Visibility on the web. Right and duty.
Our understanding of "privacy" and "public" is changing. In recent days it has been on several of my friends' lips, because Facebook now allows me to see my friends' friends' pictures.
Danaher Boyd gave a clear and interesting presentations at this year's Le Web ', where she had addressed some interesting questions about privacy and accessibility. Approximately eight minutes into the lecture she emphasizes the example of a girl who killed her mother. The media is attention to the fact that the girl has a MySpace profile and get the girl to appear as "crazy". But when Danaher Boyd looks after, then the girl claimed the mother's abuse over the years on his profile. And her friends defend the girl on MySpace.
Danaher Boyd put the relevant question:
"What happens when we have this massive amounts of visibility, but nobody is looking?"
And then she starts thinking otherwise a row: "What we think about information we can see online? What we think it means for information that is online? Just because something is publicly accessible does not mean that all people across time and place too look. "
She continues the questions "Who is watching? Why are they? And in what context they interpret what they see? ". She emphasizes that the surveillance are often those who have power over the observed. Parents, teachers, employers, government, businesses. These people feel they gain something by looking and believe that they have a right to look. "If it's public, I'm allowed two look".
But what if it is not only a right but a duty?
The lecture is available here. It is 18 minutes short and both analytical, sensitive and wise: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/2836730 . I have been aware of it through http://thenumerati.net/index.cfm?postID=470 .
