All right, get ready for a long one… I’m breaking the bloggers rule of short and sweet – damn the consequences. Proceed at your own risk.
I’m a bit of a privacy freak - particularly when it comes to digital privacy. I don’t have anything in particular to hide, just something I inherited from my family. I believe that each individual has a right to privacy (unless they break the law) and should be able to control that privacy. I’m posting this blog, so choosing to give up a bit of my own privacy, in hopes to make a handful of people more aware, ask tough questions, and take some form of action, be it educating your children, having a water cooler discussion, changing your online behavior or service provider, or contacting your elected officials. So what does this have to do with channels?
Today, most of our media channels are, or are becoming interactive. We watch CNN and Twitter our favorite talking head. We post comments to blogs. We update our Facebook page, email & text. If you are part of the Google Voice Beta, you can let Google transcribe your phone messages into an email, creating a voice to text, cross channel communication. In effect, YOU and ME are creating a new user generated content (UGC) channel – The You Channel. We no longer use the Web to simply read information, we also create Web content via social networks, blogs, uploaded photos, FarmVille purchases, Second Life simulations, emails and now phone transcripts.
The companies enabling, hosting, and transacting this very cool technology track everything we do, and now with GPS-enabled mobile devices, can track where we go and help us find our friends (and enemies). This allows them to deliver targeted content and ads, so you and I are more likely to open our wallets or keep coming back. The better the user targeting, the higher the ROI and the premium ad or subscription fee. I’m a marketer and a consumer. I appreciate getting stuff that interests me am more likely to spend my limited marketing dollars delivering ads/content to someone more likely to care about my product. In fact, (and as a disclaimer) my company offers software that can enable this level of targeting for mobile Web services. We have chosen to do so in a way that can gives the user or business control over what personal data is collected, shared, and with whom. But, I digress…
You’ve heard the phrase, “He who controls the information, has the power.” Well companies, like Google, have become very good at what they do, and have become very powerful indeed. That leads to new customers, such as the US Government, and new uses for their technology and services. What is just becoming clear to many people is exactly what those alternative uses are. Just like anything, this information can be used for good or evil. From a practical perspective, there is simply too much data for the average person to maliciously use it.
So, what about the non-average person or powerful organization? http://gawker.com/5419271/google-ceo-secrets-are-for-filthy-people ValleyWag blogger, Ryan Tate, editorializes on a recent CNBC interview with Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, expressing his concerns over how this data is used:
An interesting follow-up by Julie Bort appeared on Network World’s GoogleSubnet:
http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/48975?source=NWWNLE_nlt_daily_am_2009-12-14
And a third by Robert Hansen at Internet Evolution:
http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?doc_id=185755&f_src=ieupdate
This one is really worth reading the comments, as it gives a balanced view of the impact on You and Me of user generated content.
Are you still with me?
Lets roll back the clock to 1982. If I only read the comics and obituaries for a month, nobody knew and nobody cared. If I bought a book, nobody cared except my local bookseller who might want to recommend something similar the next time I stopped by. Fast forward to 2009. Now, it is possible to know the specific comic or obituary I read and every book I buy, along with any review or comment I write. I am, whether I like it or not, a contributing member of The YOU Channel every time I search, post, buy or social network.
Why is this relevant? Because there is a huge lack of context behind this data. Am I researching a novel, seeing if the body I dumped in the river has been identified, or just quirky? The book I bought, was it for me – or perhaps a gift? True story: Back in the 80’s I started receiving Soldier of Fortune and a SWAT supply catalog. It took me awhile to figure out why somebody thought I cared about knives hidden in belt buckles, but best I could determine, I bought The Anarchists Cookbook for a friend who was thinking about writing a novel and needed some background information. It was a Christmas present and not relevant to my personal interests – or behavior. Okay – that was a marketing targeting error, but my point is that if this happened today, I would likely end up on a terrorist watch list and unbeknownst to me, have all my electronic and telephonic communications monitored by Uncle Sam, courtesy of Google, Microsoft or Barnes & Noble. This month Yahoo has actually been testifying to the FTC on just these digital privacy issues. (BTW, check out Kara Swisher’s Ethics Statement. This is how it should be done.)
And that is my other point. Political commentary aside, consider the military contracts with Blackwater to run operations and provide security. It seems a logical extension that our intelligence services would also contract with our communications channel companies to provide data collection and monitoring services. The telephone carriers have revenue-generating programs available to law-enforcement for just this purpose – with online access to track a mobile user’s location. Unlike wire-tapping, the details are fuzzy about how access to this information is granted. It’s a brave new world out there, so Web poster and cell phone user, or should I say, “youser”, beware.
Okay, before I start sounding too much like a conspiracy theorist – I am actually, a reasonably trusting person - it is the shifting role of media from watchdog to watcher that has me concerned. It should have you concerned, too. The migration of broadcast media to digital, interactive media has transformed what you and I say and do into a youser-generated public channel. We generate the content, but we don’t really control its distribution (ever use a Facebook application?). Our technological advances, particularly in the area of communications technology ALWAYS have a huge social impact – paper and ink, typewriters, the printing press, the telephone, radio, television, the computer, the internet. All have been socially transforming and all have lead to enhanced mass communications – the media channels, as we know them today.
Historically, our media channels played a key role in holding the government, businesses and powerful individuals accountable for their actions. Media companies took this role seriously and applied balanced judgment, not strictly profit-based judgment. Rarely was information taken out of context or someone tried in the court of public opinion to create a titillating headline or sound bite. In short, responsible journalism was the standard.
In today’s society, profits and “the scoop” seem to trump common sense and getting the facts right. Ethical lines have blurred and are justified because, technically, it’s legal. Everyone is a citizen journalist. Once it’s out – it’s difficult to tell what is fact or opinion – spoof or truth. You Channel content can have a lingering affect on persons and organizations, both positive and negative. Education and legislation is woefully behind these technology advances. And as content and market capitalization have shown, there is clearly a tremendous need for personal expression and sharing.
The YOU Channel is here to stay – love it or hate it. So, youser, beware and think twice about what you share, what you say. Contribute responsibly and hope your online neighbor does the same. The only one watching your back is you (and 6,803,370,061* billion of your closest friends).
*US Census Bureau worldwide population
