Can you put a price on digital privacy? Some internet providers do. Last week, news broke that AT&T and Comcast are considering new options for customers who want greater digital privacy.
By default, internet subscribers have their online habits analyzed so that they can be targeted with personalized advertising. Targeted ads are generated based on terms searched for on search engines, activity on social media, and how long the individual spends reading articles or watching videos about specific topics. While targeted ads can seem innocuous, many users complain that seeing such specific advertising can feel creepy.
New options will be given to customers who dislike having their digital privacy invaded in this way — but there will be a charge for it. Subscribers can choose to opt out of targeted advertising for a fee of $29 a month. Given current pricing for internet service, it seems unlikely that many customers will take up AT&T or Comcast on this offer.
Why should we care about this news? It demonstrates, yet again, that our privacy is not a concern to big corporations. The lack of digital privacy can lead to digital profiling. Digital profiling can be used to identity possible cybercriminals, but it can also be used for less noble purposes: assumptions will be made about individuals based on online habits.
On an article about digital profiling, a commenter named Rocky Longworth reflected: “…the privacy ship sailed years ago. However, it is not a matter of paranoia — just scan a few Facebook pages for evidence that people are not overtly concerned with privacy.” Longworth, the Chief Strategy Officer of BrandStar, goes on to discuss the dark side of digital profiling when he says, “similar to racial profiling, digital fingerprinting seems to open the door to stereotyping people through their devices in addition to their social activity, which is disconcerting at best and dangerous at worst.” Such information can be used for discriminatory purposes.
Analysts imagine a future where we are judged based on our online status. Now that it is possible to measure how influential an individual might be based on their Klout score (a measure of social influence), people can receive preferential or disadvantageous treatment in daily interactions based on online statistics. Imagine a job applicant being denied a job for having an inferior Klout score. Seems unlikely? This exact scenario has already happened.
Of course, AT&T and Comcast choosing to put a price on digital privacy is only the most recent development in this realm. When absurd legislation is put on the table — like the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) or the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA) — people rally against it. It is only through widespread, outraged protests that our opinions seem to be heard.
Corporations like AT&T and Comcast are becoming savvy; rather than backing broad, sweeping legislation, they are taking our rights away gradually. Charging customers for their digital privacy implies that, by default, our information belongs to them. The future of digital privacy is dependent on whether consumers will tolerate such policies. Do we care enough about digital privacy to make a stand against this sort of behavior from corporations?
Small steps by internet providers are masqueraded as “giving customers options”, but they are shaping the future of digital privacy by setting a precedent. While opposition to proposed legislation like SOPA and PIPA can gain strong traction, consumers should remain watchful at all times for small changes that may have a big impact. You can keep a pulse on issued related to digital privacy at watchdog sites like the Electronic Privacy Information Center and Consumer Watchdog.
———-
Bob Hand is a freelance tech blogger from Boise. He keeps a pulse on current events related to emerging technologies and internet security. You can follow or contact him on Twitter @Bob_Hand567.