Why privacy matters
When Edward Snowden exposed the “surveillance state” he hoped it would be a wake-up call. His revelations were explosive. The National Security Agency (NSA) was conducting mass surveillance of American citizens. Private communications, such as e-mail and instant messages, were harvested; conversations were recorded (even when your phone was switched off); webcams were remotely activated; telecom companies were providing office space to intelligence agents; tech companies were handing over user data; young women were being spied on.
Instead of waking up, people turned over and went back to sleep. After initial interest, the media moved on. The people who cared least were the people who you’d think would care most. Freedom-loving, anti-government conservatives shrugged it off and called Snowden a traitor.
Not everyone reacted this way. One US Senator said that no-one could now be trusted — now you-know-they-know, people would self-censor for fear of their personal lives being exposed. In the United Kingdom, as a result of Snowden’s revelations, the government changed the law — to reduce privacy so that many of the illegal activities he described would, in future, be legal.
The tech sector’s collusion with the NSA shouldn’t have been a surprise. Eric Schmidt, the CEO of Google at the time, suggested that people who cared about privacy had something to hide. He’s not the first person to think like that.
Perhaps more surprising was the way tech companies colluded with the NSA. Regular payments were made to the companies in return for their data — so regular that the payments were included in the profit and loss accounts (but obviously not called “Money from the NSA for spying on you.”).
What have you got to hide?
So, what have you got to hide? And, who has something to hide? I’ll answer the second question first. We all have something to hide. Some people more than others, but no-one’s life is so empty that they really have no secrets. Which begs the question, what secrets?
The best way to answer that question is to imagine a world of complete transparency — a world in which every thought, word and deed is visible. God help us. Fortunately for us all, that world is not (yet) possible. So let’s take a more realistic scenario. Let’s imagine that I have access to your digital data and that of your family and friends. What would I know?
I’d know more about your sexuality than you do. Your “private” (it’s not private) browsing history would tell me more about your sexual proclivities than any psychiatrist. I’d know your finances — including the secret bank account you keep for a rainy day. I’d know what you really think about your family and friends, and what they really think about you. I’d have an almost perfect insight into your private life. Spreadsheets log your finances, e-mail records your communications, mobile phones track where you go, your writing is word processed, smartwatches log your sleep, every financial transaction is stored on your banking app, your ISP knows every URL, your political views are obvious from social media.
The problem with privacy isn’t new. Perhaps the most glaring historical abuse is the public identification of individuals who have been accused of crimes before the outcome of the case is known. While some countries don’t permit that, many do, which means you can be wrongly accused of something but have your name splashed all over the newspapers before being found not guilty. Life ruined, regardless. People have been having affairs, avoiding tax, bad-mouthing family and friends, believing weird things, and generally doing things they shouldn’t, for generations. But, in the past, this information was difficult and time-consuming to get. It also didn’t scale. It’s always been possible to get some information on some people if you spent enough time and effort acquiring it. The history books are full of stories of spying. The difference today is that the digital world makes this easy — at scale.
Why does it matter?
Maybe everyone thinks you’re great, your family adores you, you’re finances are perfect, and your browsing history is spotless. Even so, would you be happy if every message, every phone call, every financial transaction, every URL, every word you write is printed in the local newspaper? Probably not.
So, yes, we all have something to hide. Most people who say that they don’t really mean that they do — but no-one is interested. It’s based on the (true) assumption that your local newspaper isn’t interested in you. But that’s not the point. What about everyone else? What about celebrities, politicians, business leaders, activists, public intellectuals and academics? Do you want them to self-censor? Do you want your local politician to keep his mouth shut because he fears his browsing history being dredged up? Do you want academics to toe-the-line because of old transgressions? Maybe you don’t care about these people. But who’s to say that it will stop with them? As it gets easier to record and store digital data, it gets easier to cast the net wider.
Privacy is a human right
Everyone has a right to a private life. That right shouldn’t end because you’re famous or choose to enter politics. Of course, if you choose to do certain jobs you should expect more scrutiny. People have a right to know who’s paying politicians. But everyone has a right to basic protections. Who knows what about us? What are they doing with the information? Who has access to this data? Why is it recorded? How long is it stored? What rights do I have? Who’s exempt from the laws that protect me? Why are they exempt?
Depending on where you live, you will have some of these rights. But do you know your rights? Do you know what your ISP can do with your data? Do you know what the newspapers can and can’t print about you? Do you know what your employer can legally monitor (short answer: everything)? The most alarming thing about the current situation is the lack of debate. The media isn’t interested and I can’t recall a political party saying much about privacy. The media’s lack of interest is understandable — the current situation suits the media. Because privacy has been conveniently conflated with “something to hide”, politicians steer clear too. Which leaves us in the current position of having few (or little known) privacy protections and no-one speaks up for privacy.
Edward Snowden is currently living in Russia and is wanted by the US Government for breaking state secrecy laws. His claims have never been disputed.
