cummer. Backbone Magazine, February 25, 2011. |
| • |
"We have to get over, at some point, the idea that we have privacy. We don’t," said Adele Howe, computer science professor at Colorado State University and executive council member of the Association for Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. "We have to redefine what privacy means." Found in article, "Can you know too much about your customers?" The Globe and Mail, June 8, 2011. |
Counterpoint: Recognizing that, all things being equal, people will choose to deal with organizations which demonstrate an ability to protect their information, enlightened organizations will respond with privacy protective offerings and ways of doing business. In fact, it’s not too hard to imagine that, far from being dead, privacy may become an element in each company’s competitive arsenal.
» Return to PRIVACY MYTHS
Myth 2: No one cares about privacy anymore.
Personal information is the substance that makes up our modern identity. Emerging technologies, even as they collect more information about us are also giving us access to extraordinary new services, conveniences and benefits – not the least of which is the ability to maintain a broad circle of relationships through the latest social media tools. Human beings are social animals and the need to connect is part of the human condition.
| • |
Privacy is still a social norm. The Globe and Mail, March 12, 2010. |
| • |
"Now we find ourselves in a new world at the mercy of two amoral forces. The first is technology, advancing remorselessly as some invading army. The second is human nature: if a thing can be done, rest assured it eventually will. So eventually, yes, you will be able to snap that stranger’s picture and know her name and address." Found in article, There’s no app for that. STLToday, April 10, 2011. |
| • |
Web Privacy is Obsolete! So Now What? Acknowledging this all-too-popular refrain, this blog post, in fact, argues that individual privacy is a critical consideration on the Internet. The author proposes a scheme to automate and simplify communication of individual privacy preferences to sites which users visit. Lauren Weinstein’s Blog, June 11, 2011. |
| • |
Privacy, schmivacy Go ahead & track me. The Washington Post, June 17, 2011. |
Counterpoint: Privacy is also an essential element of the human condition. Our need to preserve private spaces in our lives, to permit reflection, and enjoy moments of solitude, is as relevant now as it has ever been. Indeed, it is perhaps more relevant, and increasingly necessary, now that our lives are so networked, inter-connected, and constantly “plugged in.” A recent study in the US bears this out. Surveying a broad range of adults, the authors confirmed that a majority were more concerned about privacy issues on the internet now than they were five years ago. As well, an overwhelming majority believed that there should be a law requiring sites to delete all stored information about individuals.
» Return to PRIVACY MYTHS
Myth 3: Enhanced security means diminished privacy
The privacy debate has been held captive for too long by the win/lose, zero-sum paradigm which argues that there is a balance between security (or performance, functionality or other business objective) and privacy. In other words, to have more of one, you must necessarily give up some of the other.
Counterpoint: Privacy by Design advances a "positive-sum" approach to privacy. By following the 7 Principles of PbD, one is able to conceive of achieving goals beyond privacy, while also achieving privacy. PbD recognizes the legitimate goals of other stakeholders within the organization in a doubly-enabling, positive-sum manner rather than the "either/or," zero-sum model. The "versus" in the equation is replaced with an "and."
» Return to PRIVACY MYTHS
![[Image: Ann Cavoukian, Ph.D.]](http://privacybydesign.ca/content/themes/ipc/images/commissioner.png "Ann Cavoukian, Ph.D.")