The Mound - #27 - Privacy Wars
Welcome to The Mound, a weekly newsletter in which we at Good One Creative pitch— for free — our solutions to the world’s problems.
In its latest attempt to circumvent EU privacy laws, Meta is introducing a 'Pay or Okay' model in which users and soon-to-be-customers would either pay for an ad-free service or consent to the continued collection and trading of their data by Meta with unknown third parties.
Digital privacy advocates at nyob have lodged a GDPR complaint, arguing that paying for one's fundamental rights makes them... not rights, but privileges... and sets a precedent that could lead to households in the EU paying something like €35,000 / year for the protection of their families’ privacy. Consent, according to EU law, is legitimate only if it is freely given.
Arguing for their right to charge a “privacy fee” of €12.99 per month, Meta’s argument is that users are of course free to not use Facebook, to delete their Instagram or not use WhatsApp. The sad truth, though, is that Meta does not yet have the competition required for us to even negotiate our position. What’s trickier, too, is that even if there was a competitive market in which we could fairly price our privacy, we’d still be attaching figures to what is supposed to be a fundamental, inalienable right to privacy. If, as nyob infers, everyone being able to afford their privacy is the basis for it being a right, then the price (worldwide, including developing nations) for our privacy would have to cheap enough for even our most impoverished citizens to afford it - which may be too cheap for a group like Meta to continue operating.
So, what, are we doomed to having Meta know everything about us? Is this just the cost of us living online?
Here's how we fix it:
How on Earth are we supposed to know what our privacy is worth - when the only people who have that information (and the ability to read / use / sell that information) are the ones to whom we're trying to sell that information?
Before this negotiation can take place, Meta needs to tell us what they know - and to share this information with us in such a way that we can understand it.
We propose that Meta, taking inspiration from our friends at Spotify, are forced by governments around the world to provide each and every individual user with a monthly recap of their activities and inclinations. So instead of Spotify telling me once a year that I listen to a lot of Bob Dylan (which I know already, from all those hours of listening to Bob Dylan), I want Facebook to tell me that:
In the days following a family holiday I became 27% more susceptible to conservative political messaging,
That purchasing a third Long Island Iced Tea on Saturday night reduced my work output on Monday by up to 13%,
And that over the next two weeks Pardu Pharmaceuticals really wants to talk to me about my back pain.
Maybe the issue is not that Meta knows these things. It’s just that I don’t - and, until I do, we cannot be equals.
You’re welcome, Australia.
