Chapter 1: Data Ownership Dilemma

In a world where data reigns supreme, a consensus on ownership could lead to a more harmonious existence for governments, corporations, and individuals alike.

When two titans of Big Data, Google and Meta (formerly Facebook), collaborated to facilitate contact tracing during the COVID-19 pandemic, many individuals expressed concern regarding the potential encroachment on their private lives. Although their intentions were rooted in public health, this initiative sparked fears of personal liberty being compromised.

Having spent over two decades working with data across various sectors such as pharmaceuticals, fintech, and gaming, I have observed how differently data is treated across industries, often governed by a myriad of federal and international regulations. Generally, companies operate under the notion that they are free to utilize data as long as they comply with existing laws. Often, ethical considerations are sidelined unless explicitly prohibited by legal frameworks.

The pursuit of profit dominates decision-making processes.

The restrictions in place primarily focus on safeguarding children’s data—typically those under 13 years old—and preventing third-party companies from linking personally identifiable information (PII) to the data collected. This includes health-related data, which is also subject to stringent privacy laws.

Organizations invest considerable resources to navigate these legal requirements while maximizing the utility of our data.

The controversy surrounding the Meta and Cambridge Analytica incident has elevated discussions about data control to everyday conversations.

Since the early 2000s, social media platforms have become integral to countless lives worldwide. To attract billions of users, these services must remain accessible and free. However, the notion of 'free' services is misleading; while initial usage may require minimal ongoing investment, continuous integration, maintenance, and support are essential, particularly in the face of cyber threats. Advertisers ultimately foot the bill, seeking extensive user insights to optimize their marketing strategies.

Welcome to the complexities of the 21st century.

Most companies operate under the belief that the data generated by users during the interaction with their products belongs to them. For instance, in the pharmaceutical and medical device sectors, companies track who purchases their products, but they often do not engage directly with consumers. In these cases, healthcare providers serve as intermediaries between the products and patients.

In contrast, the video game industry mirrors social media in its approach to data. Game developers gather extensive information on user behavior, from gameplay to interactions with promotional content, which they utilize to enhance user experience and drive engagement. Users implicitly consent to this data collection by agreeing to the terms and conditions upon registration.

For television advertising, data is anonymized after correlating viewing habits with demographic information. While advertisers cannot identify individuals, they can analyze viewership trends across households.

The Internet of Things (IoT) adds another layer of complexity, with numerous connected devices within a household reporting usage data back to their manufacturers.

We find ourselves ensnared in a vast network of information, but we are not the architects of this web. Instead, we risk being the caught prey.

This unsettling analogy rings true as each of us generates countless data points daily, which are compiled and analyzed, influencing everything from targeted ads to unsolicited communications.

However, there are advantages to this data-driven landscape. The aggregation of information can lead to better deals, improved healthcare, and enhanced safety on the roads. Furthermore, the data economy fosters innovation, such as satellite initiatives aimed at global connectivity, ultimately benefiting education and job access.

It seems justifiable for organizations to use data from their users to refine their services. However, control over data sharing should rest with the individuals from whom the data originates. We should have the right to opt-out of any data sharing practices and receive full transparency regarding how our information is utilized.

Data that pertains to us—demographic and PII—should remain under our ownership, even when sharing our personal details is a prerequisite for accessing services. Organizations must obtain explicit consent before using our information for any purpose.

Shoshana Maraney, the Content and Communications Director at Identiq, highlights the potential for new technologies to enable companies to collaborate without compromising privacy. For instance, identity validation is crucial for online businesses, yet sharing data with third parties poses risks. Emerging technologies like Identiq’s F.A.I.R. network allow for accurate validation without transferring personal information, which could significantly shift the landscape of data sharing and privacy in the future.

Unfortunately, not all companies uphold the sanctity of personal data, nor are they held to uniform standards or regulations. This inconsistency places the onus of data protection on individuals.

The responsibility begins at home, especially as children begin using electronic devices. We must educate them on privacy risks and data security measures.

For everyday citizens and conscientious companies alike, vigilance is key to safeguarding our information.

Chapter 2: The Power of Privacy

Exploring the notion that privacy equates to power, this video delves into the implications of data ownership in a digital world.

In this discussion, philosopher Carissa Véliz articulates why privacy is essential for individual autonomy and societal well-being.