• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Crushing Krisis

The Newest Oldest Blog In New Zealand

  • Archive
  • DC Guides
    • DC New 52
    • DC Events
    • DC Rebirth
    • Batman Guide
  • Marvel Guides
    • Omnibus & Oversize Hardcover DB
    • Marvel Events
  • Star Wars Guide
    • Expanded Universe Comics (2015 – present)
    • Legends Comics (1977 – 2014)
  • Valiant Guides
  • Contact!
You are here: Home / Personal / off-topics / events / 140conf / The Future of Privacy @ #140conf: Day 2, pt. 6

The Future of Privacy @ #140conf: Day 2, pt. 6

April 21, 2010 by krisis

This talk goes on my highlights list – amazing content that all social media users should consider.

Privacy, Secrecy, Publicy – Stowe Boyd, Analyst, Advisor, and Futurist (@stoweboyd)

“We have secrecy for secret, privacy for private” but no word for things that are made (or made to remain) public.”

Every paragraph of this talk has a notable quotable. I encourage you to read it and consider what it means to you. It was easy to summarize rather than transcribe, because it was organized very well – the words are mine, but the content entirely belongs to Stowe.

Stowe begins:

They’re rolling out the Minority Report billboards in Japan that know what you might want to buy. Some people polled thought it was “creepy.” That’s a word that’s frequently used in conjunction with this technology.

“Everyone has three lives: a public life, a private life, and a secret life.” – Gabriel Maria Marquez

“We have secrecy for secret, privacy for private” but no word for things that are make (or made to remain) public. The history of mass communication doesn’t have a paradigm for people eagerly sharing personal information publicly – it was previously a potential embarrassment! Narcissistic. Arrogant.

The difference is that now “publicy” is just hanging out. What’s more creepy – just hanging out and sharing what you did with friends (via social media), or sitting alone in silence watching your television?

Part of the issue is that privacy was typically defined by space – “the notion of body modesty is different in different parts of the world” (i.e., string bikinis v. yarmulke vs. burquas). At least in America, we also have regulations to expose your identity (e.g., illegal to wear a mask in Virginia), while also protecting your privacy (e.g., from strip searches).

But online we don’t share space. “We use that metaphor a lot, but it’s not a good metaphor.” In the real world you can’t conceal your identity from a passerby unless you very actively OPT OUT – cover your face, duck behind someone else. Online, concealment is the norm, and publicy is OPT IN. Thus, in using the social web, we have “a bias toward publicy.”

Now online tools are exposing not only intellectual information publicy, but also information about our physical selves – appearances, products we consume, and locations. And, it’s that commensurate exposure of our physical space that gives us the perception of intrusion – we’re opting in, and we’re discussing things easily observed in person, but still we think it’s invasive! Why? Because there is no way to define the width or breadth of that shared space.

Part of how to manage this is the compartmentalization of identity – it’s okay to divide your personality (as opposed to an “integrated, monolithic” character of you that is the same in all environments). But, don’t we compartmentalize in life, too? Bilinguals code-switch depending on their environment. When at work we speak in more jargon. That’s division of identity! Again, it doesn’t seem transgressive because we’re defining it based on our physical space.

How is online different? Maybe we define ourselves one way on Twitter, or LinkedIn – or, even, SuicideGirls.com! Yet, none of them exclusively define us. You know, just like life.

The next technology coming to us is Augmented Public Reality – snap a photo and overlay information over each face! Yet, that merges our online (maybe compartmentalized, maybe not) identities with our physical ones – taking away our ability to code-switch in person!

The moral? Publicy online will impact our personal identities, whether we want it to or not. All the more reason to thoughtful opt-in online.

Related posts:

  1. two sides of a naked truth

Filed Under: 140conf, Twitter, Year 10

Previous Post: « Paper on Twitter @ #140conf: Day 2, pt. 5
Next Post: Books (and effective product launches) on Twitter @ #140conf: Day 2, pt. 7 »

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. rabi says

    April 21, 2010 at 5:01 pm

    I’m sure I’m not thinking about the nuances here, but publicy seems like a particular, personal version of publicity, really.

Primary Sidebar


Support Crushing Krisis on Patreon
Support CK
on Patreon


Follow me on Twitter Like me on Facebook Contact me
Follow me on Instagram Watch me on Youtube Subscribe to the CK RSS Feed

About CK

About Crushing Krisis
About My Music
About Your Author
Blog Archive
Comics Blogs Only
Contact Krisis
Terms & Conditions

Crushing Comics

Marvel Comics
Marvel Events Guide
Marvel Omnibus Guide
Spider-Man Guide

DC Comics
DC New 52
DC Rebirth

Valiant Comics

Copyright © 2017 · Foodie Pro Theme by Shay Bocks · Built on the Genesis Framework · Powered by WordPress

Crushing Krisis is supported by SuperHeroic Sponsor Omnibuds' Café


Links from Crushing Krisis to retailer websites may be in the form of affiliate links. If you purchase through an affiliate link I will receive a minor credit as your referrer. My credit does not affect your purchase price. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to: Amazon Services LLC Associates Program (in the US, UK, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain), eBay Partner Network, and iTunes Affiliate Program. Note that URLs including the "geni.us" domain name are affiliate short-links.