Ethical Tracking

Who is Watching the Watchers Privacy in the Early 21st Century
Notwithstanding the Fourth Amendment constitutional expectations to privacy that American consumers enjoy, the Internet of Things, the proliferation of closed-circuit cameras and GPS tracking systems has made true individual privacy is a thing of the distant past. Nevertheless, consumers have a legitimate right to expect that their right to privacy is respected and protected to the maximum extent possible and that businesses of all sizes and types conform to all relevant governmental regulatory and compliance requirements. To determine the current state of affairs, the purpose of this paper is to provide a review of the relevant literature concerning the ethical considerations involved the use of tracking technologies to determine whether privacy policies or legislation should only apply to sensitive, personal information and to determine with some precision just who “watches the watchers.” Finally, a summary of the research and important findings concerning the need to enhanced consumer privacy protections are presented in the paper’s conclusion.
Review and Discussion
One of the more challenging aspects of increasing intrusions into personal privacy is the potential for undetected abuse by public and private sector organizations. Indeed, while many countries have laws in place that are designed to prevent unauthorized violations of privacy protections, innovations in information technologies have made it increasingly difficult to enforce these protections. For instance, according to Apte et al. (2019), “The ability to use GPS to trace the movements of people raises important ethical issues. Geospatial technology for personal location tracking presents a global concern and there is geo-location privacy legislation in place in some countries which prohibits use of this technology for routine surveillance activities” (p. 103). While it is reasonable to suggest that many if not most commercial enterprises conform to the relevant laws in the jurisdictions in which they compete, it is also likely that more than a few do not. This means that companies that exploit tracking technologies can gain an unfair competitive advantage, thereby encouraging other businesses to follow suit by also bending or breaking relevant laws.
Likewise, companies that actively map consumer perceptions about their preferences and purchase habits are under increasing scrutiny concerning the manner in which they collect and use personal data. In this regard, Mittelstadt et al. (2016) point out that, “Gaps between the design and operation of [data collection] algorithms and our understanding of their ethical implications can have severe consequences affecting individuals as well as groups and whole societies” (p. 1). The severe consequences that are involved with sophisticated data collection technologies extend to what type of data is targeted and how it is collected as well as how this data is interpreted and applied (Mittelstadt et al., 2016).
These issues have assumed even greater importance and relevance in recent months as the need for enhanced and expanded contact and proximity tracing using GPS-enabled smartphones in response to the ongoing Covid-19 global pandemic continues to intensify. According to the most recent guidance from the World Health Organization (WHO), the existing privacy protection laws in most countries serve as a valuable framework in which to administer and assess the effectiveness of ongoing proximity tracking technologies as well as their potential for abuse by nefarious actors in both the public and private sectors. For instance, WHO’s “Ethical considerations to guide the use of digital proximity tracking technologies for COVID-19 contact tracing” interim guidance (2020) advises that, “Laws and human rights instruments provide for use of personal data that is in the public interest, while also preventing unnecessary intrusions or commercial exploitation” (p. 2).
Not surprisingly, the WHO guidance also cautions, however, that the potential for abuse of collected personal data is always present and organizations. The WHO also emphasizes that the use proximity tracking technologies carries a corresponding ethical responsibility to ensure that organizations apply the most advanced digital protections that are available to help ensure that individuals’ privacy is protected from unauthorized uses and that the process is completely transparent (Ethical considerations to guide the use of digital proximity tracking technologies for COVID-19 contact tracing, 2020). In sum, there are plenty of watchers but few if any watchers watching them.
Conclusion
The research was unsettling with respect to the growing threats to privacy that are directly attributable to the increased use of any technologies that can collect data without the knowledge of the targeted individuals. Despite laws that are intended to protect American consumers form unwarranted intrusions into their constitutionally guaranteed privacy, the stakes and potential for abuse are very high indeed. These trends underscore the fundamental issue as to whether anyone can really have a legitimate expectation of privacy when there are literally Big Brother-type data collection devices everywhere – including in American consumers’ homes, vehicles, businesses and even places of worship. Certainly, governments have a legitimate right and obligation to protect people from the spread of pandemics, but they also have a concomitant responsibility to ensure that the processes that are used are not violative of Fourth Amendment and other relevant privacy protection laws.
References
Apte, A. et al. (2019, June 25). Ethical considerations in the use of GPS-based movement tracking in health research – lessons from a care-seeking study in rural west India. Journal of Global Health (9)1, 103-123.
Ethical considerations to guide the use of digital proximity tracking technologies for COVID-19 contact tracing The World Health Organization. Retrieved from file:///C:/Users/hp/Downloads/WHO-2019-nCoV-Ethics_Contact_tracing_apps-2020.1-eng.pdf.
Mittelstadt, B. D. et al. (2016, July-December). The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. Big Data & Society, 1-21.