Tim Oren had a great post recently, resulting from his research into "consumer privacy, data aggregation, and marketing analytics," that's both funny and insighful on the current state of the privacy debate. On the humorous side, he tweaks everyone who has a stake in this issue:
I haven't seen a domain with more zealots since the early crypto market. There are zealous marketers sure they can make their customers more loyal and profitable if only can pool all the known data about them. There are privacy zealots, who often don't seem to believe in marketing at all - or maybe even markets. And there are zealous computer scientists and security experts, sure the whole matter can be resolved with the right algorithms. And now that the press and politicians are coming to the party, we can expect the discourse to become even more informative.
As for his insights, he proposes a Hierarchy of Unease (a riff on Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs) that suggests different levels of privacy-related violations:
1. Direct Financial Loss, or Threat of Same. Anything from credit card or check theft and fraud, to emptying of bank accounts via EFT, or full-up identity theft...
2. Intrusion. ...This can range from dinner time phone calls, to spam, to (less commonly) junk mail or pop-ups and interstitials. Unfortunately for marketers, the volks-wisdom has these all largely conflated.
3. Compartment Breach. We all segment our lives to some extent: family, career, friends, hobbies, finance, politics, religion, and so on. The configuration, number, and fervor with which these compartments are defended are highly idiosyncratic. But a third party information transfer that crosses one of these boundaries feels like a larger breach of privacy...
4. Loss of Information Asymmetry. Consumers usually encounter information asymmetry on the down side: the loan officer, real estate agent, or contractor who knows far more about the market and has much more deal making experience. But the individual has always had a few hidden cards of his or her own - knowing the real details of one's state of health, financial conditions, motivations for a purchase, and so on. Data transfer or analysis that puts those cards face up when consumers must make a deal feels like an affront.
5. Everything Else. A great deal of 'private' information does not seem to be highly valued or defended - grocery store purchase lists, music tastes, web site visit s- so long as the utilization of that information doesn't fall into one of the categories above. It's routinely traded away for everything from modest discounts to suggestions of interesting books or new artists.
Tim's predictions?
If I'm close to right on this, there are pitfalls ahead for all of the zealots. The privacy hardliners and techno-purists are solving problems that a large part of the market doesn't think they have (item 5). On the other hand, the marketing enthusiasts may take that same acquiescence as a go-ahead for projects that will run straight into issues 2 - 4, and be surprised by the blowback.
