Jordan’s dilemma: Can large parties still be intimate? Redefining public, private and the misuse of the digital person

Marion Oswald

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

4 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

In the early twentieth century, it was still possible to be relatively anonymous at a large gathering, to be visible, yet not the subject of detailed scrutiny or surveillance. A century on, the impact of digital technology has reduced our expectations of privacy, whether physical or online. This article discusses the interpretation of ‘private’ and ‘public’ in today’s technologically enabled world by reference in particular to case-law on the reasonable expectation of privacy. The article goes on to discuss the potential of technological methods for controlling, blocking and obfuscating digital information and devices as means for individuals to regain control over their privacy, ultimately concluding that these technologies, themselves alone, do not provide a long term solution to privacy harms. Finally, the article puts forward an alternative model for consideration pursuant to which certain information about individuals available to the‘masses’ digitally or on the Internet, or which can be generated from such information, should no longer be regarded as ‘public’ in the sense of there being no privacy in respect of it. Thus, the term ‘private’ when applied to the digital world must be redefined.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)6-31
JournalInformation & Communications Technology Law
Volume26
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 20 Jan 2017

Keywords

  • privacy
  • technology
  • digital
  • private
  • public
  • surveillance
  • obfuscation

Cite this

@article{66c99f356dc245d7837ec2325c067951,
title = "Jordan’s dilemma: Can large parties still be intimate? Redefining public, private and the misuse of the digital person",
abstract = "In the early twentieth century, it was still possible to be relatively anonymous at a large gathering, to be visible, yet not the subject of detailed scrutiny or surveillance. A century on, the impact of digital technology has reduced our expectations of privacy, whether physical or online. This article discusses the interpretation of ‘private’ and ‘public’ in today’s technologically enabled world by reference in particular to case-law on the reasonable expectation of privacy. The article goes on to discuss the potential of technological methods for controlling, blocking and obfuscating digital information and devices as means for individuals to regain control over their privacy, ultimately concluding that these technologies, themselves alone, do not provide a long term solution to privacy harms. Finally, the article puts forward an alternative model for consideration pursuant to which certain information about individuals available to the‘masses’ digitally or on the Internet, or which can be generated from such information, should no longer be regarded as ‘public’ in the sense of there being no privacy in respect of it. Thus, the term ‘private’ when applied to the digital world must be redefined.",
keywords = "privacy, technology, digital, private, public, surveillance, obfuscation",
author = "Marion Oswald",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "20",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
pages = "6--31",
number = "1",

}

Jordan’s dilemma: Can large parties still be intimate? Redefining public, private and the misuse of the digital person. / Oswald, Marion.

Vol. 26, No. 1, 20.01.2017, p. 6-31.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Jordan’s dilemma: Can large parties still be intimate? Redefining public, private and the misuse of the digital person

AU - Oswald, Marion

PY - 2017/1/20

Y1 - 2017/1/20

N2 - In the early twentieth century, it was still possible to be relatively anonymous at a large gathering, to be visible, yet not the subject of detailed scrutiny or surveillance. A century on, the impact of digital technology has reduced our expectations of privacy, whether physical or online. This article discusses the interpretation of ‘private’ and ‘public’ in today’s technologically enabled world by reference in particular to case-law on the reasonable expectation of privacy. The article goes on to discuss the potential of technological methods for controlling, blocking and obfuscating digital information and devices as means for individuals to regain control over their privacy, ultimately concluding that these technologies, themselves alone, do not provide a long term solution to privacy harms. Finally, the article puts forward an alternative model for consideration pursuant to which certain information about individuals available to the‘masses’ digitally or on the Internet, or which can be generated from such information, should no longer be regarded as ‘public’ in the sense of there being no privacy in respect of it. Thus, the term ‘private’ when applied to the digital world must be redefined.

AB - In the early twentieth century, it was still possible to be relatively anonymous at a large gathering, to be visible, yet not the subject of detailed scrutiny or surveillance. A century on, the impact of digital technology has reduced our expectations of privacy, whether physical or online. This article discusses the interpretation of ‘private’ and ‘public’ in today’s technologically enabled world by reference in particular to case-law on the reasonable expectation of privacy. The article goes on to discuss the potential of technological methods for controlling, blocking and obfuscating digital information and devices as means for individuals to regain control over their privacy, ultimately concluding that these technologies, themselves alone, do not provide a long term solution to privacy harms. Finally, the article puts forward an alternative model for consideration pursuant to which certain information about individuals available to the‘masses’ digitally or on the Internet, or which can be generated from such information, should no longer be regarded as ‘public’ in the sense of there being no privacy in respect of it. Thus, the term ‘private’ when applied to the digital world must be redefined.

KW - privacy

KW - technology

KW - digital

KW - private

KW - public

KW - surveillance

KW - obfuscation

M3 - Article

VL - 26

SP - 6

EP - 31

IS - 1

ER -