i like it....whatever that means: the evolving relationship between disclosure, audience, and...
TRANSCRIPT
I like it…whatever that meansThe evolving relationship between disclosure, audience, and privacy in networked spaces
Jessica VitakCollege of Information StudiesUniversity of [email protected] | Twitter: @jvitak Website: jessicavitak.com
Google processed more than
20 PETABYTES of data per day
in 2014.
(That’s 1,000,000 gigabytes forthe non math-oriented)
Source: Mashable
So why do we share so much online...
And what are the implications of these shifting norms?
SHARING BUILDS RELATIONSHIPS.
ALTRUISM IS PART OF BEING HUMAN…
Flickr: Arlington County
…AS IS NARCISSISM.
(ALTHOUGH MAYBE THAT’S NOT LIMITED TO PEOPLE)
INTERACTIONS BUILD NEW & MAINTAIN EXISTING RELATIONSHIPS.
INTERACTIONS BUILD NEW & MAINTAIN EXISTING RELATIONSHIPS.
AFFORDANCES, AFFORDANCES, AFFORANCES
Other options:• Your first pet• Paperweight• Art project• Bring down a government
General affordances of social media
VISIBILITY: making it easily to locate information
PERSISTENCE: content is visible and searchable for a period of time (aka archivability)
EDITABILITY: curate identity through careful self-presentation
ASSOCIATION: public displays of connection link people and content
BUT… affordances vary by technology also.
Affordances shape our experience. Features encourage sharing.
So why do we share so much online...
And what are the implications of these shifting norms?
Analog Footprints
(Yeah, you’re not going to be there in five minutes)
BUT IS SOMETHING LOST IN THESE INTERACTIONS?
A little
experimen
t in likes…
Low-costAccrue social capital
…SO WHAT?
The public-private fallacy in networked publics
1. We make assumptions about who can see a piece of information we share online. This is a false expectation of privacy (usually) due to limited knowledge of how the technology actually works.
2. When choosing between privacy and usability, people always choose usability.
3. You’re never really truly anonymous.
The public-private fallacy
Establishing privacy in public?
Technically possible, practically useless.
The public-private fallacy
Hiding online is even harder.
The public-private fallacy
1. People will sacrifice privacy & security for usability.
2. Companies structure their services to encourage sharing information with a wide audience.
The public-private fallacy
You’re leaving digital traces for everything you do.
Three examples: 1. The Taste, Ties & Time study2. Target Predicts Pregnancies (and
other targeted advertising)3. And of course, there’s always the
NSA…
The public-private fallacy
1990s 2015
Is privacy dead?
1997 2012 2015
Organization-Level Proactive Strategies
≈
The future remains a (somewhat) blank canvas…
Three critical areas of focus:
1) Providing education and resources on privacy management
2) Minimizing penalties for non-disclosure/non-use of technology
3) Pushing companies to be more transparent
≈
Thanks!
Jessica VitakCollege of Information StudiesUniversity of MarylandEmail: [email protected]: @jvitakWebsite: jessicavitak.com/cv