http://christopher-parsons.com/readingprivacy/session1/privacy-as-contextual-integrity/ Discussing Privacy, Publicly Sun, 05 Jul 2009 09:29:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 http://christopher-parsons.com/readingprivacy/session1/privacy-as-contextual-integrity/comment-page-1/#comment-25 Technology, Thoughts, and Trinkets» Twitter and Statutory Notions of Privacy Sun, 05 Jul 2009 09:29:49 +0000 http://christopher-parsons.com/readingprivacy/?p=81#comment-25 [...] nuanced understandings of what individuals expect o remain private online – the challenge for theorists such as Nissenbaum will be translating these insights into actionable principles and guidelines that data and privacy [...] [...] nuanced understandings of what individuals expect o remain private online – the challenge for theorists such as Nissenbaum will be translating these insights into actionable principles and guidelines that data and privacy [...]

]]> http://christopher-parsons.com/readingprivacy/session1/privacy-as-contextual-integrity/comment-page-1/#comment-16 Technology, Thoughts, and Trinkets » Blog Archive » Twitter and Privacy in Social Context Sun, 10 May 2009 08:27:46 +0000 http://christopher-parsons.com/readingprivacy/?p=81#comment-16 [...] Helen Nissembaum would likely insist that citizen-solidarity (in terms of the privacy discussion) is only threatened when data is appropriated in violation of normative expectations concerning how personal information will be appropriated and subsequently distributed. The former norm correlates with what is appropriate or fitting to reveal depending on context of the data collection – merely being in a public space does not mean that all information collections are appropriate (e.g. demanding to know a stranger’s name and not accepting ‘it’s none of your business’ as a response would be inappropriate, whereas giving one’s name to an employer would be appropriate) (Nissenbaum 2004: 120-121). The latter norm is meant to establish that there are some transmissions of personal data are acceptable whereas others are not; while I might expect a public ‘tweet’ to be reposted on Twitter, I might not expect it to be transferred into a databank that us used to develop detailed consumer profiles. [...] [...] Helen Nissembaum would likely insist that citizen-solidarity (in terms of the privacy discussion) is only threatened when data is appropriated in violation of normative expectations concerning how personal information will be appropriated and subsequently distributed. The former norm correlates with what is appropriate or fitting to reveal depending on context of the data collection – merely being in a public space does not mean that all information collections are appropriate (e.g. demanding to know a stranger’s name and not accepting ‘it’s none of your business’ as a response would be inappropriate, whereas giving one’s name to an employer would be appropriate) (Nissenbaum 2004: 120-121). The latter norm is meant to establish that there are some transmissions of personal data are acceptable whereas others are not; while I might expect a public ‘tweet’ to be reposted on Twitter, I might not expect it to be transferred into a databank that us used to develop detailed consumer profiles. [...]

]]>