By Default: Yes. Or: We Need to Talk About Consent
Since listening to several talks by Harvard Professor Shoshana Zuboff, author of The Age of Surveillance Capitalism (2019), I am more aware than ever that I need to rethink the way I behave on the internet and the way I use technology.
The 50-minute VPro documentary (see above) is just one of many interviews Zuboff has given since publishing her work in which she explains how our online behaviour is being tracked, gathered and eventually sold as big data by the giant tech companies to be monetized. And since a lot of our lives is happening online, this means, in fact, big parts of our lives are being monitored.
One of the most important things she points out and a big reminder to me is that our online behaviour and our “real life” behaviour are closely intertwined. What is happening online has an impact on what is happening offline, in the streets, to us personally and physically - be it in form of rallies, social uproar, bullying, or event organization (to name only a few, both positive and negative).
That in itself is not necessarily negative. Social gatherings, protests and rallies are a big part of democracy, as they offer platforms for people to voice their opinion, to be heard and to raise the governments’ attention.
Where it becomes questionable, however, is when the data that is being collected is used to create a profile about us that helps predict our future actions. Personalized ads are the most prominent evidence of our behaviour being tracked and the information being used for commercial purposes.
Where it becomes dangerous, according to Zuboff, and a potential threat to democracy is when our profiles are used not only to predict, but to influence our actions. In 2014, the PNAS published a study that examined if and to what extend Facebook users’ emotions could be influenced. The research paper Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks sums up:
“We show, via a massive (N = 689,003) experiment on Facebook, that emotional states can be transferred to others via emotional contagion, leading people to experience the same emotions without their awareness. We provide experimental evidence that emotional contagion occurs without direct interaction between people (exposure to a friend expressing an emotion is sufficient), and in the complete absence of nonverbal cues.”
These findings show us that our emotions, and thus our attitudes and behaviours, can easily be steered, even without our knowledge.
When Silence Means Consent
With all that in mind, I decided to take a closer look at my own online behaviour by starting to track myself. To see how much time I spend on my phone and how much time I spend on each app, I installed StayFree, a tracking app.
Interestingly enough, installing this app automatically brought me to a section of my phone settings where I had to give my consent that StayFree can track my phone behaviour. What I saw then, to my surprise, was that all apps were ticked as “Yes, you can track my behaviour” (see screenshot below).
This is certainly something I was not aware of, and never actively (or let’s say consciously) agreed to. There may have been a general consent button I had to press in order to proceed when setting up the phone, but of that I have no recollection. So, it seems like unless I actively say “no” and deactivate this function, it is assumed that I agree and give my consent.
Not being aware that something is happening and therefore not speaking up against it does not equal giving consent. Transferring this notion to other areas of life, I am sure, a lot of people would agree.
In 2019, the question of how to get more people to become organ donors (after their death) was heatedly discussed in Germany, where compared to other countries the number of organ donors remains relatively low. One of the solutions under discussion was to assume everybody, by default, would be a prospective donor, unless people actively voice their dissent, no justification required. The suggestion was dropped, however, because it was found to be against the constitution which states that a person must have the chance to consider the topic before making a formed decision. (tagesschau.de)
Of course you cannot compare donating your organs to giving away data on your online behaviour. But I do think we need to reconsider - or rather reclaim - our rights of being asked before we give our consent, without facing disadvantages.