THE PRIVACY PARADOX: Seen, Heard, Acknowledged, Watched and Targeted

In our relentless pursuit of progress, connectivity, an ever-growing desire for ’15 minutes’ of fame and an unclear notion of security, we find ourselves at a crossroads. How much of our personal data, our liberal freedoms and privacy are we willing to relinquish in exchange for convenience, cash or oversight? The concept of privacy has become a paradox.

As technology evolves, more of our lives become exposed. Our movements are tracked, our words, downloads and uploads are analysed and our preferences anticipated. This raises critical questions about fundamental rights. In this era, where many aspects of our existence can be scrutinised and examined, safeguarding personal privacy should be more crucial than ever.

Yet the erosion of privacy is evident across the globe and it is escalating. Citizens have yet to truly grapple with the consequences. Critical dialogues have emerged, shedding light on the disparate impacts and ethical considerations that underpin mass data collection and surveillance states, yet they largely go unheard. “I’m doing nothing to worry about, I’m not doing anything wrong!” is a typical cry of exasperation when one challenges a choice of digital tool.

Already by 2017 in the United States, most people were unaware that during a simple drive to the supermarket they were photographed about 15 times on average. They also featured on video for roughly 90 seconds. Their texts and calls during that trip could be monitored, with all the metadata instantly relayed to databases worldwide. Not just to friends, but quite possibly to the National Security Agency (NSA) (1).

As of 2020, the UK had an estimated 5.2 million CCTV cameras: that is 1 camera for every 13 people.(2)

Techniques vary but the scale is unrelenting:

London’s facial surveillance network is among the world’s largest real-time facial recognition deployments. It raises concerns about privacy and civil liberties. China’s social credit system monitors and scores citizens based on behaviour, using facial recognition and online monitoring. In the United States, predictive policing algorithms forecast crime hotspots, simultaneously attracting criticism for exacerbating biases and targeting marginalised communities. Singapore and South Korea employ smart city initiatives using sensors and data analytics for urban management, sparking debate about state oversight. India’s Aadhaar system collects biometric data for government services, with concerns raised about data security and breaches. Russia engages in mass surveillance of internet communications, often targeting dissenters and political opposition. Meanwhile, bad actors indiscriminately scrape the entire internet for available information.

These methods, often implemented without transparency, raise serious concerns not just about the gathering of personal and biometric data but its potential misuse. Will such data be used to determine whether someone is promoting conspiracies, involved in serious or criminal activities or is simply an activist, highlighting these suppressive tactics?

Who could forget the Edward Snowden ‘dick pic’ warning: “The NSA has the greatest surveillance capabilities that we’ve ever seen in history”, Snowden said. “What they will argue is that they don’t use this for nefarious purposes against American citizens,” as he pointed out that their collection now includes every ‘dick pic’ you take. Coercion is a known tactic used when certain compromising information is held about someone. It must be assumed, even from governments.

As surveillance techniques proliferate, they already disproportionately affect communities based on skin colour, socioeconomic status and location. The implications extend beyond individual privacy to broader issues of citizenship, human rights and ethics.

Furthermore, the naivety about the use and implications of data collection persists on a mammoth scale, with many people unaware of the extent to which their information is being stored and utilised. In this landscape, certain technologies already offer no recourse for individuals seeking to reclaim their privacy or exercise a right to be forgotten, wherever applicable. In fact, the very notion of a ‘right to be forgotten’ is challenged by some technologies that perpetuate indefinite, immutable storage.

Looking forward, the rise of artificial intelligence amplifies the ability to process, monitor and detect. A recent Slate headline observed: “The Internet Enabled Mass Surveillance. A.I. Will Enable Mass Spying.”

Mitigating the consequences of a world where privacy is increasingly scarce may require collective action and robust regulation. Or is the erosion of privacy so entrenched and normalised in our ‘watched nations’ that there seems little hope for a reversal?

The challenges are daunting. Lost privacy, once gone, is not easily reclaimed. As a society, we still need to grapple with the potential benefits of eroding privacy, for example in shared health data. As we educate new generations of digital natives, it becomes even more imperative to instil an understanding that privacy is not a given, but a fundamental right worth protecting.

Standing up for privacy, not as a luxury but as a fundamental pillar of democracy and human dignity, is perhaps more important than ever. As we face the paradox of being seen, heard, acknowledged and targeted, it should challenge us to confront the true toll of laissez-faire data relinquishment on our freedoms and societal values. Take note of the erosion of our privacy before it becomes irreversible.

(1) The Erosion Of Privacy As We Know It

(2) Number of CCTV Cameras in UK reaches 5.2 Million