Christian Heller: Post-Privacy

Lift 10 Talk

Part of the Session The redefinition of Privacy

christianheller's picture

Christian Heller

Plomlompom, Germany

The dissolution of privacy in the digital age shatters personal and social securities. That's not necessarily a bad thing.

Privacy as we understand it is a recent historical development. Its role in personal freedom and social progress has been praised as well as questioned. Privacy enables and disables. It can protect us from undue social pressure; it can serve as a space of higher personal freedom than we would find in the public. It can also isolate and imprison us. Privacy can be akin to forcing into shame and secrecy that which society does not approve of or does not want to be known.

As we externalize our social and personal lives into Google, Facebook and Twitter, privacy seems to fade away. There are warnings that this will lead us into victimization by surveillance states, corporations, employers and our intolerant neighborhood. But these very same institutions can just as well be put under pressure by a shattering of privacy. Instead of seeing the current privacy earthquake just as a danger to be prohibited, we should open our eyes to its emancipatory potentials: towards creating a "Transparent Society" (David Brin), towards making our world more tolerant by exposing it to that which previously was forced into secrecy (as the Gay Pride movement did through public outing) and towards questioning our values of shame, biographical guilt and public adequacy that privacy was constructed to protect us from.


Commentaires

We, the people, have been given tools to voluntarily surrender privacy. The current laws seem to focus on ensuring that when we do so, it can be proved that we did so voluntarily and with sufficient knowledge of what we are doing.

Doesn't a transparent society requires either involuntary openness, or universal acceptance? For example, a technological "breakthrough" that allowed anybody to view, hear, or otherwise observe anybody at any time, could lead to involuntary openness.


Post privacy is nothing but a short circuit between individual and society. You may hide this distinction with the word "we" but that doesn't change the problem.
Gay pride and outing might be a good political, social and personal strategy for the people it concernes. But the wisdom of this strategy can not be directly translated to society on the whole.

A society with no privacy would be horror, it's as simple as that.
If you're a political person, ask yourself if you want to take real responsibility for strategies that work for everyone.


Remarques

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Syndicate content