Are we stepping into the era of trapped consent?
Allow cookies? Do you agree to be recorded? Can the organization store and process your data for a specific reason?
Going digital has brought about all these questions, service level agreements, data policies, GDPR. All natural consequences when information is collected, or personal data is used. “Stopp! Min kropp!” (“Stop! My body!) is something that’s taught to children in Sweden. As the fight to make aware the concept of consent continues, the plethora of things that consent extends seethes. The simple act of browsing a site or consuming news online involves opting into cookies, necessary or not.
Digital life equals a life of data collection/surrender, storage and processing.
Where thrilling spy movies in my time (90s kid) were all about stealing a briefcase of secret paper files or breaking into a safe containing top secret lists, they quickly evolved to remote hacking, using USB sticks and all the high tech methods that are no longer just fiction.
There is a need to make sure everyone understands data privacy.
Understanding and appreciating what data privacy is has become important. It’s a big part of ‘knowing your rights’, and understanding what constitutes your identity, what’s yours. Only then, can you set your boundaries as you please.
Giving or denying consent is likened to setting boundaries. Are we getting trapped into giving consent?
Boundary setting now extends beyond just “please expect a 2 working day processing time of your text”, or leaving a voicemail when you can’t reach your friend. It goes beyond just work or immediate personal interactions. In an environment where almost every action is logged (hello, credit cards) and data about you is collected with everything you do, I find it alarming that we are stepping into an era of trapped consent.
Sure, organizations and humans ask for consent before anything is done. One can always opt out, or choose not to use said platform, or interact with said human. Nevertheless, society and institutions that exist to safeguard the interests of society and its individuals need to ask if denying any consent could impact the individual negatively.
How to ascertain consent? Is the absence of a “deny” really a form of consent?
Dragging another topic I feel strongly about into the picture, in the case of sexual harassment, the idea of consent is still being explored and debated. Studies show that most individuals continue to communicate consent through nonresistance (Jozkowski et al., 2014a).
While not to be compared with in cases of sexual harassment, there are always implications of denying consent, digital consent included. There is the normative nature of fears and anxieties, whatever the decision may be. Will I miss out on this information? Everyone is using this application — will I be left out because I refuse to share my personal data and thus not use this app? When and how to judge whether consent is appropriate? (Suggested resource: see this page by the UK’s ICO on the topic.)
There is so much to unpack in this, from the ethics of collecting and sharing data, to whether assumed consent is ok. And to that, I refer to signs in event spaces that say “by participating in this event, you consent to the organization’s right to take and use photos or videos that might contain your likeness”, or something along that gist.
Complicate it further with artifical intelligence, why not?
While the mere existence of websites are already confounding us, we find ourselves facing more of such requests with the use of AI. While digital meetings became a norm during the pandemic, so did the recording of meetings. We eventually find ourselves faced with a “do you agree to be recorded” prompt prior to every meeting. Likewise in the world of healthcare with medical records, life changing studies — all to do with data processing.
Now, AI tools are being used — which is great for productivity in its ways. Nevertheless, I believe this is just the beginning. We now have prompts prior to any interaction, disclaiming the use of an AI tool, and no clear path of proceeding should the subjects feel uncomfortable or want to find out more first.
All I’m saying is, tech is developing rapidly. But it seems like humans aren’t keeping up. We could be, in our adoption of these technologies, be it to better lives or to help smooth things along.
I appreciate that there are positives to this and welcome it. I however would like to urge society, especially institutions of authority, to speed up its education and safeguards for its people. It’s important to not lose sight of what makes us human, while striving for advancements for our kind.
If we are already struggling to keep up with basic, physical consent, how are we to take on digital consent without doubling down on efforts?
