Navigating the Dataverse: Privacy, Technology ... - The ICHRP

process” to empirical research into specific technological interactions. 199 Privacy in
these contexts is “the continual management of boundaries between different spheres
of action and degrees of disclosure within those boundaries”. 200
When Altman was writing in the 1970s, “privacy management” was largely accomplished
by making use of “features of the spatial world and the built environment, whether that
be the inaudibility of conversation at a distance or our inability to see through closed
doors [and] behavioural norms around physical touch, eye contact, maintenance of
interpersonal space, and so on”. 201
The dataverse has profoundly altered the context, leading to what has been termed a
“steady erosion of clearly situated action”. 202 As Palen and Dourish explain:
In virtual settings created by information technologies, audiences are no
longer circumscribed by physical space; they can be large, unknown
and distant. Additionally, the recordability and subsequent persistence
of information, especially that which was once ephemeral, means that
audiences can exist not only in the present, but in the future as well.
Furthermore, information technology can create intersections of multiple
physical and virtual spaces, each with potentially differing behavioural
requirements. Finally in such settings our existence is understood through
representations of the information we contribute explicitly and implicitly,
within and without our direct control. 203
Palen and Dourish speak of three boundaries where the “erosion of clearly situated
action” takes place: disclosure, identity and time.
With regard to disclosure (the boundary between privacy and “publicity”), choosing to
disclose information serves to create a public profile by limiting as well as increasing
accessibility. This is clearly so in the case of personal websites, for example, that
channel seekers towards certain information and pre-empt the need for certain kinds
of inquiry. In our interactions in the dataverse we continually disclose information about
ourselves (through our purchases, searches, cookies, and so on) without necessarily
being cognisant of the narrative about us that is thereby generated.
Needless to say, the same is true of disclosures that are less voluntary in nature, for
example CCTV or public transport registries, like the London Oyster card, that tracks
movements in the London Underground, or car registration number (licence plate)
identification on toll roads. (These are examples of what we have been calling a “datatrail”.)
To be more exact, individuals are aware that a narrative is being created about
their selves, but (in most cases) have little control over, or understanding of, its elements
and arc, if they care. 204
199 Palen and Dourish (2003), 1. “As a dialectic process, privacy regulation is conditioned by our own
expectations and experiences, and by those of others with whom we interact. As a dynamic process,
privacy is understood to be under continuous negotiation and management, with the boundary that
distinguishes privacy and publicity refined according to circumstance.” [Italics in the original.] They
examine the mobile phone, instant messaging, shared calendars, and the family intercom.
200 Palen and Dourish (2003), 3.
201 Palen and Dourish (2003), 2.
202 Ibid citing Grudin.
203 Ibid., 2.
204 Ibid., 3–4.
Navigating the Dataverse: Privacy, Technology, Human Rights 63