For nearly everyone who grew up in the new millennium, the internet and social media have been woven seamlessly into the fabric of our lives for as long as we can remember. It’s all too easy to take for granted all of the ways technology has improved our lives. But as in most things, some have benefitted from the technological revolution more than others. And the ones who’ve gained the most have done so largely in the shadows, packaging and selling their product to anyone who can pay the price. This ever-growing industry is Big Data. And all of us are the product. 

It should be common knowledge by now that nearly everything we do online can be tracked, generating valuable data points for the information dealers that can offer corporations elusive insights into what we search for, what we watch, what we buy, and when we buy it. But what many people don’t know is that this has been happening since before the era of Amazon and Google. Since the early days of computing, big business has used software to track and predict the habits of consumers.[1] And as the internet expanded into nearly every aspect of our lives, this dystopian surveillance economy expanded with it. 

In the past few years, the practices of data brokers–the professionals who collect, sort, and sell every detail they can get their hands on–have become the subject of increasing scrutiny. For the first time, people are starting to realize the extent to which their private lives have become just another commodity to be bought and sold. Adding insult to injury, we don’t see a single cent of the profits generated by this economy of data exploitation. 

Must we simply accept that we’ve made a deal with the Devil? Some say it’s already too late to change anything.[1] Should we resign ourselves to paying the price that our modern lifestyle seems to come with? In reality, that price may be too high. We must fight the erosion of our data privacy not only because privacy is fundamental to our dignity as human beings, but also because there are dire political consequences to the widespread collection and aggregation of so much information about our lives. The news that the profiling firm Cambridge Analytica used data from Facebook to help target ads for the Trump campaign leading up to the 2016 election was scandalous when it was announced, but what many don’t know is that the collection of user data by Facebook and the transfer of that data to Cambridge Analytica was an intentional act rather than the result of illicit means like hacking.[2] This fact should be very concerning, because it highlights the ease with which political actors can gather information about who is most susceptible to their propaganda. And with the increasing involvement of fake news in politics, this knowledge has the potential to help one side more than the other. Conservatives, who are more likely to share fake news articles, are also more likely to be tracked by the news websites they visit[3], something that campaign advertising firms no doubt keep in mind. 

In addition to the role rampant data collection now plays in politics, we have also seen an increasing interest in this powerful tool from law enforcement agencies. Apple has been in the news several times for its refusal to comply with FBI demands to create a “backdoor” for law enforcement agents to access the encrypted data contained on seized iPhones.[4] Although for now Apple has been able to resist this pressure from law enforcement, there are plenty of other companies with access to our data that have been all too willing to hand it over. A particularly disturbing example is the use of cell phone location data by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to track and arrest immigrants without obtaining a warrant.[5] 

 But despite what the cynics say, there is still hope that we can seize our privacy back from the corporations that have built their businesses selling our data. Several states have taken steps to enshrine data privacy in the law. Notably, the California Consumer Privacy Act, which took effect in 2020, essentially requires any company that does business in the state to be upfront with consumers about what kind of data they collect, and give them the choice to have it deleted if they want to.[6] Other states, including Washington and Utah, have begun the process of creating similar legislation.[7] 

While these state-level laws are a good first step to protecting the right to privacy, there is more we can do to curtail the corporations that profit off of our data. Federal legislation could go a long way towards forcing tech companies to be more transparent in their data collection practices, and could help consumers assert more control over their personal data. In the meantime, we can each take steps to reduce the amount of information that corporations can gather about us on the internet. Consider switching to a privacy-focused browser like Brave or Firefox, or at least set your default search engine to DuckDuckGo, which doesn’t track searches like Google does. Be mindful of what personal information you’re giving away online, and try to make yourself aware of the ways your personal data is being used, until the time comes when privacy protection laws catch up to the 21st century. 

Sources:

1. Bogost, Ian. “Welcome to the Age of Privacy Nihilism.” The Atlantic. The Atlantic Monthly Group, August 23,  2018. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/08/the-age-of-privacy-nihilism-is-here/568198/.  

2. Meyer, Robinson. “The Cambridge Analytica Scandal, in Three Paragraphs.” The Atlantic. The Atlantic Monthly Group, March 20, 2018. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/03/the-cambridge-analytica-scandal-in-three-paragraphs/556046/

3. Greenberg, Andy. “Conservative News Sites Track You Lots More Than Left-Leaning Ones.” Wired. Condé Nast, February 11, 2020. https://www.wired.com/story/right-left-news-site-ad-tracking/

4. Gordon, Marcy. “AP Explains: The Justice Department’s new quarrel with Apple”. AP News. The Associated Press, January 17, 2020.l https://apnews.com/b23decd95426b746d06e5da5fe762c7b

5. Gilad, Edelman. “Can the Government Buy Its Way Around the Fourth Amendment?” Wired. Condé Nast, February 11, 2020. https://www.wired.com/story/can-government-buy-way-around-fourth-amendment/

6. Rosenberg, Joyce M. “Calif consumer privacy law can affect businesses across the U.S.” AP News. The Associated Press, December 18, 2019.  https://apnews.com/dc3cbf8659d930899400a9a26aa65172

7. Davis, Molly. “Utah Just Became a Leader in Digital Privacy.” Wired. Condé Nast, March 22 2019. https://www.wired.com/story/utah-digital-privacy-legislation/