I think there needs to be more government involvement and protection in how data is collected, shared, and consumed; however, I also think people don’t realize that their perception of ‘privacy’ has always had the major benefit of being from the perspective of an individual that largely is unprofitable.
Many celebrities would very likely tell the public that ‘privacy’ is largely a myth and the reason their perspective is that way is because their lives, activities, and actions are viewed as profitable to someone. A lucrative paycheck from acquiring that salacious photo in a vulnerable position, etc is a big motivator, and if the celebrity gets mad at the paparazzi, there’s even more news about how the celebrity lost their shit for all the world to see; however, if the celebrity embraces the media and tries to work with them to conserve what little ‘privacy’ they have, there is negative news about how the celebrity is fake or too controlling about their image. At the end of the day, these celebrities simply want to have dinner out with family or friends and they can’t.
The general public isn’t used to the idea that someone cares enough about every nuanced detail of their decisions that it would matter… but it does. Sadly, a celebrity must spend thousands of dollars to secure their privacy, and even then it isn’t a guarantee… what hope do we have? In today’s society we use debit or credit cards, but all of the transactions are data mined by the banks and privacy is non-existent; however, with cash you have some built-in ‘privacy’ because at its core it is not easily profitable to track.
And that is the point; Data collection is slowly bridging the gap between a celebrity’s reality and normal everyday human perception of ‘privacy’.
I think there needs to be more government involvement and protection in how data is collected
There’s plenty of government involvement. They have access to this data, they can either buy it or simply request it. They don’t want to go back to the days of the pesky 5th amendment standing in their way, that’s why this will never be regulated out of existence.
I think there needs to be more government involvement and protection in how data is collected, shared, and consumed; however, I also think people don’t realize that their perception of ‘privacy’ has always had the major benefit of being from the perspective of an individual that largely is unprofitable.
Many celebrities would very likely tell the public that ‘privacy’ is largely a myth and the reason their perspective is that way is because their lives, activities, and actions are viewed as profitable to someone. A lucrative paycheck from acquiring that salacious photo in a vulnerable position, etc is a big motivator, and if the celebrity gets mad at the paparazzi, there’s even more news about how the celebrity lost their shit for all the world to see; however, if the celebrity embraces the media and tries to work with them to conserve what little ‘privacy’ they have, there is negative news about how the celebrity is fake or too controlling about their image. At the end of the day, these celebrities simply want to have dinner out with family or friends and they can’t.
The general public isn’t used to the idea that someone cares enough about every nuanced detail of their decisions that it would matter… but it does. Sadly, a celebrity must spend thousands of dollars to secure their privacy, and even then it isn’t a guarantee… what hope do we have? In today’s society we use debit or credit cards, but all of the transactions are data mined by the banks and privacy is non-existent; however, with cash you have some built-in ‘privacy’ because at its core it is not easily profitable to track.
And that is the point; Data collection is slowly bridging the gap between a celebrity’s reality and normal everyday human perception of ‘privacy’.
There’s plenty of government involvement. They have access to this data, they can either buy it or simply request it. They don’t want to go back to the days of the pesky 5th amendment standing in their way, that’s why this will never be regulated out of existence.
you should use the term government regulation, not involvement.
The us government LOVES being involved in our lives.