Since its beginning, the web has evolved drastically and so have the theories over which privacy has been perceived. Tim Berner Lee, the father of the World Wide Web (WWW), introduced it in the year 1989. He determined the three developmental ages of the Web. First is the Web 1.0, also called the Web of Documents consists of the static pages of data; second is the Web 2.0, also called the Web of People consists of the dynamic pages of data and third is the Web 3.0, also called as the Semantic Web or the Web of Data which would consists the senses, brains, and voices of information. This form of web is still in development.
However, the recent times are realising a less talked about age of the web namely the web 2.5 or the symbiotic web (or modern web for this article), introduced by Dr. Paul Bernal. In this era of the Web, the web has become a vulnerable place where the users are constantly being watched by the data storing private-government agencies. The content providers wait to extract the data from users and every response is coveted by attention-seekers and influence-peddlers. Now, this development has made the users’ data worth gold and every agency is in the quest for the same and led to the concept of big data which is a high-volume, high-velocity, and/or high-variety information assets that demand cost-effective, innovative forms of information processing that enable enhanced insight, decision making, and process automation.
Modern web categorizes the users’ choices in such a way that it serves the controller’s desires. This controlling and tailoring of users’ data is an essential characteristic of the modern form of web. The modern web is invincible, and its has unbound potentials. Foucault hypothesized a society of “universal notation,” a possible world of big data (Foucault 1968). He believed that “everything will be noted, the unconscious of man, his sexuality, his daily life, his dreams, his wishes and his impulses.” His theory of social conditioning and identity formation about power plays an important role in understanding life in the online realm. The present web has become a tool for the exchange of information which leads to subjectivation of an individual. In the present form of web, there is a common norm of sharing which is now not only a neutral exchange of information but a performative act, and this performative aspect of sharing defines the logic and experience of the act itself. The act of sharing is a performance, to an extent, an act that does something in the world, as J.L. Austin would say. The sharing of the content on the web is a self- reflexive structure. The phenomenon is same as acting on a stage with an aim to impress a certain crowd. The only difference is that, here the stage is an online realm, where all the users are the audience as well as actors. The selecting and framing of the content are the basic constructions of the present web and all the shared content will be tagged with an existential marker: Jeremy Bentham was the inspiration behind the thoughts of Michael Foucault, which made him a great proponent of the idea of “Panopticon”. Now, considering this panopticon on the virtual domain clarifies that all the content sharing on the web exposes us to a similar kind of surveillance. In this virtual panopticon, every user is a guard or a prisoner, the role shifts depending upon who shares the content and who receives it. When we share content online, we are aware that we are performing for an audience. This audience consumes our shared content and, if it resonates, amplifies it by sharing it further. The audience validates the identity we construct through our online presence.
However, the metaphor of the panopticon, representing modern surveillance, loses some relevance when considering today’s digital and data-driven visuality. Unlike the centralized surveillance of the panopticon, contemporary surveillance is less visible and more dispersed. It raises the question of whether this modern form of surveillance, which operates without our explicit awareness, normalizes behavior in the same way the panopticon was designed to do. Does the hidden nature of this surveillance system still lead to self-regulation and behavior correction?
Nowadays, in most advanced-capitalist liberal democracies, a new digital way of life dominates. It is a digitized, cosmopolitan environment captured by a productive cultural, academic, personal and political loop of text messages, emails, digital photos, scans, PDFs, Skype, Facebook, Twitter, Google, Snapchat, online downloads, and Instagram. Similarly, Netflix and Amazon recommend next movies and books. Twitter tracks our Internet activity. Facebook’s smartphone app gathers and transfers ads from smartphone apps. Instagram tests ad impressions, monitors their effectiveness, and provides marketers with input on the most effective ones. Google Street View cars record and capture usernames, passwords and personal emails on unencrypted WiFi traffic.
Within these technologies, there is a whole new surveillance technology that enables omnipresent data mining and automated profiling. It is a new world in which users open themselves to the technological capabilities of the market and the Government, as well as to their most intimate desires. This absolute self-exposure gives birth to the overarching principle of Virtual Transparency. It means that nothing is hidden and everything is transparent. It is a complex system which has elevated privacy disputes.
It became clear by the shocking revelations from Snowden on how the NSA has virtually free access to vast amount of data. The agency has access to data from Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Yahoo, YouTube, Skype, Apple and more with its PRISM program, which was launched in 2007. After a comprehensive re-investigation of the PRISM system, Bart Gellman of the Washington Post reports that this is direct access: “From their workstations anywhere in the world, government employeescleared for PRISM access may ‘task’ the system and receive results froman Internet company without further interaction with the company’sstaff.”
The modern web sets an unavoidable form of interdependence between an individual and a commercial enterprise. There is an equivalent exchange of resources, where these agencies provide free services like email, social networking, search engines, etc and the users provide them personal data. The personal data is the cost a user pays for free services and it becomes a way of generating revenue for these agencies through targeted advertising, profile building, and the direct sale of personal data amongst other things. There is a symbiosis that lies behind the exchange of data. It is essentially benign and has initiated various positive development. However, there are underlying risks which can manipulate the web and its usage into something malign by twisting the mutually beneficial symbiosis into a harmful parasitism. Today, the web poses a threat on the predicted future of web where a greater autonomy to the individual was assured.
Modern form of Web: New Flow of Information
In India, it has been contended many times that the corporations control the country. To put it more subtly the “corporations control the public imagination.”In this situation, where the data values are like gold, the corporates manipulate it easily too. The situation gets even complex when the state mutually becomes the part of this transaction and collects personal information for surveillance making a state of the virtual panopticon. For instance, the state of Andhra Pradesh, has established a Real Time Governance Centre (RTGC) under which the data from medical histories, GPS coordinates of houses, social media accounts, religion, schemes or subsidies, castes’, AADHAR numbers can be called by the requests. The data collected by the Government under the “Sunrise AP-2022” vision, an E-pragati initiative. “Collected at various points of time for subsidy delivery, this data is now used for surveillance” Noopur Raval, a PhD candidate in Informatics at the University of California, Irvine states that “Datafication is also happening through private, corporate actors who are stepping in to help the state do this.”The Data Protection Act is also drafted to serve the underlying vision of a surveillance state as it excludes the state from the legislation’s application. It states under section 17 of the Act that “The provisions of this Act shall not apply in respect of the processing of personal data— (a) by such instrumentality of the State as the Central Government may notify, in the interests of sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, maintenance of public order or preventing incitement to any cognizable offence relating to any of these, and the processing by the Central Government of any personal data that such instrumentality may furnish to it.”
The substantial impact of this symbiosis cause a fracture in the structural framework of the web which makes this territory a vulnerable place for the user. Every user apprehends it differently but with one common realization that the idea of controlling one’s own identity ends up in the hands of the content providers. The symbiosis is not only about the gathering of data but about the usage of that data without the consent (of) or knowledge (to) the user. Another impact would be the evolving burgeoning market of data which the users are unaware of and this market serves only the collecting – agencies or the data mongers who use this data to expand.
Mere existence of data poses a threat, irrespective of the fact as where and how it is stored. Hacking, inappropriate selling, hardware and software failure, theft of hardware, security failures are all the risks involved thereto. Once the data gets ‘lost’, the potential for criminal misuse is huge – already crimes like identity theft and other forms of financial fraud are a significant problem. The harvesting of new data proliferates the forms of crimes. For instance, the profiling information raises the risk of better targeted and more pernicious identity-related crimes. Besides, the mammoth data kicks the dopamine of those who have access to it to find new uses for it. These uses are not equally reasonable in character for which the data was gathered. The misuse of this collected data causes function creep in the commercial purposes more often than in security or law-enforcement. It is a phenomenon when a technology is used for a different purpose than it was originally intended for. The data is shattered and unbound in an infinite space due to which a risk is always there in its handling, so the more data are being held, the greater the risk. The introduction of the whole AADHAR platform reflected this function creep. From the starting the unique identification (UID) project was promoted as a cradle of hope for the poor which will provide them an identity. Then, it was shifted into a scheme for the de-duplication of the entire population which will provide each of them a unique identity. Again it was shifted to prevent the ‘leakages’ and getting rid of ‘ghosts’ and ‘duplicates’. Then to creating businesses for private companies and was introduced as a money bill by Section 57 of the AADHAR Act. Then for a cashless economy. Then data as property and the exploitation of the UID number for making people leave detailed digital footprints became the game. Then it became a precondition for underserved and socio-economically vulnerable people to get any manner of state assistance. Then, from denial of entitlements if a person is not enrolled or does not seed their number, it has reached a point where not having a UID number will force you to commit an offence. Why? Because you want to pay your taxes, but you cannot, because the Government will refuse to accept tax payment from you if you do not give them your UID number. And they will cancel your PAN card and then levy a penalty because you do not have a PAN card. AADHAR has tried to reason its existence in every possible way and painted a colour to its unscrupulous controversies. This is an example of just one facet of the modern web and these characteristics are common in all those technologies that build up the web, in every territory, thus ultimately leading to the question of privacy, which in India is still a complex issue though being a fundamental right.
It is important to note that in every aspect, the question and risk of privacy remains at the paramount. Because individuals risks one form of freedom i.e. privacy and autonomy in return of another freedom where they get free services without paying a penny. However, the services comes at the cost of personal information. Privacy has become the middlemen of the power-centers or data mongers who feeds themselves on the user data. However, the main issue is as why users surrender their data to these agencies willingly. One reason can be that these data mongers cares for user privacy at the forefront either to remain in power or gain public trust, as these agencies merely pretends that they are interested in respecting user privacy. There are various reasons for this deceitful behavior, but the major one is the economic benefits they will have by fooling users. The users remain in a ‘delusion of reality’ where they believe that these agencies are cooperating with them and in return, they willingly provide their data. Here, the delusion is a highly desirable strategy because it benefits them as a cooperator without costing them a single penny to become one. However, the main reason is the helplessness of the users in relation to their data due to which they are forced to share their information; this is known as the unraveling effect. Agencies left no choice to user other than coercing them to disclose their data to drive benefits out of it. Even though the user would be sharing the personal information themselves for the economic benefits but they would be in self-imposed coercion for doing so. This situation was put forefront by Scott R. Peppet in his theory of Unraveling Privacy, where he determined that the world is facing a different threat to privacy due to the shift from the Sorting economy to the Signaling economy. Both these economic theories are used to overcome the information asymmetry present in the market. The previous one i.e. the sorting or screening theory determines that an uninformed party will filter out the counterparties on the basis of observable characteristics or available information if the desired characteristics are unobservable.
While the latter one i.e. Signaling is the counterpart to Sorting. In this economy, the economic actors use the signals to differentiate themselves from the other economic actors for getting benefits. Signaling “refers to actions taken by an informed party for the sole purpose of credibly revealing his private information.”
Modern Web and The Delusion of Privacy: The Unraveling Effect
Nowadays, signalling is not a dream anymore and the cheaper technology is accessible and leads to the game rhetoric i.e. unravelling effect in which the self-interested actors (the users), for attaining the real-life economic gains, tend to disclose their personal information to the data mongers. These self-interested actors will get benefits in exchange for their data. However, privacy may unravel if someone refuses to disclose because they assumed to be hiding some negative information. They will be stigmatized and penalized which create a state where everyone has to disclose if few have the ability and incentive to disclose. This can be understood as a ‘self-imposed equilibrium’.
In the signalling economy, unravelling effect will cause a self-imposed equilibrium which can be realized nowadays more often. In this situation, the privacy proponents must either concede defeat or focus on preventing unravelling. However, the latter craves for a holistic change in the approach of determining the conception of privacy harms and practical changes in privacy reform strategies. Signalling economy is a tool in the hands of the data mongers who can extract high-quality verified data at an incomparably low cost and ease. They can fetch this data directly from each other rather than drowning in the sea of unverified, low-quality information. Thus, there is no concept of information asymmetry for the individuals, firms, and Government in signaling economy. They can have the data whenever they wish to access and the developments in information technology make information increasingly verifiable, and thus increasingly valuable as signals.
In India, the Government in the name of digitization has proposed various schemes where the citizens have to share their personal information in return of the economic benefits. The world’s largest data collection platform AADHAR has certainly increased the unraveling of privacy. The Indian Government holds the largest amount of data. The AADHAR bill was passed on March 11, 2016 which aims to target the services to the intended beneficiaries by assigning them the Unique Identity Number (UIN). The UIN allows the state to access the individual’s personal information. The Indian Social Structure where majority of the population is rural based and facing poverty at its worst, the personal information hardly matters. Moreover, AADHAR was made mandatory at its commencement, till the time the SC judgment has arrived in 2018 where AADHAR was made not mandatory anymore, the loss was already done. Majority of population has linked their AADHAR to the get the services which they otherwise could not be allowed and hence unravelling of privacy came into play. The program collected over 1.3 billion data including names, addresses, date of births, gender details, photographs, etc. Moreover, the platform retained more than 20 billion iris scans and fingerprints in its database.
Personal Prospectus
Scott R. Peppet introduced the metaphor of the “personal prospectus” (Repository) to describe the signaling economy. This repository consists of an individual’s verified personal information, compiled as they submit data for official purposes such as bank accounts, educational records, tax history, health records, and other private sources. It might also include an eBay Feedback score or a Klout score, creating a comprehensive digital resume that encompasses a person’s records, private tests, and history, all shareable with a click. The personal prospectus highlights the potential of the signaling economy, indicating a significant shift in the importance of privacy, where an individual’s data is considered gold and their information an asset. This underscores the limitations of existing privacy law and scholarship.
Information privacy scholarship has been narrow, beginning with Posner’s perspective on the topic. It has neglected the evolving concerns of time and economy and overlooked the threats of unraveling. Even when addressed, there has been little development and study on this specific issue. Scholarship has focused extensively on the risks posed by sorting individual data through mining aggregated data, such as credit histories. Consequently, sorting has been a well-studied field in privacy research.
Digital Dossier
The field of Informational Privacy scholarship is dominated by the idea put forward by Daniel Solove i.e. Digital Dossier. It determines the information that is being present in public-private domain (database) about a particular person. The concern around privacy is simple the personal information of an individual is available to others as it becomes part of digital dossier. However, the dynamics of this concern have evolved which has been posed by personal prospectus and it demands different solutions than increased control over one’s information. This implies that in a signaling economy, even when individuals have control over their personal information, this control ultimately undermines their privacy. The reason is straightforward: individuals hold the key to their data, and refusing to share this private information can result in stigmatization, leading to new forms of economic discrimination.
Multiple Faces of a User
considering how professionals are leveraging multiple personas for communication and self-promotion, it becomes clear that social media’s capacity to cultivate and manage various identities is one of the Web’s most powerful marketing tools. Changizi accurately noted that, in the past, individuals typically belonged to a single community, with only one opportunity to succeed in fields like entrepreneurship, science, and the arts. But in the age of modern web, people can adopt multiple personas and engage in various communities at once.
This shift necessitates increased information disclosure, as users are no longer merely passive visitors on the web. They now occupy multiple roles as service providers, users, and visitors. This anonymous collective benefits from the web’s marketing capabilities and treats data as a form of currency. The trend of unraveling privacy has become the new norm.
The required shift?
There has been a significant change in how consumers and websites behave over the past few years. Users have developed a heightened moral sensitivity regarding the use of their personal information by websites. They now recognize their basic right to internet privacy, which includes the respectful handling of their data. The concept of privacy as merely data control has evolved, with discussions now extending beyond the ‘control factor.’ Consequently, the social perception of personal data collection has shifted from morally neutral to morally charged.
However, this awareness may be futile because when ‘data provides a discount/value to the user,’ it poses a radical threat to privacy. Initially, some individuals will disclose information for personal gain, but as this trend continues, it becomes evident that withholding information is no longer an option, as the signaling economy stigmatizes silence. As low-cost signaling becomes more prevalent, the fundamental point is that some will want to disclose while others will not.
Eventually, everyone may find they have little choice. Initially, those with favorable private information (“top” of the pool) will disclose to gain discounts and economic benefits and to avoid the negative implications of digital dossiers. Over time, even those with unfavorable private information (“bottom” of the pool) may feel compelled to disclose to avoid the stigma of secrecy. While an individual might benefit from signaling in certain contexts, few, if any, will benefit in all contexts. As signaling becomes more widespread, disclosure could become the norm across the economy, making the act of keeping personal information private suspicious. This is the unraveling threat to privacy, leading to increased data fluidity on the internet and a vast amount of data residing in unknown territories, creating a dome of virtual transparency.
References
- Sir Tim Berners-Lee World Wide Web Foundation, https://webfoundation.org/about/sir-tim-berners-lee/ (last visited Oct 31, 2018),
- Basic Definitions: Web 1.0, Web. 2.0, Web 3.0 | Practical Ecommerce Practical Ecommerce, https://www.practicalecommerce.com/Basic-Definitions-Web-1-0-Web-2-0-Web-3-0 (last visited Oct 31, 2018)
- Web 2.0 Compact Definition: Trying Again O’Reilly Radar, http://radar.oreilly.com/2006/12/web-20-compact-definition-tryi.html (last visited Oct 31, 2018)
- Straight From the Tech Experts: What Will the Defining Feature of Web 3.0 Be? Techopedia.com, https://www.techopedia.com/straight-from-the-tech-experts-what-will-the-defining-feature-of-web-30-be/2/33540 (last visited Oct 31, 2018)
- Lecturer in Information Technology, Intellectual Property and Media Law in the UEA School of Law
- David R. Johnson and David G. Post, “Law and Borders–The Rise of Law in Cyberspace,” Stanford Law Review 48 (1996): 1367; John Perry Barlow, “Electronic Frontier: Coming into the Country,” Communications of the ACM 34 (3) (March 1991).
- P. A. Bernal, Web 2.5: The Symbiotic Web, 24 Int’l Rev. L. Computers & Tech. 25 (2010)
- https://philosophyforchange.wordpress.com/2012/06/21/foucault-and-social-media-life-in-a-virtual-panopticon/
- The Viewer Society: Michel Foucault’s `Panopticon’ Revisited, https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480697001002003
- (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jul/23/panopticon-digital-surveillance-jeremy-bentham)
- Google’s Real Secret Spy Program? Secure FTP | WIRED. https://www.wired.com/2013/06/google-uses-secure-ftp-to-feds/
- Web 3.0 envisioned by Tim Berner Lee which suggested a greater autonomy to the individual
- https://www.straight.com/life/616401/arundhati-roy-explains-how-corporations-run-india-and-why-they-want-narendra-modi-prime-minister
- https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/what-icc-rules-say-if-world-cup-knockout-matches-get-affected-rain-105152
- https://www.huffingtonpost.in/2018/07/23/how-andhra-pradesh-built-indias-first-police-state-using-aadhaar-and-a-census_a_23487838/
- https://thewire.in/government/aadhaar-function-creep-uid
- Norm Proselytizers Create a Privacy Entitlement in Cyberspace Understanding the actions of websites, then, may require determining whether they are best understood as seeking to simulate respect in order to trick users into turning over their data.
- Scott R. Peppet, Unraveling theory, This change towards a “signaling economy,” as opposed to the “sorting economy” in which we have lived since the late 1800s, poses a very different threat to privacy than the threats of data mining, aggregation, and sorting that have preoccupied the burgeoning field of informational privacy for the last decade. https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/faculty-articles/177/
- Roger Klein, Richard Spady & Andrew Weiss, Factors Affecting the Output and Quit Propensities of Production Workers, 58 REV. ECON. STUD. 929 (1991)
- N. GREGORY MANKIW, PRINCIPLES OF ECONOMICS 487 (5th ed. 2009).
- WILLIAM A. MCEACHERN, ECONOMICS 313 (5th ed. 2000).
