Carsten Wilhelm – Université de Haute Alsace, France
Keywords
privacy, culture, digital media, personal data, GDPR
Abstract
The porosity between public and private spheres in the digital age is a recurring topic of conversation for families who regulate the use of smartphones at the dinner table, companies that cut off access to the mail server during weekends or governments that monitor the use of social networks or public spaces, thus reinforcing state surveillance. Privacy is also an object for the humanities and social sciences, from early research on the nature of digital communications to recent scandals highlighting the private information economy (Rochelandet 2010). If there is global awareness of the scale of transnational and cross-cultural technologies that work in these processes – the Snowden and Wikileaks cases have certainly contributed to this – the fact remains that the concept of privacy is a concept in motion, a “travelling concept” of a cultural nature, dependent on the evolution of discourse spaces and political and civic actions but not exempt from change. Yet, despite the almost universal materiality of privacy-regulating technologies — smartphones, tablets, computers and connected objects — the interpretive traditions of these digital technologies and their acceptability vary culturally (Ess 1999, Bosler and Wilhelm 2017). Our contribution integrates a reflection on the link between private life / personal data and the question of the cultural characteristics of privacy regimes, questioning a possible convergence of conceptions on a transnational and transcultural scale. we propose a return to the fundamental notion of privacy, its roots in classical philosophy, its history and meanings, its socio-cultural nature and different applications. In the light of our recent research on the use of digital media and privacy regulations we aim to identify it as a dynamic “mediacultural” concept (Maigret and Macé 2005) that reveals socio-economic, political and cultural tensions. Critical (inter-)cultural studies, we argue, thus needs to acknowledge these tensions and the “cultural politics” they play out. The Internet has enabled individuals, communities and social movements through access to information, knowledge and organizational tools, as far as transforming the “communication machines” (Perriault 2008) into “identity machines” (Wilhelm 2009, p.486). The ubiquity of the production and transmission of data, the capture and measurement of our behaviors and choices, the analysis of the data thus compiled and the commercial and political decisions that feed on them, clearly show the importance of the protection of privacy on a global scale, fueled by transnational and transcultural technologies operating these processes. Evidence seems to emerge in the public, national and international arena, that notions of privacy and transparency are at once culturally influenced yet shifting, liquid notions around which controversies arise and alongside which public opinion aligns or diverges. A recent example is European legislation concerning the regulation on the treatment of personal data (GDPR), including cultural characteristics of a person. This act of policy-making has irrigated media discourse, and has, for the general public, shed light on the individual and even intimate consequences of the so-called « digitization », the « mediatization » of all sectors of life. As this regulation concerns several countries, discourse on its implementation is emblematic of the conceptions that societies have of the private sphere and its importance because this reflection touches on concepts such as intimacy, secrecy and the autonomy of individuals, power, and collective and individual governance. Drawing on recent literature, our contribution shall highlight the shifting nature of the conceptions on privacy through recent research projects : The issue is controversially discussed by participants of our CUMEN survey (2015-2019), highlighting different attitudes (for example between French and German young adults) towards privacy risks and behaviors. Attention to privacy aspects was unevenly distributed among media use studies commanded by industry or stake-holders (Bosler and Wilhelm 2017). Management of identities in semi-public discourse is also evident in a recent and ongoing study of controversies in Senegalese media. Throughout our data, the dynamic nature of privacy prevails, highlighting the need for a critical academic acclaim of this highly cultural yet deeply political notion and arguing for its malleability.
Bibliography
Bosler, S., & Wilhelm, C. (2018). La politique des études d’usage : Une méta-analyse internationale des études sur les médias numériques. Les Enjeux de l’information et de la communication. Consulté à l’adresse https://lesenjeux.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr/2017/supplement-b/06-la-politique-des-etudes-dusage-une-meta-analyse-internationale-des-etudes-sur-les-medias-numeriques/
Ess, C. (2014). Digital media ethics. Cambridge Malden, MA: Polity.
Maigret, E., Macé, E. (Éd.). (2005). Penser les médiacultures : Nouvelles pratiques et nouvelles approches de la représentation du monde. Paris: Colin : Institut national de l’audiovisuel.
Perriault, J. (2008). La logique de l’usage. Essai sur les machines à communiquer. Paris: Éd. L’Harmattan, coll. Anthropologie, ethnologie, civilisation.
Rochelandet, F. (2010). Économie des données personnelles et de la vie privée. Paris: Découverte.
Wilhelm, C. (2009). Processus interculturels et apprentissage à distance : De la communication à la communauté. Thèse de doctorat. Université de Bourgogne.