Dear dyslexicDiaries,
I have a Mass Media assignment that I need to get out to the masses. Read and enjoy. Feel free to comment with thoughts or questions!:
Critical Analysis: Facebook Privacy
Social Media is a machine that is ever evolving. Due to a few genetic mutations along the evolutionary path, social media currently finds Facebook in its prime; not very many natural predators, plenty of prey, and an exploding online environment to call home. If you haven’t heard of Facebook, you may want to look out, because you may be living under a rock. Unfortunately, that rock is not made for privacy. So we ask ourselves; Is Facebook invading our privacy? I say no, Facebook isn’t invading anything, because privacy is dead.
Before we delve into what Facebook is or is not doing, let us take a closer look at privacy. While I was growing up, if you were not listed in the phone-book, they may have needed a private investigator to figure out where you were. In this digital era, the answers to your questions are a few clicks away. I typed into Google search, my name, Lauren Molloy. I was rewarded with pictures of myself, and a link to my Facebook page. When I added in a few more keywords, such as my school name and city I currently reside in, I was given the gift of my current address, as well as my previous, including a satellite photo of my home-with a directions option-. With options like Google Earth and Spokeo offering up my information on a platter, the term “unlisted” becomes obsolete.
So, the internet itself has rendered the traditional sense of privacy a thing of the past. How did privacy of the past and “privacy” of today converge seemingly without our knowledge or consent? Robert (2011), in the published scholarly article from the Journal of Economic Issues used the phrase, “…normalization of intrusive practices” (p.281). An example of this is: by our employers requiring things like background checks, and using phone and computer monitoring practices frequently, we have come to accept this as normal behavior. According to Robert’s (2011) study, these practices led employees to believe that their private lives were subject to monitoring -of some sort- as well. Our American economy also fosters young adults, twenties to thirties, to accumulate large amounts of debt. This diminishes an employee’s ability to leave current employment, even if they are unsatisfied (p.284). The rise in unemployment added emphasis to this feeling; there aren’t many jobs out there, so hold on to one if you get it. This has led to an acceptance of repressive behaviors that we have come to accept as normal.
Now, what about Facebook? As I understand it, you must still choose to be a member. Even if you willingly sign up, do you actually get to choose your friends? Frampton & Child (2013) look at Facebook in the work environment. “…most working professionals accepted co-worker Facebook friend requests. However, request decisions varied in conjunction with organizational privacy orientation, current Facebook privacy management practices, and co-worker communication satisfaction” (p.2257). Turning down friend requests could result in trouble in the workplace. While this feels like an uncomfortable position, you still have the option to refuse those you don’t want to be friends with.
In the end, it is clear that you do have a choice when it comes to social media websites, like Facebook. While consent is still required to post on these sites, internet privacy (or lack thereof), has normalized intrusive practices. We have been trained to slowly let go of our tight grasp of our private lives. So no, Facebook is not invading your privacy. We have willingly let our privacy slip through our fingers, and have reached the point of no return. Privacy, as we have known it, is dead.
References
Frampton, B. D., & Child, J. T. (November 01, 2013). Friend or not to friend: Coworker Facebook friend requests as an application of communication privacy management theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 6, 2257-2264.
Robert, E. P. (June 01, 2011). Capitalism, Freedom and Democracy Reprised; Or, Why Is the Liberalization of Capital Associated with the Increased Repression of Individuals?. Journal of Economic Issues, 45, 2, 277-288.