Main Page/Teaching Resources/Talking points - Revision history

Amacrina2: /* Dealing with common anti-privacy arguments */

2021-05-06T15:27:48Z

‎Dealing with common anti-privacy arguments

Amacrina2: Created page with "=== Talking points === ==== Stakeholders: admin ==== ==== Stakeholders: IT ==== ==== Stakeholders: patrons ==== ==== Stakeholders: library workers ==== ==== Dealing with comm..."

2021-05-06T15:24:15Z

Created page with "=== Talking points === ==== Stakeholders: admin ==== ==== Stakeholders: IT ==== ==== Stakeholders: patrons ==== ==== Stakeholders: library workers ==== ==== Dealing with comm..."

New page

=== Talking points ===

==== Stakeholders: admin ====
==== Stakeholders: IT ====
==== Stakeholders: patrons ====
==== Stakeholders: library workers ====
==== Dealing with common anti-privacy arguments ====
How to talk to people who have negative/hostile/ambivalent attitudes about privacy
Consider viewpoint/situation of person making the argument – they are not necessarily bad
Maybe have not thought about topic before or are information poor
Write all negative statements about privacy you can think of on post it notes
Entire group responds to each one
“It’s safer” argument
Civil liberties/freedom argument
Redirect: Would you allow cameras in your workspace? Would you give me your credit card number?
Noncriminal examples: journalists, political dissidents
At what point does it stop?
You might not have something to hide but you have something to protect
What is a crime?
Point to specific instances of when surveillance in its current form did not work
Mike German (former FBI): anti-surveillance advocate with ACLU – “all this surveillance is like trying to find a needle in a haystack; it’s not about solving crimes, it’s about social control”
Why should criminals get all the good stuff?
Point out less political things i.e. data breaches, security threat vulnerability, etc.
Data is collected on everyone – how can we make it secure or reduce amount collected?
Do you really trust other people with your information? Malicious intent OR ineffective data management
You can’t clean up a data spill, it’s like an oil spill
Law enforcement doesn’t always use data for good
Ex. DHS using social media data against people at the border
Aim for common ground or seeing a different viewpoint – consider alternatives to safer communities other than the “arms race”
“Convenience” argument
Start with validation – it IS convenient – then how does vulnerability become inconvenient
Ex: it’s convenient to not have to type in your bank password, it’s incredibly inconvenient to track down your data after your identity has been stolen
A little bit of inconvenience is worth it for future convenience (i.e. password manager) and security
Judge who you are speaking with:
Upper classes who benefit: Pitch value of security
Lower classes who are harmed: you are being policed by this; offer your services/assistance
Economic position threat modeling
There are some small, easy changes to make that will add up
Maty’s “One Weird Trick” program
Have you thought about how this could go wrong for you?
“Don’t Care/Why Bother/Doesn’t Impact Me” argument
We’re all part of this society and you should care about others
Imagine being in a position where it does impact you
If everyone uses it, it normalizes the act (herd immunity)
Tailored example to person you are talking to – it does impact you
Do you like seeing targeted ad? Do you think your phone is listening to you?
“Saying you don’t care about your privacy because you have nothing to say is like saying you don’t care about your freedom of speech because you have nothing to say” – Snowden
Show ways they already DO care
Credit card, social security, closing their blinds in their house at night
Even if you don’t care today, you might care tomorrow
Ex: DACA recipients
Ex: If you are ever engaged in any kind of lawsuit, consider the invasive nature of discovery
Almost everyone is related to a vulnerable community (children, teenagers, seniors)
Self-care: this information is yours and is personal, you should take care of it the same way you take care of your mind/body
Some things you do every day are illegal (speeding, jay walking, etc.)
Book recommendation: Three Felonies A Day by Harvey Silverglate & Alan M. Dershowitz
Your privacy isn’t necessarily just up to you – consider what other people put about you online, how inaccurate data could be incriminating
Ex: Serial podcast
“You are just a prosecuter’s attention away from chaos”
“That’s Great/Wow but I’m not going/It’s cool that you care but I don’t” argument (staff focused)
Institutional values – assumes that everyone is on board with library ethics 101
How can we work within institutional decisions that maybe are not in line with values?
Public staff needs training or workshops – libraries 101
Good intentions – how to be helpful without undermining patron privacy
Tension between customer service and privacy
We are the only ones who can offer privacy as a service
Develop training/print materials for staff and public training
“I don’t have time/it’s too complicated/it’s overwhelming” argument
“One Weird Trick” again
Yeah, it is overwhelming and it sucks! And here’s where you can start
Harm reduction arguments
You won’t necessarily get everything but you can always start somewhere
Small things add up
Some solutions are not technical – take a step back
Privacy is not a fixed state
Something you will always work toward
Like going to the dentist or working out to maintain health
“Social Media/Self-Branding/Oversharing/Brand Loyalty/Popularity is Important” Argument
Your data is your brand
Threat model – targeted ads
Ex. Surprise vacation research
How much is too much?
Show how much Google tracks
How much of yourself are you investing into that brand or social media?
Book Recommendation: How To Do Nothing by Jenny Odell
Cultural shift – it’s “cooler” to not share
Point out the way these companies don’t adhere to the same values as you
People are willing to boycott based on values and there is room to push for that
Ex: Facebook higher up is BFFs with Brett Kavanaugh
Is your personal brand compatible?
How can you mitigate your use so that you can still use it?
Create intentional spaces in the library to counteract FOMO – community building
“How to lie productively”
Teens know so much more about privacy skills than you expect
Engage students to share their knowledge
“What About-ism” Argument
You will encounter this argument in any conversation about things you are passionate about
Of course we care about other things, we’re just addressing this one right now
Can you not multitask?
Similar to the fight for rights (someone else getting rights does not take rights away from you) – caring about x does not mean you don’t care about y
The thing they are trying to distract you with PROBABLY IS RELATED
Privacy is essential for most other activism

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 ==== Stakeholders: library workers ====
 ==== Dealing with common anti-privacy arguments ====
-How to talk to people who have negative/hostile/ambivalent attitudes about privacy
+===== How to talk to people who have negative/hostile/ambivalent attitudes about privacy =====
 Consider viewpoint/situation of person making the argument – they are not necessarily bad
 Maybe have not thought about topic before or are information poor
 Write all negative statements about privacy you can think of on post it notes
 Entire group responds to each one
-“It’s safer” argument
+===== “It’s safer” argument =====
 Civil liberties/freedom argument
 Redirect: Would you allow cameras in your workspace? Would you give me your credit card number?
@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 Ex. DHS using social media data against people at the border
 Aim for common ground or seeing a different viewpoint – consider alternatives to safer communities other than the “arms race”
-“Convenience” argument
+===== “Convenience” argument =====
 Start with validation – it IS convenient – then how does vulnerability become inconvenient
 Ex: it’s convenient to not have to type in your bank password, it’s incredibly inconvenient to track down your data after your identity has been stolen
@@ Line 39: / Line 39: @@
 Maty’s “One Weird Trick” program
 Have you thought about how this could go wrong for you?
-“Don’t Care/Why Bother/Doesn’t Impact Me” argument
+===== “Don’t Care/Why Bother/Doesn’t Impact Me” argument =====
 We’re all part of this society and you should care about others
 Imagine being in a position where it does impact you
@@ Line 58: / Line 58: @@
 Ex: Serial podcast
 “You are just a prosecuter’s attention away from chaos”
-“That’s Great/Wow but I’m not going/It’s cool that you care but I don’t” argument (staff focused)
+===== “That’s Great/Wow but I’m not going/It’s cool that you care but I don’t” argument (staff focused) =====
 Institutional values – assumes that everyone is on board with library ethics 101
 How can we work within institutional decisions that maybe are not in line with values?
@@ Line 66: / Line 66: @@
 We are the only ones who can offer privacy as a service
 Develop training/print materials for staff and public training
-“I don’t have time/it’s too complicated/it’s overwhelming” argument
+===== “I don’t have time/it’s too complicated/it’s overwhelming” argument =====
 “One Weird Trick” again
 Yeah, it is overwhelming and it sucks! And here’s where you can start
@@ Line 76: / Line 76: @@
 Something you will always work toward
 Like going to the dentist or working out to maintain health
-“Social Media/Self-Branding/Oversharing/Brand Loyalty/Popularity is Important” Argument
+===== “Social Media/Self-Branding/Oversharing/Brand Loyalty/Popularity is Important” Argument =====
 Your data is your brand
 Threat model – targeted ads
@@ Line 94: / Line 94: @@
 Teens know so much more about privacy skills than you expect
 Engage students to share their knowledge
-“What About-ism” Argument
+===== “What About-ism” Argument =====
 You will encounter this argument in any conversation about things you are passionate about
 Of course we care about other things, we’re just addressing this one right now