Framing the future of privacy: citizens’ metaphors for privacy in the coming digital society

Abstract

Privacy is one of the pressing issues of the digital age. New technologies and surveillance practices continuously present new privacy threats. This paper reports an exploratory qualitative study on non-experts' metaphors for privacy in future society using focus group material from three countries: Finland, Germany and Israel. Using thematic analysis, four metaphorical frames for privacy are constructed: 'dodo', 'hemline', 'savings' and 'foundations of our home'. The frames are analysed using the causal layered analysis method to uncover their systemic and worldview components. Taken together, the metaphorical frames highlight two key concerns of individuals: their struggle for control over a dominating future, on the one hand, and the problem of trust in collective means of privacy protection, on the other hand. The article concludes that the views of non-experts need to be included in broad societal discussion about a desirable future society and the role of privacy in that society. This discussion needs to seriously consider systemic interconnections that challenge privacy as well as the whole ecosystem of metaphorical frames for privacy.

Determining The Nature of Digital Communication in Public Law Sphere

“…Nowadays, there is public debate about the desired future of society and the role of privacy in it. This debate requires serious consideration of the systemic linkages that challenge privacy, particularly when using digital communication tools (Minkkinen, 2017;Al-Hussein & Shahba, 2023). Therefore, ensuring security and protecting privacy is one of the key issues in the current digital transformation.…”

Scenarios From Artificial Narrow Intelligence to Artificial General Intelligence—Reviewing the Results of the International Work/Technology 2050 Study

“…The legal grounds for banning several applications of AI can be found, in particular, from the already accepted EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The EU could ban the use of personal data if there is the slightest indication that the data could be misused (see, e.g., Minkkinen, Aufferman, and Heinonen 2017). We claim that a general ban on facial recognition would prevent the development of personal digital twins that learn together with a person through their sense of sight (see, e.g., Kaivo-oja et al 2020), and the EU would lose many of the very promising future possibilities of photonics (cf.…”

Is there enough trust for the smart city? exploring acceptance for use of mobile phone data in oslo and tallinn

“…This paper aims to illuminate how citizens perceive the sharing of information about their movements with mobile phone operators and their wider circle of customers, partners and subcontractors. The use of passive data is undoubtedly a challenge to privacy policies, which influence the everyday life of ordinary citizens, and the use of such data cannot be governed top-down and only discussed in expert debates about data protection ( Minkkinen et al., 2017 ; Calzada and Cobo, 2015 ). The general awareness among the public about the existence and use of such data is also relatively limited ( IET 2016 ).…”