One of my classes this past fall allowed students to lead weekly class discussions by selecting pertinent articles from the Chronicle of Higher Education and setting up prompts/discussion questions to jump start the class conversation. Around Thanksgiving, we read this article about whether or not it was ethical for the researchers at Harvard University to use cameras in order to track student attendance without telling the students about the study. One of the questions asked by that week's discussion leaders was whether or not we felt differently about our privacy if it was predominantly online information being tracked versus information about our physical interactions.
I was surprised to find that many of my classmates were not all that concerned by the data tracking, and seemed to even appreciate it if they benefited from it in some small financial way (such as a targeted coupon). Moreover, several classmates mentioned that since they were not doing anything illegal then they had nothing to be concerned/paranoid about. I won't quote anyone directly without their permission (although if you are a classmate who has stumbled onto this blog and would like to give me permission to republish your comment, I will do so), but below I have copied and pasted my response to the prompt. Feel free to let me know what you think, because I am very curious to get the opinions of others on this subject.
(Originally published in a Blackboard discussion thread on November 15, 2014)
"I wish that I could share my classmates' nonchalance towards data tracking, but even though I am considered a millennial I am a bit more wary of those who gather the information. Regardless of whether or not I get less annoying ads or better coupon deals, I don't believe anyone has a right to track someone unless it is for crime solving purposes. And I don't think that wanting your data protected necessarily means you have anything to hide. It is your information, and people, companies, and the government should respect that. You would not open the door to the police or door-to-door salespeople so they can rifle through your things and get a better idea of what products they should market to you. Granted, companies are going to track what sells in their stores and do marketing research but the data they gather on their sales should be stripped of your identifying information and they certainly should not sell your e-mail address! Furthermore, how do I know that companies are keeping this information safe? Look at Target and Home Depot, just to name a few companies that have been targeted by hackers for identity and credit card theft. Bottom line is that if someone has your information, someone else can most likely get it, whether that is the government or hackers which sometimes might be one in the same."
"I know this may seem paranoid, but it is only paranoia if it isn't true. Look at what whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed about the NSA and their spying practices. Some of this information has led cell phone makers to up the security and encryption on cell phones, and now the FBI is saying that could be a problem for them in solving crime. The nerve of people for expecting their privacy! Part of me feels as though law enforcement officials, particularly on the federal level, are too reliant on easy access to people's electronic data for fishing expeditions in order to make their cases. Although I do understand that there must be some give and take with the expectation of privacy and solving crime, but there also must be better oversight aimed at deterring unnecessary data tracking."
"As for the original question about whether I feel differently about online data tracking versus the tracking of physical interactions I would have to say no, because I feel that neither should be unnecessarily surveilled nor tracked without my knowledge unless I am a legitimate suspect in a crime. To me this is just a further, albeit more personal extension of the ALA's Code of Ethics' third tenet which states: "We protect each library user's right to privacy and confidentiality with respect to information sought or received and resources consulted, borrowed, acquired or transmitted." If we as librarians would consider it our duty to fight a National Security Letter (NSL) from the FBI in order to protect our patrons' rights to privacy, then to me it stands to reason that we should be as protective of our own privacy."
"This is also why I believe that there are grave potential implications to academic libraries. Universities have long been bastions of learning and innovation. How is that supposed to continue unfettered if scholars are unable to trust the institution's ability, or willingness to protect their information? Many colleges have visiting professors from around the country and abroad which is aimed at bringing the brightest scholars to their campus. If professors are concerned about the government intruding on their privacy whether because of their country of origin or area of research, and they know that the library won't or is unable to protect their privacy, then they will most likely go elsewhere. I understand that this may seem like an over exaggeration, and I suppose it is to some extent in order to make my point. However, while the misuse or unnecessary data tracking may seem to be a minor concern, over time it could easily evolve into a much scarier and serious issue for academic libraries as a whole."
