The issue is as follows: recently,
an application called Good2Go was launched, which provided a platform for
people to consult one another about initiating sexual encounters. Users
received propositions from other users, to which they could respond, “Yes,” “Yes,
but…we need to talk,” or simply, “No.” The application was shut
down shortly after its launch, in the wake of a range of objections related
to its practicality, crude content, and questionable security measures.
Content considerations
aside, this last concern related to Good2Go’s retention of users’ activity, as
it was recently explained in an article from Tech Crunch, is what struck
me most about the application.
While the application was
not around long enough to gather statistics on its popularity, it is clear that
Goog2Go creates the possibility of leaving a digital footprint related to one’s
sexual life. Therefore, for whoever decided to use such an application, with
full recognition that their sexual activities could become known by third
parties, a valid question would be: don’t you consider your sexual decisions to
be part of your private life?
One of the explanations for
the creation of Good2Go had to do with encouraging a culture of consent on
college campuses in the United States. Moreover, this application would have
the effect of “proving” that there was consent provided by the potential
accuser of a sexual assault. With that in mind, we could reformulate the
earlier questions: it’s not so much an issue of taking sexual activity out of
the arena of our private lives, but rather that that right would not be as
valuable in the face of a possible need to defend before courts an accusation
of a sexual assault
At the same time that I
found out about the existence of Good2Go, I read information
about a study carried out in 2012 in Germany that concluded that the more
information people disclose on social media, the more they make claims related
to their privacy. The author of the study, Sabine Trepte, a professor at the
University of Hohenheim in Stuttgart, noted that the paradox is that there is
dissatisfaction with what users get in return for divulging personal
information. But, I would add, this dissatisfaction does not impede them from
continuing to share information!
In any case, the reflection
is the same: what content do we currently give to the right to privacy? The possibility
to use applications such as Good2Go leave me thinking that perhaps we need to
abandon certain concepts – legal as well as sociological – that we’ve been
using for years regarding privacy. Or perhaps not, and the song will remain the
same? What do you think, reader?
[1] I would like
to thank Tomás Ramos, who collaborates on the Freedom of Expression on the
Internet Initiative of the Center for Studies on Freedom of Expression and
Access to Information (CELE), for his contributions to this article. Sophia
Sadinsky helped with the English version of this piece.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario