Is privacy an issue of getting what you pay for?
Like lots of blogs, we wrote recently about the privacy vs. “cool-factor” of Google’s new Street View function. That post was more than just a snapshot of interesting new software; it was an open-ended question about how and when citizens are willing to compromise privacy for the sake of functionality or convenience. In a broader sense, that brings up another interesting question: is privacy vs. security a balancing act or does it have to be a quid-pro-quo consumer market?
For example, lots of people want “off” of Google Street View. They somehow came across their picture online, and contacted Google about getting it taken down. One of these people happened to be privacy advocate Kevin Bankston who works with the EFF, and he documented the entire procedure. However, Google’s requirements brought his campaign to a screeching halt.
To make sure you are who you say you are, Google requires picture ID, an affidavit, e-mail addresses and a statement of your association with the photo. Bankston says that what concerns him is that “there’s no apparent policy limiting Google’s use of the information I’m being asked to provide to them.” He worries that in protecting part of his privacy, he might unwittingly be giving up an even greater amount, most likely for marketing purposes. You can read a full account of his attempts on Privacy Digest or Wired. The sources also report that evidently Google has since revised its “take-dow” policy.
Does that mean that privacy has to come at a price? Probably, if a recent study by the Carnegie Mellon Usable Privacy and Security Lab (CUPS) is any indication. In a nutshell, it found that consumers are willing to pay a little extra for online goods and services if it means they get hassled less from data-buying marketers. CNET reports that test subjects “were willing to pay about 60 cents more for each $15 item purchased to protect their privacy.” The results indicate that we not only want privacy, but that we are willing to place a distinct monetary value on it.
Ideally, everything – privacy included – would be free. Since ours is a less than ideal world and things cost money, we want to know were our readers stand on the issue. Leave us a comment and let us know.
