Getting to Know You: An Affirmative View

“Everything people do online is avidly followed by advertisers and third-party trackers,” according to the “Data: Getting to Know You” article featured back in September 2014 on http://www.economist.com. In this day and age, many people are becoming increasingly more aware of how their information is gathered and exposed on the internet with each new web page that they join or account that they create. This article in particular compares this ever-growing information culture to “Divergent,” a book series and Hollywood film in which humans are categorized for life based upon their aptitudes and values. Yet while the world of online advertizing and data gatekeeping may not be as structured, I agree with the idea that gathering information about users and grouping them into sellable “segments” has become a large component of business in today’s society.

The article discusses how we as a society and world are in an information war. It is 100% about having more information about the customer than another company, and thus being able to generate more commerce as a result of having this greater knowledge.

The internet has increasingly made it easier to gather data about users because of users leaving traces wherever they go. Facebook and Twitter contain codes within the “Like” and “Tweet” buttons that enables to social-networking companies to track users’ movements and interests, according to the article. What remains in question is whether or not users are fully aware of websites doing this.

Quick quiz to see if you’ve been keeping up with our posts: Who are the people who collect our data that can be found on the internet?

If you’ve forgotten, they’re called data brokers. And they earn their living by helping advertisers and publishers manage their data, as well as selling them more data about users (that’s you, by the way). Most consumers have never heard of the companies that make a full-time business of gathering data about them, but they are aware of the firms that do it as a sideline. So many people are quick to say they “have nothing to hide” and go on to wonder “why should I care?” There’s actually a whole wikipedia page dedicated to that train of thought, called the Nothing to Hide argument. Uneducated internet users will tout this all the time, unaware that the legality of their activity isn’t at stake. When it comes down to it, it doesn’t necessarily matter what it is you’re doing, but how that information is being used.  The economist article best vocalizes how people should become increasingly more aware about how their data is used, bought, and everything related to ways that their personal information is transmitted around the web. We as humans constantly need to be in the know about who sees our personal information and how it is distributed.

Marketplace.org provides a few tips as to how you can avoid some of this data ever being collected in the first place. Even if you have nothing to hide it’s not a bad idea to heed to some of these suggestions, namely using non tracking search engines like Duckduck.org and making sure to always read the Terms of Service even if they’re lengthy and obnoxious. (#thinkbeforeyouclick anyone?) Other suggestions, while seeming obvious, are easily forgettable but can be helpful in protecting your privacy–namely clearing out your cookies and browser caches and using different email addresses when signing up for sites and services. If you’re not expecting a confirmation email you can use websites like 10minutemail.com to create a super temporary address to sign up with.

Overall, people know that their data essentially is never private – we constantly sign up for new things on a regular basis and consistently advertise our private lives with just a few clicks and a “create new account” button. But, it is important that we know how our data is transmitted, who is doing it (and seeing it), and for what purpose. That is how we will develop trust and know that our information is used for a good purpose – and that is simply to enhance business and the economy.

Data Brokers: What They Are & Why You Should Care

So we’ve talked about how necessary it is for companies to maintain data transparency, and we’ve discussed the insane amount of information they collect and circulate, but what we haven’t gone into yet is the role of the data-mining companies themselves. Today we’re going to fix that, while also introducing some additional big data terminology to your lexicon.

As this 2012 CNN article explains, there are companies out there, fondly termed data brokers, that “collect things like contact information, demographics and your preferences on things” and then “aggregate that information to try to discern a picture of what people want.” CBS News defines them as “collecting, analyzing and packaging some of our most sensitive personal information and selling it as a commodity…to each other, to advertisers, even the government, often without our direct knowledge.” FYI, I’m not talking about Facebook anymore. No, this is that mysterious “third party” that you’ll find in nearly every TOS you’ve ever agreed to, it’s the all-knowing “them” I’ve referred to in every post. The CNN article introduces one such company called Acxiom. In an interview with the reporter, Acxiom CEO Scott Howe proudly offered the above quotes I used as a definition for data brokers while going on to explain the necessity of his company’s services. Thankfully, the article’s author goes on to report the many potential issues with these data brokers, particularly these following points:

1. “the average consumer has no idea that their intimate personal details are up for sale on these sites”

My bets are on the fact that you never knew Acxiom existed.But Acxiom knows your name, number, where you live, your gender and all the things you like and don’t like. You’ve never visited their site, and yet they’ve got a nice fat folder with your name on it, for sale to their various clients.

2. “data mining could open the door to hacking, identity theft and stalking.”

What companies like Acxiom do, and what all data brokers do, is create these enormous dossiers containing a lot of really important information on you. It doesn’t matter if you have “nothing to hide,” any law abiding citizen can have their entire lives hacked away by anyone savvy enough with a computer to get into whichever data mining company they so choose.  A security researcher from Dell SecureWorks explains that, “just basic information…can lead predators to potential victims… That’s a common scenario, actually.”

The article goes on to state several more critiques and I definitely recommend reading it if you’ve got some time.

The funny thing about these data brokers is that they seem to float in this mysterious grey area, a giant legislative question mark surrounds what they do and how they do it. There’s no federal regulation encouraging them to encrypt the information they have on you or otherwise keep it protected. CBS News explains that data brokers have always been around, but have grown immensely in volume as of late. What used to be somewhat harmless collections from surveys and phone calls has become malicious and dangerous. The author explains, “No one even knows how many companies there are trafficking in our data. But it’s certainly in the thousands, and would include research firms, all sorts of Internet companies, advertisers, retailers and trade associations. The largest data broker is Acxiom, a marketing giant that brags it has, on average, 1,500 pieces of information on more than 200 million Americans.” Can you even imagine what 1500 pieces of information on you would look like?

Data Brokers are viewed with plenty of criticism, which is something we are extremely happy to see. It’s great that big news names like CNN and CBS News are educating their readers about Big Data and explaining the numerous consequences that follow in data mining companies’ wake. Hopefully this post has helped clarify all those “them”s I’ve been referencing, while making the chain of information a little clearer.

There are some tools out there you can use to reduce the amount of information these companies have, such as Abine, a company that claims to quite literally “remove your information from data broker sites.” Of course this service comes at a cost, and cannot guarantee that everything will be found and removed. So remember, as always #thinkbeforeyouclick and be careful what you do online. Nothing is private, and you never know who’s watching.

Terms and Conditions May Apply

Imagine that if when the telephone was first invented, users had to sign a contract stating that use of the phone allowed calls to be wire tapped at any and all times.  I’m pretty sure that the telephone wouldn’t have become the world changing utility that it is today.  In the documentary “Terms and Conditions May Apply” the privacy policies of online companies are explained and shown to not only be complex but incredibly convoluted. Physical contracts make people stop and think.  When you walk into a bank to open an account or apply for a loan you read the contract to make sure that you aren’t being cheated.  You can see the contract and know that society has taught us to “always read the fine print” so you squint to make out the minuscule symbols at the bottom of the page.   In the digital world however, this interaction is starkly different.  Most individuals click “I agree” without having the slightest inkling of what they are actually agreeing to.  The difference is in presentation.  Users are asked to click a box instead of being handed a physical document.  Terms are hidden away on another page that users are required to locate before reading.  While minimum effort is required to be just as informed online as in the real world, companies bank on our innate laziness to skip these steps and just click the box, something all of us do.

In doing so we sign away more then we realize.  The documentary clearly shows the interesting wording of the privacy policies of some of our favorite companies.  This little known fact is surprisingly true, Facebook, LinkedIn, Pintrest and Instagram have permeant, irrevocable access and rights to use, reproduce, retain, repurpose and distribute any and all user submitted and generated content.  Say you post some wedding photos to Instagram.  You and your bridesmaids had a great time and you want your whole social circle to know it. A year later you see one of your wedding photos used in an advertisement.  In your mind you never consented to this and deserve compensation for your property.  Except you don’t. You gave Instagram total control over your content the day you signed up.  Now everyone can see how happy you where while you sit sad and digitally violated.  Additionally, the documentary details the complexity of different terms agreements.  It shows examples of convoluted agreements where the wording intentionally shrouds the true intent of the terms.   An article posted by David Meyer of Gigaom.com agrees and also speaks on contract complexity. It states that a report by the UK’s Science and Technology Committee called terms and conditions contracts “too complex for users to understand.”  This is certainly true, and almost certainly deliberate.

An interesting section of the documentary focused on Brian Lawler, a typologist for Cal Tech.  Typologists study types or prefigurative symbols, especially in scriptural literature.  When Brian was asked how he, an expert in typefaces and fonts, would make a passage deliberately difficult to read, the answer was surprising.  Lawyer stated that he would use a sans serif font in all caps, exactly like the fonts used in some terms and conditions pages and privacy policies.  These fonts are selected because they trick the eye into seeing the passage as a texture or a pattern instead of information containing characters.  This phenomenon occurs when the hight of each character remains unchanged, the reason for capitalization, and when the characters contain little distinguishing features, hence the sans serif.  In short, terms and conditions are designed to be difficult to read in a possible attempt to dissuade users from reading them fully.

Save yourself…Delete Facebook Now

In the article “Get your loved ones off Facebook” the author, Saintsal, thoroughly breaks down Facebook’s Term of Service and Privacy policy, and yes they are two completely different conditions you agree to! Facebook has an average of 1.393 Billion monthly users, meaning it is watching, following and tracking every search, like, comment, status and messages all 1.393 billion people are doing. Facebook has clearly written out in their privacy settings, which everyone has agreed to-or they wouldn’t be on the site anymore. However how many people have actually read through the term of services before checking the yes box? Most people do not realize Facebook now has “permission to use your name, profile picture, content and information in connection with commercial, sponsored or related content (such as a brand you like), served or enhanced by us.” Since you checked the tiny box at the bottom of the sing up screen. Hidden gems of data instruction such as these are scattered through Facebook’s term of service. As Saintsal pointed out in his article, now that your profile has been set up all you have to do is continue to use Facebook and you are agreeing to Facebook’s new Terms of Services-which they have just updated again. When Saintsal decided to do some digging about the privacy settings, he discovered disturbing details about no matter how secure your privacy setting might be set to, Facebook still has access to all of your information and will use it without your knowledge or updated consent. Another way Facebook tricks users into believing that Facebook isn’t actually using your data they collect for their own use, is by allowing you to use third-party applications which then act as a cover for Facebook to continue their digging. All of these findings by Saintsal confirm the need for data transparency in social media site, especially Facebook. By finding and creating new ways to sneakily get users to accept Facebook’s tracking methods, without their continual consent written out explicitly.