Do-It-Yourself Data Protection—Empowerment or Burden?

Matzner, Tobias; Masur, Philipp K.; Ochs, Carsten; Pape, Thilo von

doi:10.1007/978-94-017-7376-8_11

Cited by 54 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…My discussion of the consent paradox speaks to an 20 emerging strand of literature exploring how political, scientific and popular discourses shape the field of data protection (Matzner et al 2016;Draper 2017;Hull 2015;Bellanova 2014;van Dijk, Gellert, and Rommetveit 2016). Quite a few of those works come to similar conclusions: They observe an increasing individualization and commodification of data protection (Matzner et al 2016;Draper 2017;Hull 2015;Crain 2016). It is tempting to dismiss these studies as broad and undifferentiated attempts to explain developments in data protection as influenced by a neoliberal zeitgeist.…”

Section: The Data Market Worldmentioning

confidence: 97%

The Consent Paradox: Accounting for the Prominent Role of Consent in Data Protection

Bergemann

2018

IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Abstract. The concept of consent is a central pillar of data protection. It features prominently in research, regulation, and public debates on the subject, in spite of the wide-ranging criticisms that have been levelled against it. In this paper, I refer to this as the consent paradox. I argue that consent continues to play a central role not despite but because the criticisms of it. I analyze the debate on consent in the scholarly literature in general, and among German data protection professionals in particular, showing that it is a focus on the informed individual that keeps the concept of consent in place. Critiques of consent based on the notion of "informedness" reinforce the centrality of consent rather than calling it into question. They allude to a market view that foregrounds individual choice. Yet, the idea of a data market obscures more fundamental objections to consent, namely the individual's dependency on data controllers' services that renders the assumption of free choice a fiction. Terms of use: Documents in

show abstract

Section: The Data Market Worldmentioning

confidence: 97%

The Consent Paradox: Accounting for the Prominent Role of Consent in Data Protection

Bergemann

2018

IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Due to the debatable issue of the existence of the "privacy paradox" and the complexity and multi-dimensionality of online privacy behaviors, alternative proposals by researchers explain the discrepancy between privacy attitudes and real behavior as "privacy cynicism" (Hofmann, Lutz, Ranzini 2016) or the "privacy dilemma" (Matzner et al 2016).…”

Section: Privacy In Surveillance Capitalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Importantly, online privacy researches indicate that there is a signiicant link between internet and digital skills (boyd, Hargittai 2010; Litt 2013), knowledge (Matzner et al 2016, pp. 282-285, Nissenbaum 2011, and the intensity and the type of undertaken privacy practices.…”

Section: Privacy In Surveillance Capitalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…his is conirmed by the studies (Büchi et al) showing that internet skills are an important complementary predictor of self-protective privacy behavior (Büchi, Just, Latzer 2016, p. 15-16). As Matzner et al concludes, protection of social privacy requires diferent practices and activities then institutional privacy (Matzner et al 2016).…”

Section: Privacy In Surveillance Capitalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Surveillance capitalism and privacy. Knowledge and attitudes on surveillance capitalism and online institutional privacy protection practices among adolescents in Poland

Ptaszek

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>The purpose of the study was to determine the level of knowledge and attitudes towards surveillance capitalism and online institutional privacy protection practices among adolescents in Poland (aged 18–19), as well as to determine the relationships between these variables. Surveillance capitalism has emerged as a result of internet users’ activities and involves the collection of all data about these users by different entities for specific benefits without letting them know about it. The dominant role in surveillance capitalism is played by hi-tech corporations. The aim of the study was to verify whether knowledge, and what kind of knowledge, on surveillance capitalism translates into practices related to the protection of online institutional privacy. The study was conducted on a sample of 177 adolescents in Poland. The main part of the questionnaire consisted of two scales: the scale of knowledge and attitudes on surveillance capitalism, and the scale of online institutional privacy protection practices. The results of the study, calculated by statistical methods, showed that although the majority of respondents had average knowledge and attitudes about surveillance capitalism, which may result from insufficient knowledge of the subject matter, this participation in specialized activities/workshops influences the level of intensification of online institutional privacy protection practices.</p>

show abstract

“…Yet, the fact that a large degree of consent in this realm is uninformed has been well-documented (McStay, 2013), and some have questioned whether it is desirable to leave it to the individual data subject to improve the level of data protection (Matzner et al, 2016). As the European Commission's Impact Assessment noted, 'individuals are often neither aware nor in control of what happens to their personal data and therefore fail to exercise their rights effectively' (European Commission, 2012).…”

Section: Autonomymentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualising the right to data protection in an era of Big Data

McDermott

2017

Big Data & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2009, with the enactment of the Lisbon Treaty, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union entered into force. Under Article 8 of the Charter, for the first time, a stand-alone fundamental right to data protection was declared. The creation of this right, standing as a distinct right to the right to privacy, is undoubtedly significant, and it is unique to the European legal order, being absent from other international human rights instruments. This commentary examines the parameters of this new right to data protection, asking what are the principles underpinning the right. It argues that the right reflects some key values inherent in the European legal order, namely: privacy, transparency, autonomy and nondiscrimination. It also analyses some of the challenges in implementing this right in an era of ubiquitous veillance practices and Big Data.

show abstract

Do-It-Yourself Data Protection—Empowerment or Burden?

Cited by 54 publications

References 30 publications

The Consent Paradox: Accounting for the Prominent Role of Consent in Data Protection

The Consent Paradox: Accounting for the Prominent Role of Consent in Data Protection

Surveillance capitalism and privacy. Knowledge and attitudes on surveillance capitalism and online institutional privacy protection practices among adolescents in Poland

Conceptualising the right to data protection in an era of Big Data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About