March 1, 1999
The online privacy vs. responsibility debate
By Bob O'Donnell
Over time, it has occurred to me that the phenomenon of the Internet is as much a
social revolution as it is an information revolution. It's changing not only how we find
and use information, but also how it's valued, sold, understood, and relayed within our
society.
Along with these revolutionary developments have come redefined rules that seem to be
changing the way people think and act -- and not always for the better. Old social norms
and customs, as well as logical thinking in some cases, are being tossed out in the wild
and woolly world of the Internet, and they're being replaced either by new standards or
none at all.
You can see this happening on many levels: Internet stock valuations, for example,
completely defy rational logic. On the one hand, this is great for many people and
companies enjoying the financial ride, but you have to wonder when it's all going to end.
The most obvious collision of these principles, however, is in the oft-debated but
still little-understood area of personal privacy on the Internet. While privacy concerns
transcend the Internet, those who harp on the Internet version of the problem blow it as
out of proportion as Internet company values.
Part of the problem is figuring out what privacy on the Internet really is and really
means. Many people seem to think that privacy means doing whatever you want to do and
having the right to keep that information from anyone. I don't understand this kind of
thinking, however, because we certainly can't hide all the places we go and things we do
in the real world, so why should we expect that online? Does the mere act of going online
give us the right to do whatever we want? Where does privacy end and responsibility begin?
If I choose to visit a pornographic site, for example, then I need to be able to live
with the fact that others may find out I did. It boils down to believing we have to be
willing to take responsibility for our actions, regardless of whether we're in the real or
online world. Many online privacy zealots, however, seem to think that complete anonymity
-- and the freedom from responsibility that it brings -- is the correct solution.
The other part of the dilemma is coming to terms with the intrusions into our privacy
that technologies other than the Internet have enabled. For example, how many people who
are up in arms about online privacy use their grocery store club card to buy groceries?
While the cards provide the convenience of instant savings, they also allow the company to
track all the food and sundries I buy, which seems a lot more personal than anything that
could be gleaned from my online usage patterns.
Similarly, high-volume phone dialers and direct marketing services who interrupt my
family's dinner are a lot more annoying than any spam I receive from someone who's got a
bot that scoops up any e-mail address it can find.
And taking these arguments to their logical conclusion, even if some company does
collect some information about me, so what? I don't consider myself so self-important to
believe that someone's going to bother taking all the effort it would entail to piece all
this together. Sure some data could probably be found out somewhat easily, but not all of
it. And even if it could, I come back to the question of so what? People are going to send
me unsolicited e-mails and phone me with unsolicited phone calls no matter what, so if
anything, I'd like to influence the e-mails and calls I receive to being about subjects in
which I'm interested.
In an age when so much information, both public and private, is so readily accessible,
it seems logical to be concerned with privacy, particularly our privacy online. But at the
same time, trying to relieve individuals of their personal responsibility is a misguided
effort, at best.
©
Copyright 1999, by InfoWorld Publishing Corp., a
subsidiary of IDG Communications, Inc. Reprinted from InfoWorld,
155 Bovet Road, San Mateo, CA 94402. Further reproduction is prohibited.
