Talking about the ethics of social media companies controlling our data made me think of an episode of Hasan Minhaj’s “Patriot Act” on Netflix. Minhaj discussed these same topics that were brought up in discussion on Monday, including the seeming cluelessness of lawmakers as to the basics of technology, as well the rich collection of data companies have built up. His main conclusion of the episode is that regulations of these companies need to change to protect our data and treat these companies as what they really are: glorified ad agencies.
The discussion also made me reflect on the difficulties or protecting our information absent necessary legislation. Because so much of the modern life relies on the internet, it is almost impossible to go completely off the grid unless you have already lived as a hermit, or you are Ron Swanson from “Parks and Recreation.” I am extremely troubled by this. Technology is a basic fact of life at this point; it is unsettling that companies are able to have an extremely detailed record of our locations, store every single one of our internet searches, and keep track of what we interact with on social media, all in the service of creating a detailed profile to sell us more. This is made worse by the potentiality that law enforcement could possibly gain access to all of this data in the future in a potentially incriminating way.
As Minhaj suggested in his show, the best possible method forward is changing the way companies interact with our data, and, as mentioned at the end of class, convincing legislators requires organization. I do not have the technical knowledge to propose nuanced solutions to these problems, but in the meantime, I will try to remain extremely conscious of the way I use my devices and these platforms.
I have also been thinking about my use of social media, particularly Facebook, and how, despite the knowledge I have of the company, I continue to use the platform on a near-daily basis. Like you say, it is very difficult for us to go “off the grid.” Especially since beginning college, Facebook controls large parts of my social life. It’s how I find out what Harris is this weekend and if my friends are having birthday parties. I know I could made do without Facebook, but it would probably necessitate asking someone else to check Facebook for me. Platforms of this type are deeply engrained in our social organization.
Another related note: I have worked on a couple of political campaigns, and seen the reliance on Facebook for communication in the field of political organizing. On one hand, it is a practical way to reach many people without needing too much personal information. It allows people to share with others and is a relatively easy and efficient way to disseminate information. However, Facebook potentially has enormous access to information about political networks from this type of organizing. I don’t think using Facebook in this way is inherently good or bad, but there are many aspects to carefully consider.
Georgia, your comments regarding Facebook and other social media is really interesting to me, as I have never had Facebook; this is mostly because I am bad at communication and don’t want to introduce more things I have to check, and by the time I thought that I should make an account, the Cambridge Analytics scandal had just come to light, so I figured it just wasn’t worth it. I have come to find out, however, that whether or not I have a Facebook account doesn’t really make a huge difference on my privacy. While I have noticed that sometimes it takes me longer to find out about on-campus events and learn about the latest Grinnell Thumbs Down drama, I don’t find myself ever feeling like I am missing out. This may be different, however, at a larger university where there are so many things going on and I can’t get the general run-down from friends or posters. A lot of jobs also prefer if people do have social media experience.
Despite this, I know that my information is still out there and all of my Amazon purchases, internet searches, and who I follow and like on Instagram are being analyzed to determine what ads to show me. I believe that, as someone mentioned in class, fake Facebook accounts can be made for people even if they aren’t signed up for one. As Charles said, technology is a “fact of life” that we need to accept; in order to create a safer environment, protection of privacy needs to be prioritized, as a complete rejection of the internet is just not an option for many, especially regarding the job world and communication.
Charles, I think you’ve touched on a number of the important points, there is a lot to work with here. Firstly, I think that the issue of private personal data and information security had a lot of traction during the Cambridge Analytica scandal and has unfortunately been pushed to the wayside.
On the one hand it does seem that the problem of data security is inescapable. Unless we all revert to paying only with cash and wiping all our social media accounts, companies will always be able to track our personal data and purchases. In some sense this seems to me to represent a compression or perhaps eclipse of the private and public spheres. What is the cost of having a light shone on all aspects of our identities? We might think of Princess DIana or other super celebrities. Are we potentially losing the ability to have private lives at all and what are the costs for our well being, psyche, mental health?
Secondly, if big data is being used in insidious ways to influence voters what should the average person be doing about this? It seems like the answer we all come to is “legislation” to limit corporate power, but I haven’t heard much on this front in quite some time. Maybe it will take a second data breach catastrophe to spur us into action.