As web technologies progress and as we, as a society, delve deeper into the possibilities presented by digital communication, it is by default that concerns regarding personal privacy and disclosure become more and more urgent.
Delete: The Virtue of Forgetting in a Digital Age, a book by Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, addresses these issues in an interesting way. According to Mayer-Schönberger, whereas in the past it was more costly to remember things (such as spending money on paper and ink or painstakingly documenting things over a number of years) it has now become such that forgetting is “brutally expensive”. Keeping records has become so easy and virtually automatic for most that it is only due to costly technological problems that we don’t record things; for example, trying to retrieve documents from a broken hard drive or pictures from a damaged digital camera.
Mayer-Schönberger believes whereas forgetting came easily in the past, society has now “begun to unlearn forgetting” to the point where we are trying to remember everything and Mayer-Schönberger believes this is causing huge problems regarding personal privacy in the world.
However, according to Adam Keiper (editor of The New Atlantis), the examples Mayer-Schonberger uses in his books to further his point do not soundly support his argument.
One example Mayer-Schönberger uses is of a psychotherapist who has been denied entry into the U.S. since 2006 because of an explicit personal account of his use of drugs in the 1960s. According to Keiper this does not support Mayer-Schonberger’s argument that digital memory and the need to remember everything is detrimental to society. Keiper says the situation with the psychotherapist was the psychotherapists own nostalgia that led to his being denied entry into the U.S. If he hadn’t been so public about his drug-use he wouldn’t have had a problem with U.S. border security.
In a second example, a teacher-in-training is denied certification because of a suggestive photo on her MySpace page. Keiper says that the woman was not denied certification because of one photo that suggested she was drunk, but rather that there were “several problems that called into question her competence and performance”. Keiper also argues that this is not a case of “remembering too well” but a case of the blurring of lines between public and private lives in the online world.
Toby Shuster from takepart.com agrees to some degree with Keiper saying digital memory is not to blame for the unforgiving lack of forgetfulness in society. Shuster believes it is a case of people lacking the proper online etiquette when it comes to making use of privacy settings and practicing self-censorship.
Shuster says Mayer-Schönberger’s argument is more of a case of “a Harvard academic, shaking his fist in a ‘kids these days, with their digital cameras and unlimited storage!’ fashion.”
I tend to agree with Shuster. Although I understand the extreme concerns lack of privacy in the online realm presents, I believe Mayer-Schönberger’s method of addressing the problem is no more than the fear-mongering tactics of a man who is afraid of change.
Society, for as long as it has existed, has had times of ups and downs where there have been individuals scoffing at progression and radical changes, claiming that they will cause the downfall of society as we know it; and this is what, in my humble opinion, Mayer-Schönberger is doing.
Yes, a man being denied entry into the U.S. because of drug usage 40 years previously is an unfortunate thing. Yes, missing out on a job opportunity because of something you posted on Facebook or Twitter or MySpace on whim, but that does not speak to your character as a person or employee, is ridiculous. But this is not a problem created by the Digital Age and the causal outcome of everything being recorded and retained on the Internet. This is ultimately a human problem. Having access to archival information, employers, governments, organizations and people in general are using this information in a way that, to me, is the cause of the problem. They are abusing the freedom achieved by having access this kind of information and using it against others without compassionate regard for the individuals in question. They are judging too harshly because of one image or one sentence or one recollection from decades ago. And this is where I believe the problem lies.
If we are to embrace the change our society is undergoing, if we are to adapt in a way that avoids crisis and fear-mongering, we must, as a society, be more respectful of the freedoms we have gained and as a result have a little more humility, tolerance and good judgment when we access this information. As the age-old saying goes: “Don’t judge a book by it’s cover.” Unfortunately, this is exactly what we are doing by taking things on social networking sites at face value. It must stop, one way or another in order for this change to be one that allows our society to progress and eventually thrive online.
If anyone has any specific suggestions on how to achieve this, I would like to hear your opinion… leave a comment!
No comments:
Post a Comment