This is from a piece I wrote long ago for a web site in England.
Someone once said “There are two sides to every issue”, or “Every coin has two sides”, or something like that. The point being that Right and Wrong, Good and Evil, Truth and Falsehood are more a mater of prospective than of reality and are RELATIVE to which side you happen to be on at the time.
Since there are two sides to everything, there has to be another side to the privacy issue, right? And just what is privacy anyway? Well, obviously, privacy has to do with NOT letting others “know” something about you. And why would that mater? The laws protecting “privacy” issues leave a lot to be desired.
The issue of privacy is really an issue of secrecy. We want our privacy because we have secrets we don’t want others (usually strangers, but not always) to know. There are lots of these secrets; how old we are (especially if we’re women or under age 21), how much we weigh, whether or not we dye our hair, and other such “personal” things about ourselves. The more significant “Privacy” issues are the secrets about such things as how much income we have, have we ever been arrested, do we pay our debts on time, etc. I guess we could call these “Public” secrets since in reality we share this information with others, usually strangers, and we must trust them to keep our secrets. That’s where the privacy issue becomes a heated topic. There is a growing outcry against the lack of care these “Strangers” exercise in keeping our secrets.
Ok, so why the need for all the secrets? Why do we want to keep certain information about ourselves from others? If you think about it, it must be fear. Fear that someone will use the information in some way that will be detrimental to us either physically, financially, emotionally or otherwise. Based upon the experiences virtually everyone in this technological culture has had, our fears seem to be justified.
But what’s the other side of the issue? (Remember? Everything has two sides to it.) Lets imagine a world in which there was no privacy. (OK, I mean even less privacy than we have today, small as that may be.) What would that world be like?
For such a world to exist, there would have to be no secrets. This doesn’t mean that everyone would make a point of wear a sign on their back proclaiming to the world the amount of their annual income. It means that no one would care if others knew these things. Since the reason for the secrets is fear, not caring what others know about us would require that the fear be gone. With out the fear, there would be no need for the secrets, and so no concern about privacy. Can you imagine a world without fear? Neither can I. But I can imagine a world with less fear. If we take an honest look at our fears, (those that lead us to want to keep secrets about ourselves), we may find that many, if not most of these “Privacy” needs are unfounded.
The growing conflict in society over the issue of privacy results from the failure of the “Strangers” who know our secrets, to keep those secrets. Our secrets have become a commodity that is traded in the global market place. Our secrets are just another part of the mass of information that makes up this new Information Age. Those involved in this trade may share the general concern over the loss of privacy on a personal bases, but on a professional bases they have no trouble justifying the trade in secrets. With out this information, how could banks know who to make loans to? How could law enforcement agencies know who to watch as potential criminals? How could advertisers know what groups to target with their ads? And with out these things, how long do you think this complex technical society could survive. When we hear that the economy runs on information It’s not just words. Information, (and that includes the “Private” information about you and me and everyone else), is THE commodity of greatest value and highest demand. So there IS another side to the issue of privacy. Refusing to admit the existence of and ignoring the other side of any issue, only heightens the conflict and makes finding a compromise impossible.
Social conflicts are like all other conflicts: they are self sustaining. The longer they go on the less connection they have with reality and the more rigid the antagonists become in their stands. What is needed in this conflict is for all of us, individually and collectively as societies and governments, to take an unbiased look at the “Fears” which underlie these privacy needs we have become so adamant about and see if the fears are justified. We can not live fulfilling lives if we live in fear. Unless the fears are truly significant, have more than just a “Possibility” of occurring, AND pose a real threat to our well-being, we really should give them up. Giving up the fears removes the need for secrecy and in this case, eliminates the bases for “Privacy.”
It comes down to this: Many if not most of the privacy needs we thank we have do not exist. For instance, do we really need to make knowledge about our incomes an issue of privacy? What real danger is there to us if this information becomes public knowledge? Any one who COULD use this information to harm us, (bankers, credit card issuers, mortgage brokers) gets it, and usually from ourselves. So why the fear? Why the need for “Privacy”?
I could raise questions about many more of our “Privacy” concerns, but this piece has to end somewhere, and this is that place. Let me know your opinions, and remember, I’m just Thinking OutLoud.
CopyRight © 2002, Russ Perry. All rights reserved.