Toward a Sociology of Privacy

Abstract

What are, and what should be, the boundaries between self and society, individuals and groups? To address these questions, we synthesize research on privacy that is relevant for two foundational sociological issues: social order and inequality. By synthesizing work on a narrow yet fundamental set of issues, we aim to improve our understanding of privacy as well as provide a foundation for understanding contemporary privacy issues associated with information and communication technology. We explore the role of privacy in maintaining social order by examining the connections of privacy with social control and with group cohesion. We also discuss how inequality produces variation in privacy and how this variation in turn contributes to inequality. Throughout the review we identify potential directions for sociological research on privacy generally and in the context of new technologies. Our discussion highlights implications of privacy that extend beyond individual-level concerns to broader social, structural impacts.

Toward a Theory of Concealment

“…There are three theoretical approaches in sociology that have influenced how sociologists study concealment. These include the dramaturgical approach, which conceptualizes concealment as the medium through which internal selves are presented to others (Goffman 1959;Goffman 1963); the problem approach, which conceptualizes concealment as antisocial behavior (Gottfredson and Hirschi 1990); and the privacy approach, which specifies concealment as an expression of ownership over information (Nippert-Eng 2010;Anthony et al 2017). Below, I summarize and evaluate each way of thinking about concealment.…”

“…To highlight the conceptual diversity in the literature, I first take stock of common treatments of concealment in sociology. These include Goffman's dramaturgical approach to concealment (1959,1963), concealment as a problem behavior (Stouthamer-Loeber 1986;Gottfredson and Hirschi 1990;Simpson 2013), and concealment as privacy (Nippert-Eng 2010; Anthony et al 2017).…”

Reframing Current Debates on Young People's Online Privacy by Taking into Account the Cultural Construction of Youth

“…The concept of privacy fetishism thus reminds us that some individuals, groups, or institutions, may be more privileged and decide for themselves whether to keep information private [31,61]. According to Anthony and colleagues, privacy can be considered as a resource that intersects with inequality [30]. People with a lower hierarchical status experience a transfer of control over their privacy to 'others'; a process called "inclusive boundary coordination" by Petronio [51].…”

“…People with a lower hierarchical status experience a transfer of control over their privacy to 'others'; a process called "inclusive boundary coordination" by Petronio [51]. Having a disability or illness, for example, forces an individual to provide more information in exchange for healthcare [30]. It can be argued that children and youth are 'naturally' coerced into inclusive boundary coordination because society appoints to adults the power to regulate young people's lives [15,51].…”

“…Secondly, there is often a lack of attention given to how youth's experiences are shaped by their exposure to technopanic narratives [e. g., 3,6,28,29]. Finally, the general assumption that privacy is something inherently good that young people should maintain, obscures various power dynamics stemming from the concept's liberal foundations [30,31,32].…”