Privacy and free speech are two of the top techno-cultural issues that have been ricocheting about since the rise of the internet. Free speech has become a lynchpin for democracy advocates who wish to maintain that the US Constitution is upheld online as well as off. Yet, privacy issues are inextricably intertwined with free market capitalism as internet sales are more and more dependent upon the exchange and analysis of private data. Where is the balance between our freedom to use public spaces—both real and virtual—to include our rights to privacy and the freedoms of businesses to cull information that they deem publicly available (or at the very least made available at the end of a long clickable blurb)?
First, there is a legal grey area where companies like Checkr offer facial biometrics services along with other companies such as Berbix and Onfido. One company, Biometrica Systems, is offering what they call “Advanced Facial Recognition” which takes a customer's photo and compares it to verified government documents in order to identify anyone suspicious. More worryingly, this company uses the biometric information to provide constant criminal background checks and it will notify organizations in near real-time when an employee has potentially been arrested.
What this means, is that aside from private companies enlisting themselves in law enforcement, even tangentially, private individuals are now being inculcated into the larger structure of biodata by force. In the same way that those people who refused to get credit cards in opposition to big banking policies and high rates of interest were forced into signing up for credit cards with the onslaught of economic electronic transactions, we are facing a similar paradigm today where employment and purchasing may very well be dominated by biometric data systems.
And there is good reason for caution since the data which companies cull on private citizens falls into grey legal areas where now private companies are operating without full disclosure to those whose information they hold. Moreso, these companies act with an unofficial power, not necessarily state-granted, to pass on such data to state authorities. Additionally, there are privacy issues related to employment background checks that verge on the forced surrender of these rights in exchange for the ability to eat and pay rent. As these practices become more widespread, so too do stealth and even unethical practices such as employers fishing social media accounts for private information. Add to this the many companies operating through spam market with emails that read “Someone might have run a background check on you,” it is easy to feel insecure that not only are you being spied upon but that there is little to no legal oversight of your privacy rights.
It is easy to feel surveilled in this era of hyper-surveillance. As more users are opting to surf the internet through VPN technology, there are just as many others worried about government spying, hence many web surfers opt for services that hide IP addresses or they opt for web-based anonymizers. Privacy advocates like the ACLU have warned that such technology is encroaching on our human freedoms and these extend far beyond just the internet. There has been much discussion in recent months over the expansion of satellites used to survey private citizens beyond international spying. And the fast-paced advances in this technology is outpacing the government’s ability to regulate it. In short, the legal limitations of spying through new technology can soon mean that more privacy issues are a grey area legally speaking.
In fact, people-finding websites are not going away—and this includes the many companies which specialize in background checks. The sale of private information is a multi-billion dollar business such that companies like Acxiom amassed $1.1 billion in sales in 2011 from what it calls “analytical services.” There are companies such as HireRight and CheckThem.com which offer background checks and public records searches operating within the framework of employment verification. where background checks are becoming increasingly important within the employment sector. However, there have been recent changes in the law in California and Vermont which mean that data broker companies in these states now face more restrictions upon what information can legally be culled about people without their express consent.
Still, by all accounts, we ought to be far more concerned about the information Facebook, among other social media giants, are collecting on us given that the trade-off between the private information we surrender in return for use of their systems. To be clear, these tech giants are compiling and selling information to data brokers who also cull information from publicly available sources such as property records, marriage licenses, and court cases. Data companies may also gather medical records, browsing history, social media connections, and online purchases. Depending on your residence, data brokers could even purchase private information from the Department of Motor Vehicles or retail shops.
Privacy and capitalism may very well be at odds with each other, but it is up to our lawmakers to decide to what degree the right to privacy is being exploited by companies who offer employment only if people surrender their privacy and biodata in exchange for a job or other social transactions. Ultimately, when people are given the “choice” between public or economic viability and socio-economic alienation, we must recognize that there are no choices, only coercion.
