Consequences of Digital Footprints
OVERVIEW
What are the consequences of one’s digital footprint, and why does it matter?
This is the focus of my proposal paper for the first semester of Critical Histories. A brief synopsis of the proposal paper, as well as bibliography, can be found below.
(above) the Panopticon
PROPOSAL SYNOPSIS
Living in a digital world means that on some level we consent to our movements, actions, and interactions being logged, analyzed, and used by invisible entities.
As Haque tells us in Surveillance, Transparency, and Democracy, we exist in a world where privacy is diminishing daily. There are many potential benefits related to the ever increasing amount of personal data that is constantly being collected online and elsewhere in a digital format. Unfortunately there is equal opportunity and potential for misuse of this data. The contents of this active and passive generated information make up what are known as digital footprints.
Through the concept of Panopticism we learn that being highly visible can in itself be a form of confinement. Through this lens, it can be viewed that digital footprints are the result of omniscient and invisible power structures used to collect information about individuals.
As participants in a digital society, it is critical that we educate ourselves in order to best utilize emerging technology and protect ourselves from unintended harm. This education can come in many forms and is sometimes directly connected to other types of learning. For example, we can step through how digital information relates to online learning environments in Anonymity and Learning in Digitally Mediated Communications. Further questions are explored related to how much personal digital information is actually needed in different cases, what happens with this information inside and outside the intended use, what effect this information might have on online communities, and what role government and politics have in this discussion.
It is obvious that in the world today there is ongoing competition for attention. Related to the core of Encoding, Decoding by Stuart Hall, there is great value in being able to decode different types of information. A simple example could be the decoding of a person’s social media posts and finding patterns in order to determine what style of a particular product they would most likely purchase.
It can make a difference whether this decoding is of an individual piece of data on its own, or grouped within a larger data set. Through this lens, our digital footprints have the potential to provide large amounts of data revealing how we might react or otherwise behave when presented a certain circumstance or opportunity. Decoding also has the potential to paint how individuals, organizations, and governments, etc. are perceived. This information can be used to serve the individual or manipulate them.
I believe it is important to consider the ethics of data collection and distribution when looking at digital identities. Within the system that is outlined in The Culture Industry, our digital lives are categorized and sold. This often occurs without our consent. Those at the top of the power structure claim to have your best interests in mind. This is often presented in the form of perceived convenience. Whether or not this is true, you are a target market based on your digital activities and there is money to be made for those with access to your digital footprint.
There is a growing amount of discussion around what the future looks like when it comes to privacy, security, and standardization of data collection as related to digital footprints. As a result, the number of proposals for new systems and new rules has increased in recent years.
In Digital Identity, Dr. Sullivan’s research examines the digital identity that people use for transactions, especially in the context of e-government. A new legal concept is appearing related to how that digital identity can be legally protected. Digital identification and systems around them are inevitable. It is important, therefore, to put forth ideas of how we might incorporate rights around these identities.
Sometimes what we learn from researching one industry has such broad implications that it can be viewed as universal. I believe this is the case with the findings in Feasibility of Digital Footprint Data for Health Analytics and Services. This contains a study investigating how to improve health data analytics and new health services by identifying, collecting, and using people’s digital data. The researchers came up against many hurdles in their pilot study. This was due to the data collected not being useful and discovering errors in health data reports. The information contained in the digital footprints could be useful to the health industry, however, the format of the data and the method of access posed problems. The biggest takeaway, therefore, is that the form data takes needs to be standardized and reusable to provide the greatest benefit. This valuable insight has global importance, reaching outside of the healthcare industry as it relates to digital footprints and digital identity everywhere.
As I continue my investigation I look forward to uncovering and further exploring the consequences of digital footprints, and why this matters. Like the Panopticon, our digital lives exist under a methodical and often silent observation. This makes designing the future of digital footprints and making informed decisions about what we actively and passively share all the more important.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Foucault, Michel, and Alan Sheridan. “Panopticism.” Discipline and Punish: the Birth of
Prison , Penguin, 1975, pp. 195–228.
Horkheimer, Max, et al. “ The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception.”
Dialectic of Enlightenment , Continuum Publishing Company, 1993, pp. 1–24.
Hall, Stuart. “Encoding, Decoding.” The Cultural Studies Reader , Routledge, 2007, pp.
90–101.
Baggio, Bobbe, and Yoany Beldarrain. “Chapter 5: How Safe Is Your Identity?”
Anonymity and Learning in Digitally Mediated Communications: Authenticity and Trust in
Cyber Education, Information Science Reference , 2011, pp. 84–106.
Weaver, Stephen D., and Mark Gahegan. “Constructing, Visualizing, and Analyzing a
Digital Footprint.” The Geographical Review , July ed., vol. 97, American Geographical
Society of New York, 2007, pp. 324–350.
Harjumaa, Marja, et al. “Feasibility of Digital Footprint Data for Health Analytics and
Services: an Explorative Pilot Study.” BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making ,
vol. 16, no. 139, 9 Nov. 2016, doi:10.1186/s12911-016-0378-0.
Haque, Akhlaque. Surveillance, Transparency, and Democracy: Public Administration in
the Information Age. The University of Alabama Press, 2015.
Coiro, Julie, and Sara Kajder. “Conversation Currents: Digital Footprints.” Language
Arts , vol. 89, no. 2, 2011, pp. 148–153. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/41804328 .
Nissenbaum, Helen. “A Contextual Approach to Privacy Online.” Daedalus , vol. 140, no.
4, 2011, pp. 32–48. JSTOR , JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/23046912 .
Holt, Jennifer, and Steven Malčić. “The Privacy Ecosystem: Regulating Digital Identity in
the United States and European Union.” Journal of Information Policy , vol. 5, 2015, pp.
155–178. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.5325/jinfopoli.5.2015.0155 .
SULLIVAN, CLARE. Digital Identity: An Emergent Legal Concept . South Australia,
University of Adelaide Press, 2011. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.20851/j.ctt1sq5wqb .
Bertino, Elisa, and Kenji Takahashi. Identity Management: Concepts, Technologies, and
Systems , Artech House, 2011. ProQuest Ebook Central,
https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/artcenter/detail.action?docID=634511 .
Matejic, Nicole. Social Media Rules of Engagement : Why Your Online Narrative Is the
Best Weapon During a Crisis , John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated, 2015. ProQuest Ebook
Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/artcenter/detail.action?docID=2031449 .
CLASS
Critical Histories 1
INSTRUCTOR
Arden Stern