The "Dark Side" of Big Data: Private and Public Interaction in Social Surveillance, How data collections by private entities affect governmental social control and how the EU reform on data protection responds (original) (raw)
Related papers
Life In the Big Data World. Mass Surveillance and Social Control
Life in the Big Data World. Mass Surveillance and Social Control, 2021
The problem of big data companies claiming rights to the data of individuals is a hot topic in the 21st century. This work will aim to outline the positive and negatvie aspects of the internet of things and how it impacts our social as well as private live. This work analyses why big data and mass surveillance was allowed to thrive so freely for the last decade and it asks the question, why convienience of these technologies is making it hard to fight against them. The history of surveillance is discussed from the perspective of the United States of America and it will try to answer the question: what did the US government do wrong? Furthermore, the thesis looks into the case studies of different elections in the 21st century and how big data and social surveillance effects democratic processes in different countries across the world. The work will also look into the worst kind of example of mass surveillance, namely the Uighur minority in Western China, the social credit system and different methods of spying on minotiry groups will be talked about. Finally, the thesis ends with an analysis of the current state of the legislative action that is being taken against the big data companies as well as governments. Analysis of the EU and US legislation has been conducted as these two regions are by far the most advanced in terms of the opposition to these technologies.
Big Data & Society: Big Data & Society On behalf of
he Snowden revelations about National Security Agency surveillance, starting in 2013, along with the ambiguous complicity of internet companies and the international controversies that followed provide a perfect segue into con- temporary conundrums of surveillance and Big Data. Attention has shifted from late C20th information technologies and networks to a C21st focus on data, currently crystallized in ‘‘Big Data.’’ Big Data intensifies certain surveillance trends associated with information technology and networks, and is thus implicated in fresh but fluid configurations. This is considered in three main ways: One, the capacities of Big Data (including metadata) intensify surveillance by expanding interconnected datasets and analytical tools. Existing dynamics of influence, risk-management, and control increase their speed and scope through new techniques, especially predictive analytics. Two, while Big Data appears to be about size, qualitative change in surveillance practices is...
Computer Law & Security Review Volume 33, Issue 5, October 2017, Pages, 2017
In January 2017 the Consultative Committee of Convention 108 adopted its Guidelines on the Protection of Individuals with Regard to the Processing of Personal Data in a World of Big Data. These are the first guidelines on data protection provided by an international body which specifically address the issues surrounding big data applications. This article examines the main provisions of these Guidelines and highlights the approach adopted by the Consultative Committee, which contextualises the traditional principles of data protection in the big data scenario and also takes into account the challenges of the big data paradigm. The analysis of the different provisions adopted focuses primarily on the core of the Guidelines namely the risk assessment procedure. Moreover, the article discusses the novel solutions provided by the Guidelines with regard to the data subject's informed consent, the by-design approach, anonymization, and the role of the human factor in big data-supported decisions. This critical analysis of the Guidelines introduces a broader reflection on the divergent approaches of the Council of Europe and the European Union to regulating data processing. Where the principle-based model of the Council of Europe differs from the approach adopted by the EU legislator in the detailed Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In the light of this, the provisions of the Guidelines and their attempt to address the major challenges of the new big data paradigm set the stage for concluding remarks about the most suitable regulatory model to deal with the different issues posed by the development of technology.
Big Data: From modern fears to enlightened and vigilant embrace of new beginnings
Big Data & Society
In The Black Box Society, Frank Pasquale develops a critique of asymmetrical power: corporations’ secrecy is highly valued by legal orders, but persons’ privacy is continually invaded by these corporations. This response proceeds in three stages. I first highlight important contributions of The Black Box Society to our understanding of political and legal relationships between persons and corporations. I then critique a key metaphor in the book (the one-way mirror, Pasquale’s image of asymmetrical surveillance), and the role of transparency and ‘watchdogging’ in its primary policy prescriptions. I then propose ‘relational selfhood’ as an important new way of theorizing interdependence in an era of artificial intelligence and Big Data, and promoting optimal policies in these spheres.
Big Data and Global Society: Implementation of Surveillance into the Contemporary Democratic Matters
The emergence of new digital information and communication technologies (ICTs) and the provision of social network services nowadays can be considered not only as technological revolution but also as a great source of data concerning the major global dynamics. The sizable bloom of data amount, diversity and velocity generated by countless individuals has enriched the research progress in various academic fields such as political, media, cultural and anthropologic studies. Meanwhile, the global society has reached considerable results regarding the level of public interaction, exchange of information and engagement into the overall process of institutional decisions-making and governmental functionalism. Still, despite the numerous positive ICTs outcomes, the social opinion towards the implementation of certain specific digital services into the democratic matters remains controversial. Due to this point, the current article emphasizes the implementation of surveillance into the contemporary democratic matters with the intention to represent the motives of social concern towards the subject.
2018 - Tracing Big Data Imaginaries through Public Policy: The Case of the European Commission
Across the globe, the notion of Big Data has received much attention, not only in technology and business circles but also among political authorities. Public officials in Europe, the U.S., and beyond have formulated Big Data strategies that will steer I(C)T development towards certain goals and aspirations. Drawing on official European Commission documents and using the notion of sociotechnical imaginaries as a sensitising concept, this chapter investigates the values, beliefs, and interests that guide European policymakers' Big Data rhetoric, making the argument that while the Commission's embrace of a strong free-market position can be partly explained in terms of vexing economic, institutional, and epistemic challenges, its push for Big Data solutions threatens to undermine democratic rights and principles as well as efforts towards responsible research and innovation. The article concludes with recommendations for further research, emphasising the need for cross-disciplinary dialogue and scholarship.
A Digital Janus: Looking Forward, Looking Back
Harms arising from digital data use in the big data context are often systemic and cannot always be captured by linear cause and effect. Individual data subjects and third parties can bear the main downstream costs arising from increasingly complex forms of data useswithout being able to trace the exact data flows. Because current regulatory frameworks do not adequately address this situation, we propose a move towards harm mitigation tools to complement existing legal remedies. In this article, we make a normative and practical case for why individuals should be offered support in such contexts and how harm mitigation tools can achieve this. We put forward the idea of 'Harm Mitigation Bodies' (HMBs) which people could turn to who feel they were harmed by data use but do not qualify for legal remedies, or that existing legal remedies do not address their specific circumstances. HMBs would help to obtain a better understanding of the nature, severity, and frequency of harms occurring from both legal and illegal data use, and they could also provide financial support in some cases. We set out the role and form of these HMBs for the first time in this article.
Big Data analytics in national security, law enforcement and the fight against fraud have the potential to reap great benefits for states, citizens and society but require extra safeguards to protect citizens’ fundamental rights. This involves a crucial shift in emphasis from regulating Big Data collection to regulating the phases of analysis and use. In order to benefit from the use of Big Data analytics in the field of security, a framework has to be developed that adds new layers of protection for fundamental rights and safeguards against erroneous and malicious use. Additional regulation is needed at the levels of analysis and use, and the oversight regime is in need of strengthening. At the level of analysis – the algorithmic heart of Big Data processes – a duty of care should be introduced that is part of an internal audit and external review procedure. Big Data projects should also be subject to a sunset clause. At the level of use, profiles and (semi-) automated decision-making should be regulated more tightly. Moreover, the responsibility of the data processing party for accuracy of analysis – and decisions taken on its basis – should be anchored in legislation. The general and security-specific oversight functions should be strengthened in terms of technological expertise, access and resources. The possibilities for judicial review should be expanded to stimulate the development of case law