Part I: The Right to Privacy
Part II: The Nature of Consent
Part III: Transparency
Part IV: A Framework for the Consideration of Privacy Issues
Part V: Filling in the framework; Absolute advocacy dos and don'ts
Part VI: Filling in the framework, subjectivity and interpretation
The last chapter ended with the assertion that it was reasonable to take an absolutist position on privacy issues in only three of the sixteen entire sections of the proposed privacy framework. In two (green) sections it is reasonable, perhaps incumbent on privacy advocates to lobby, influence, cajole and otherwise perform their proper, responsible role in society. In one of those sections (red), they have an absolute duty to forebear from any and all activity, lest they invite the label of hypocrite at best and aspiring tyrant at worst.
There is also a third region of the framework where things aren’t settled -- where in some cases there would be room for uninvited third parties and sometimes there wouldn’t be room for uninvited third parties to advance the societal privacy debate. In order to complete the traffic signal metaphor and with sincere apologies to any number of African countries, let’s use yellow.
How one fills in the rest of the framework is necessarily going to reflect a fair degree of subjectivity.
Using the colors:
Green -- It’s everybody’s business;
Red -- It’s none of your business;
Yellow -- Let’s talk about it;
there are an infinite number of ways individuals can fill in the chart.
The point of this exercise isn’t to determine precisely where the boundaries are, it is firmly to establish that these categories exist and to start a conversation that can begin to generate consensus about where, approximately, they lie.
The minimal case, outlined above and in Part V would look like this:
One that wishes to tread into the yellow area should be prepared first to state the issue, explain why it’s worthy of public consideration and how their recommendation improves the status quo.
