The Two Western Cultures of Privacy: Dignity versus Liberty

Whitman, James Q.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.476041

Cited by 72 publications

(91 citation statements)

References 11 publications

(1 reference statement)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It seems that the utilization of the immaterial good "privacy" for commercial uses is condemned strongly by the participants in the German sample. This is in line with the concept of privacy as a "personal dignity" in German culture (Whitman, 2004). It is not so much the release of data, as sharing data for scientific purposes is accepted, it is its ill-intended use that causes privacy concerns.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

The users’ perspective on the privacy-utility trade-offs in health recommender systems

Valdez

Ziefle

2019

International Journal of Human-Computer Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Privacy is a major good for users of personalized services such as recommender systems. When applied to the field of health informatics, privacy concerns of users may be amplified, but the possible utility of such services is also high. Despite availability of technologies such as k-anonymity, differential privacy, privacy-aware recommendation, and personalized privacy trade-offs, little research has been conducted on the users' willingness to share health data for usage in such systems. In two conjoint-decision studies (sample size n = 521), we investigate importance and utility of privacy-preserving techniques related to sharing of personal health data for k-anonymity and differential privacy. Users were asked to pick a preferred sharing scenario depending on the recipient of the data, the benefit of sharing data, the type of data, and the parameterized privacy. Users disagreed with sharing data for commercial purposes regarding mental illnesses and with high de-anonymization risks but showed little concern when data is used for scientific purposes and is related to physical illnesses. Suggestions for health recommender system development are derived from the findings.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

The users’ perspective on the privacy-utility trade-offs in health recommender systems

Valdez

Ziefle

2019

International Journal of Human-Computer Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, even in the US, where management interests are often favoured over those of employees, management prerogative is not universally prioritised in the use of profiling, with limits being imposed on employers in areas such as credit checks and the consumption of lawful products (Charlesworth 2003). In contrast to the US, tribunals in other countries such as Canada, Israel and France have adopted a more dignity-oriented approach to privacy that awards employees a greater measure of a private life and private use of technology, focusing more on the right to dignity, personal identity and intimacy, than on the role of the individual within the work environment (Del Riego et al 2012;Whitman 2004). Overall however, the so-called right to privacy, with its emphasis on secrecy, concealment and space, may leave little protection to job applicants or employees who reveal digital personas online or who transmit electronic communications using an employer's computer and communications systems (Sprague 2011).…”

Section: Profilingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Media(tion) and the Reshaping of Public/Private Boundaries in Employment Relations

McDonald

Thompson

2015

Int J Management Reviews

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tensions surrounding social media in the employment relationship are increasingly evident in the media, public rhetoric, and courts and employment tribunals. Yet the underlying causes and dimensions of these tensions have remained largely unexplored. This article firstly reviews the available literature addressing social media and employment, outlining three primary sources of contestation: profiling, disparaging posts and blogs, and private use of social media during work time. In each area, the key dynamics and underlying concerns of the central actors involved are identified. The article then seeks to canvas explanations for these forms of contestation associated with social media at work. It is argued that the architecture of social media disrupts traditional relations in organisational life by driving employer and employee actions that (re)shape and (re)constitute the boundaries between public and private spheres. Although employers and employees are using the same social technologies, their respective concerns about and points of entry to these technologies, in contrast to traditional manifestations of conflict and resistance, are asymmetric. The article concludes with a representational summary of the relative legitimacy of concerns for organisational actors and outlines areas for future research

show abstract

“…In the Internet case, a narrow emphasis on individual decision-making alone supports current policies of relinquishing personal information, as though it is a matter simply of one's property. 18 The commodification of personal information in turn undergirds commercialisation online, by regarding the information as something that can legitimately be traded away in exchange for participation in social networks or in online commerce.…”

Section: Some Normative Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Democracy Can Inform Consent: Cases of the Internet and Bioethics

Gould

2019

J Applied Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Traditional conceptions of informed consent seem difficult or even impossible to apply to new technologies like biobanks, big data, or GMOs, where vast numbers of people are potentially affected, and where consequences and risks are indeterminate or even unforeseeable. Likewise, the principle has come under strain with the appropriation and monetisation of personal information on digital platforms. Over time, it has largely been reduced to bare assent to formalistic legal agreements. To address the current ineffectiveness of the norm of informed consent, I suggest that we need a notion of structural injustice (on a distinctive interpretation, elaborated here, which takes account of unequal power and property relations). I then argue that in order to protect and enhance people's freedom, we have to go beyond traditional applied ethics and introduce perspectives from democratic theory and social philosophy. I attempt to show how applications of the ‘all‐affected principle’, together with new forms of democratic participation, deliberation, and representation can helpfully frame the narrower principle of informed consent. There is an important role for what we could call collective consent, and informed consent can only succeed in increasing individual agency if it is situated within enhanced forms of democratic decision‐making.

show abstract

The Two Western Cultures of Privacy: Dignity versus Liberty

Cited by 72 publications

References 11 publications

The users’ perspective on the privacy-utility trade-offs in health recommender systems

The users’ perspective on the privacy-utility trade-offs in health recommender systems

Social Media(tion) and the Reshaping of Public/Private Boundaries in Employment Relations

How Democracy Can Inform Consent: Cases of the Internet and Bioethics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About