Journal Article•
Privacy as contextual integrity
01 Feb 2004-Washington Law Review (University of Washington School of Law)-Vol. 79, Iss: 1, pp 119-157
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that public surveillance violates a right to privacy because it violates contextual integrity; as such, it constitutes injustice and even tyranny, and propose a new construct called contextual integrity as an alternative benchmark for privacy.
Abstract: The practices of public surveillance, which include the monitoring of individuals in public through a variety of media (e.g., video, data, online), are among the least understood and controversial challenges to privacy in an age of information technologies. The fragmentary nature of privacy policy in the United States reflects not only the oppositional pulls of diverse vested interests, but also the ambivalence of unsettled intuitions on mundane phenomena such as shopper cards, closed-circuit television, and biometrics. This Article, which extends earlier work on the problem of privacy in public, explains why some of the prominent theoretical approaches to privacy, which were developed over time to meet traditional privacy challenges, yield unsatisfactory conclusions in the case of public surveillance. It posits a new construct, “contextual integrity,” as an alternative benchmark for privacy, to capture the nature of challenges posed by information technologies. Contextual integrity ties adequate protection for privacy to norms of specific contexts, demanding that information gathering and dissemination be appropriate to that context and obey the governing norms of distribution within it. Building on the idea of “spheres of justice,” developed by political philosopher Michael Walzer, this Article argues that public surveillance violates a right to privacy because it violates contextual integrity; as such, it constitutes injustice and even tyranny.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: An interdisciplinary review of privacy-related research is provided in order to enable a more cohesive treatment and recommends that researchers be alert to an overarching macro model that is referred to as APCO (Antecedents → Privacy Concerns → Outcomes).
Abstract: To date, many important threads of information privacy research have developed, but these threads have not been woven together into a cohesive fabric. This paper provides an interdisciplinary review of privacy-related research in order to enable a more cohesive treatment. With a sample of 320 privacy articles and 128 books and book sections, we classify previous literature in two ways: (1) using an ethics-based nomenclature of normative, purely descriptive, and empirically descriptive, and (2) based on their level of analysis: individual, group, organizational, and societal.
Based upon our analyses via these two classification approaches, we identify three major areas in which previous research contributions reside: the conceptualization of information privacy, the relationship between information privacy and other constructs, and the contextual nature of these relationships.
As we consider these major areas, we draw three overarching conclusions. First, there are many theoretical developments in the body of normative and purely descriptive studies that have not been addressed in empirical research on privacy. Rigorous studies that either trace processes associated with, or test implied assertions from, these value-laden arguments could add great value. Second, some of the levels of analysis have received less attention in certain contexts than have others in the research to date. Future empirical studies-both positivist and interpretive--could profitably be targeted to these under-researched levels of analysis. Third, positivist empirical studies will add the greatest value if they focus on antecedents to privacy concerns and on actual outcomes. In that light, we recommend that researchers be alert to an overarching macro model that we term APCO (Antecedents → Privacy Concerns → Outcomes).
1,595 citations
10 Sep 2010
TL;DR: Ito et al. as discussed by the authors argue that publics can be reactors, re-makers and re-distributors, engaging in shared culture and knowledge through discourse and social exchange as well as through acts of media reception.
Abstract: Networked publics must be understood in terms of “publics,” a contested and
messy term with multiple meanings that is used across different disciplines to
signal different concepts. One approach is to construct “public” as a collection
of people who share “a common understanding of the world, a shared identity,
a claim to inclusiveness, a consensus regarding the collective interest” (Livingstone, 2005, p. 9). In this sense, a public may refer to a local collection of
people (e.g., one’s peers) or a much broader collection of people (e.g.,
members of a nation-state). Those invested in the civic functioning of publics
often concern themselves with the potential accessibility of spaces and
information to wide audiences-“the public”—and the creation of a shared
“public sphere” (Habermas, 1991). Yet, as Benedict Anderson (2006) argues,
the notion of a public is in many ways an “imagined community.” Some scholars contend that there is no single public, but many publics to which some
people are included and others excluded (Warner, 2002).
Cultural and media studies offer a different perspective on the notion of
what constitutes a public. In locating the term “public” as synonymous with
“audience,” Sonia Livingstone (2005) uses the term to refer to a group
bounded by a shared text, whether a worldview or a performance. The audience produced by media is often by its very nature a public, but not necessarily a passive one. For example, Michel de Certeau (2002) argues that
consumption and production of cultural objects are intimately connected, and
Henry Jenkins (2006) applies these ideas to the creation and dissemination of
media. Mizuko Ito extends this line of thinking to argue that “publics can bereactors, (re)makers and (re)distributors, engaging in shared culture and
knowledge through discourse and social exchange as well as through acts of
media reception” (Ito, 2008, p. 3).
It is precisely this use of public that upsets political theorists like Jurgen Habermas, who challenge the legitimacy of any depoliticized public preoccupied “with
consumption of culture” (Habermas, 1991, p. 177). Of course, not all political
scholars agree with Habermas’ objection to the cultural significance of publics.
Feminist scholar Nancy Fraser argues that publics are not only a site of discourse
and opinion but “arenas for the formation and enactment of social identities”
(Fraser, 1992), while Craig Calhoun argues that one of Habermas’ weaknesses is
his naive view that “identities and interests [are] settled within the private world
and then brought fully formed into the public sphere” (Calhoun, 1992, p. 35).
Networked publics exist against this backdrop. Mizuko Ito introduces the
notion of networked publics to “reference a linked set of social, cultural, and
technological developments that have accompanied the growing engagement
with digitally networked media” (Ito, 2008, p. 2). Ito emphasizes the networked media, but I believe we must also focus on the ways in which this
shapes publics-both in terms of space and collectives. In short, I contend that
networked publics are publics that are restructured by networked technologies; they are simultaneously a space and a collection of people.
In bringing forth the notion of networked publics, I am not seeking to
resolve the different discursive threads around the notion of publics. My
approach accepts the messiness and, instead, focuses on the ways in which networked technologies extend and complicate publics in all of their forms. What
distinguishes networked publics from other types of publics is their underlying
structure. Networked technologies reorganize how information flows and how
people interact with information and each other. In essence, the architecture of
networked publics differentiates them from more traditional notions of publics.
1,276 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that self-presentation can be split into performances and artifacts, which take place in asynchronous "exhibitions." They introduce the exhibitional approach and the curator and suggest ways in which this approach can extend present work concerning online presentation of self.
Abstract: Presentation of self (via Goffman) is becoming increasingly popular as a means for explaining differences in meaning and activity of online participation. This article argues that self-presentation can be split into performances, which take place in synchronous “situations,” and artifacts, which take place in asynchronous “exhibitions.” Goffman’s dramaturgical approach (including the notions of front and back stage) focuses on situations. Social media, on the other hand, frequently employs exhibitions, such as lists of status updates and sets of photos, alongside situational activities, such as chatting. A key difference in exhibitions is the virtual “curator” that manages and redistributes this digital content. This article introduces the exhibitional approach and the curator and suggests ways in which this approach can extend present work concerning online presentation of self. It introduces a theory of “lowest common denominator” culture employing the exhibitional approach.
971 citations
Cites background from "Privacy as contextual integrity"
...Rather, it signifies that some individuals are classified as being considered contextually appropriate for this specific information (Nissenbaum, 2004)....
[...]
TL;DR: This article analyzes how YouTube participants developed and maintained social networks by manipulating physical and interpretive access to their videos, and reveals how circulating and sharing videos reflects different social relationships among youth.
Abstract: YouTube is a public video-sharing website where people can experience varying degrees of engagement with videos, ranging from casual viewing to sharing videos in order to maintain social relationships. Based on a one-year ethnographic project, this article analyzes how YouTube participants developed and maintained social networks by manipulating physical and interpretive access to their videos. The analysis reveals how circulating and sharing videos reflects different social relationships among youth. It also identifies varying degrees of "publicness" in video sharing. Some participants exhibited "publicly private" behavior, in which video makers' identities were revealed, but content was relatively private because it was not widely accessed. In contrast, "privately public" behavior involved sharing widely accessible content with many viewers, while limiting access to detailed information about video producers' identities.
798 citations
Cites background from "Privacy as contextual integrity"
...Nissenbaum (2004) argues that some privacy is required for individuals to self-actualize....
[...]
...Nissenbaum (2004) introduces the concept of contextual integrity, which states that within a context of an interaction, people have expectations about what information is appropriate to collect and whether it should be distributed....
[...]
...It is shown that expectations about what should be shared or withheld on YouTube vary considerably according to individual needs and according to different types of social relationships....
[...]
Book•
07 Jan 2010TL;DR: In this article, a 2.5-year ethnographic study of American teenagers' engagement with social network sites and the ways in which their participation supported and complicated three practices -self-presentation, peer sociality, and negotiating adult society.
Abstract: As social network sites like MySpace and Facebook emerged, American teenagers began adopting them as spaces to mark identity and socialize with peers. Teens leveraged these sites for a wide array of everyday social practices - gossiping, flirting, joking around, sharing information, and simply hanging out. While social network sites were predominantly used by teens as a peer-based social outlet, the unchartered nature of these sites generated fear among adults. This dissertation documents my 2.5-year ethnographic study of American teens' engagement with social network sites and the ways in which their participation supported and complicated three practices - self-presentation, peer sociality, and negotiating adult society. My analysis centers on how social network sites can be understood as networked publics which are simultaneously (1) the space constructed through networked technologies and (2) the imagined community that emerges as a result of the intersection of people, technology, and practice. Networked publics support many of the same practices as unmediated publics, but their structural differences often inflect practices in unique ways. Four properties - persistence, searchability, replicability, and scalability - and three dynamics - invisible audiences, collapsed contexts, and the blurring of public and private - are examined and woven throughout the discussion. While teenagers primarily leverage social network sites to engage in common practices, the properties of these sites configured their practices and teens were forced to contend with the resultant dynamics. Often, in doing so, they reworked the technology for their purposes. As teenagers learned to navigate social network sites, they developed potent strategies for managing the complexities of and social awkwardness incurred by these sites. Their strategies reveal how new forms of social media are incorporated into everyday life, complicating some practices and reinforcing others. New technologies reshape public life, but teens' engagement also reconfigures the technology itself.
746 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: Research reveals that the reason more people have yet to shop online or even provide information to Web providers in exchange for access to information, is the fundamental lack of faith between most businesses and consumers on the Web today.
Abstract: M oving some Web consumers along to the purchase click is proving to be difficult, despite the impressive recent growth in online shopping. Consumer online shopping revenues and related corporate profits are still meager, though the industry is optimistic, thanks to bullish forecasts of cyberconsumer activity for the new millennium. In 1996, Internet shopping revenues for U.S. users, excluding cars and real estate, were estimated by Jupiter Communications , an e-commerce consulting firm in New York, at approximately $707 million but are expected to How merchants can win back lost consumer trust in the interests of e-commerce sales. reach nearly $37.5 billion by 2002 [1]. Meanwhile, the business-to-business side is taking off with more than $8 billion in revenues for 1997 and $327 billion predicted by 2002 just in the U.S., according to For-rester Research, an information consulting firm in Cambridge, Mass. [4]. On the consumer side, a variety of barriers are invoked to explain the continuing difficulties. There are, to be sure, numerous barriers. Such factors as the lack of standard technologies for secure payment, and the lack of profitable business models play important roles in the relative dearth of commercial activity by businesses and consumers on the Internet compared to what analysts expect in the near future. Granted, the commercial development of the Web is still in its infancy, so few expect these barriers to commercial development to persist. Still, commercial development of the Web faces a far more formidable barrier—consumers' fear of divulging their personal data—to its ultimate com-mercialization. The reason more people have yet to shop online or even provide information to Web providers in exchange for access to information, is the fundamental lack of faith between most businesses and consumers on the Web today. In essence, consumers simply do not trust most Web providers enough to engage in \" relationship exchanges \" involving money and personal information with them. Our research reveals that this lack of trust arises from the fact that cyberconsumers feel they lack control over the access that Web merchants have to their
2,210 citations
593 citations
Book•
25 Apr 1993
TL;DR: Information and power operating the panoptic sort corporate perspectives on the pan-optical sort relationships and expectations the social origins of views on privacy a data protection regime as discussed by the authors, and expectations of privacy.
Abstract: Information and power operating the panoptic sort corporate perspectives on the panoptic sort relationships and expectations the social origins of views on privacy a data protection regime.
556 citations
TL;DR: The argument is developed that the primary barrier to the successful commercial development of the Web is the current lack of consumer trust in this new commercial medium.
Abstract: While there is no question that the commercial development of the World Wide Web is still in its infancy and growing rapidly, this development faces a serious barrier to ultimate commercialization. In this article we develop the argument that the primary barrier to the successful commercial development of the Web is the current lack of consumer trust in this new commercial medium. This lack of trust is engendered primarily by the industry's documented failure to respond satisfactorily to mounting consumer concerns over information privacy in electronic, networked environments. We examine how such concerns are affecting the growth and development of consumer-oriented commercial activity on the World Wide Web and investigate the implications of these concerns for potential industry response. In the short run, the commercial development of the Web depends on giving consumers the opportunity to be anonymous when engaging in information exchanges and online transactions. Ultimately, however, commercial Web pro...
317 citations