The Hairy Tracking Line

Saturday night: I check into FourSquare while at my favorite bar.  While I’m not a particularly avid FourSquare user, I like to take advantage of potential discounts.  Sweet, just for checking into FourSquare, American Express extends me a five dollar bar tab credit.  I smile at Amex’s marketing genius, and I never cease to be amazed that a 2” by 4” box can tell Amex where I am.  Do I feel like my privacy has been intruded upon?  Frankly, I don’t care.  I’m just pleased with the discount, and that someone wants to give me 5 bucks for nothing. 

But where should the line be drawn?  On the one extreme, I’m overly trusting of digital technologies and online purchasing.   True, my credit card has been fraudulently charged upon, but Amex always refunds the amounts to me, so it is never my problem.  On the other extreme, my mother is extraordinarily sensitive to the potential for fraud perpetration.  Enter paper shredder.  There isn’t a document my mom receives in the mail that she doesn’t shred.  Why is this?  Well, every document has her address on it; thus, the bad guys will know where she lives.  Mom, meet phonebook . . . but telling her that this information is readily available is useless.  I suppose this generational attitude will diffuse, as a more technologically savvy generation comes to fruition.

The Wall Street Journal article: “Apple, Google Collect User Data” touches upon the potential for data collection agencies to track motor traffic speeding.  As someone who has a less than stellar driving record, mostly tarnished by a strong propensity to speed, this is scary. Really scary.  Almost “Big Brother” scary.  I am repulsed by this.  That said, I believe privacy implications and the general lack of enforceability will prevent insurance companies from purchasing this data.  So my driving record will remain intact at least for the time being.

Consent is the big issue at hand in determining digital privacy implications.  To what extent to mobile users consent to “being tracked”.  When lost, I praise my navigation and love that it can track my current location.  I’m certainly aware that someone, somewhere can access this data.  But so what?  I have given my consent to being tracked for purposes that are useful to me.  But have I given consent to being tracked for purposes that are useful to someone else, or, worse yet, that are detrimental to me?  Again, I’m not one to get worked up about how “Big Brother” might be tracking me, but the worst ramifications of digital information sharing have yet to be proliferated at this point.  What does the future hold?

While watching Entertainment Television the other day, I heard a celebrity comment that she was going to stop posting her location on Twitter as the inevitable fans and paparrazi came swarming.  This is the most obvious level of consent.  By voluntarily posting her location, the celebrity was openly giving consent to “location tracking.”  It is a finer line where a person is merely using their mobile device for basic functions. 

To play the devil’s advocate, aren’t marketers just trying to track information in order to better understand and meet the needs of customers?  Obviously, the bottom line is profitability, but aren’t both the consumer and the big bad data collector both benefitting.  How can I on the one hand praise FourSquare for tracking my location while on the other hand critique it for using my information. 

So back to the consent line.  Enter RapLeaf.  The lady referenced in the "A Web Pioneer Profiles Users by Name” who is bombarded by Republican propaganda does not seem to be harmed by receiving political information from the party to which she is aligned.  She states that it is a very bad thing, but why?  She obviously has an interest in the substance of the material.  But she feels spooked by the fact that they can tie her personal information to her internet data.  And this is where even my overly digital trusting spirit is compromised.  This truly is scary.

Indeed, where the layer of anonymity is pealed in non-consensual situations, online tracking is intrusive.  Thus, the line should be drawn at the discrepancy between compilations of data verses data revealing personal information.  Unbelievable that RipLeaf has transmitted data including references to individual information, such as Facebook identification information.  The ease at which interested third-parties or computer hackers can access personal information is scary.

How easy is it to draw an anonymity line?  I am no technology expert, but I imagine this would be a hairy line, just asking for lawsuits to guide a path.  This also presents tough enforcement and penalty questions.  So to what extent will legislatures step up to the plate to make sure that consumer privacy is protected?  Will they extensively increase privacy regulations, and what will these laws look like?  I imagine they will be fast changing as technology continues to evolve at a rapid pace.  Of course, Goggle, Apple, and other data aggregators have big pockets and therefore strong lobbying potential.  This will certainly damper the possibility for strong anti-tracking regulation, but legislation is inevitable.  In any event, the future holds serious change in data aggregation as consumers become increasingly alarmed about “Big Brother” potential from both the government and private parties.