Posted in Consent

Opinion

More Privacy Paternalism: “We Know What’s Best for You”

Note from the Editor:

Re: "The Evolving Pursuit of Privacy," by Scott Charney, included in this week's Daily Dashboard.

Scott Charney failed to mention that many of his arguments, which would result in weakening privacy protections, have already been addressed and do not enjoy widespread support. While he indicates that his suggestions will “enhance” data protection for consumers, the opposite will most likely occur. They reflect a paternalistic approach to data protection that, if implemented, will weaken rather than strengthen privacy in the 21st century. The notion that privacy can only pose a negative challenge to new technological trends reflects a dated, zero-sum perspective that has been proven wrong on countless occasions.

More from Ann Cavoukian

Privacy Engineering

Which Information Do Consumers Most Closely Guard?

We know that consumers don’t always understand how companies collect their data, and that these misconceptions can create a trust gap between retailers and shoppers.

This doesn’t mean that consumers are completely unwilling to share their data with retailers, though. Our team at Create with Context surveyed 800 consumers in the U.S., asking them which information they’d be willing to give up in exchange for 50 percent off of three different items: a gallon of milk, a large-screen television and a new car.

More from Ilana Westerman

Opinion

Old School Privacy is Dead, But Don’t Go Privacy Crazy

By Stanley W. Crosley, CIPP/US, CIPM
Image from “Redneck Crazy” video by Tyler Farr

When I have the occasion to drive the kids to school, our music selections range almost as widely as our breakfast choices—some Christian, some country and some 80s, to which I alone know the lyrics. Recently, a particularly funny, somewhat concerning country song, “Redneck Crazy” by Tyler Farr, caught my attention. The song includes the following line, “You done broke the wrong heart baby ... drove me redneck crazy.”

More from Stanley W. Crosley

Point-Counterpoint

So Glad You Didn’t Say That! A Response to Viktor Mayer-Schönberger

In response to my comments on an IAPP story, “Forget Notice and Choice, Let’s Regulate Use,” Viktor Mayer-Schönberger distances himself from views attributed to him by the IAPP, and positions taken in an earlier whitepaper.

My first thought when reading Mayer-Schönberger’s response was, “I’m so glad he didn’t mean that!” In sum, Mayer-Schönberger assures me that our views are aligned as follows: The belief that individuals have an interest in privacy protection; privacy should be anchored in the OECD Fair Information Practice Principles; the public should have control over their personal information, and privacy does not impede innovation. Allow me to assure all of you that in addition to the IAPP story, I have indeed viewed the video of Mayer-Schönberger’s Brussels keynote and have read the two papers he referenced.

More from Ann Cavoukian

Point-Counterpoint

“I Never Said That”—A Response to Cavoukian et al.

In a recent blog post, Ontario Information and Privacy Commissioner Ann Cavoukian et al. offer a response to my keynote address at the IAPP Europe Data Protection Congress in December 2013 and also announce an upcoming whitepaper.

They do so, acknowledging that neither of them had actually listened to what I said at my keynote. Hence, their blog post is based on certain assumptions of what I said. Regrettably, those assumptions are not borne out in fact.

I very much appreciate a robust debate about the future of how we best protect information privacy. It is far too important a value to not do so. But without knowing exactly what I said, the whitepaper may respond to a straw man’s argument and thus offer much reduced value. In the spirit of giving Cavoukian et al.—and the general audience—the opportunity to appreciate what I actually said, here are the facts.

Opinion

Consent and Personal Control Are Not Things of the Past

We will be releasing a white paper, early in the new year, challenging the view that consent and personal control of one’s data by data subjects is a thing of the past – it is not. In fact, in the wake of Edward Snowden’s revelations, we are witnessing the opposite: a resurgence of interest in strengthening personal privacy.

Opinion

Yes, Consent Is Dead. Further, Continuing To Give It A Central Role Is Dangerous

By Eduardo Ustaran, CIPP/E

At the just-concluded IAPP Data Protection Congress in Brussels, the audience heard a bold proposal from closing keynoter Viktor Mayer-Schönberger: “The naked truth is that informational self-determination has turned into a formality devoid of meaning and import.”

Contemporary ideas of notice and consent, he argued, are a farce.

In the moment, he was quite compelling. It is important that we as privacy professionals from time to time question the underpinnings of our training and, especially, our industry and profession.

More from Eduardo Ustaran

Opinion

The Choice-Sized Gap

By M. Jos. Capkovic, CIPP/US

As Privacy Professionals, when we read about petabyte ingesting big data tools and some of the thorny applications … the analysis begins. We identify potential issues, weigh risks, and ruminate over solutions. But upon surveying the technological landscape, it’s not all risk and woe. In fact, some emerging technological trends are rooted in themes we’re quite familiar with. Among them—Choice: “the ability to specify whether personal information will be collected and/or how it will be used or disclosed.”

Choice is no longer just an implement in our policy and privacy-by-design toolboxes. Several tech innovators have identified a choice-sized-gap in the market, and they’re ready to meet the demand.

Posted in Consent
More from M. Jos. Capkovic