New Google Privacy Policy: Damned if you do and damned if you don’t

Google has come up with a new privacy policy which it argues is simpler than its multiple predecessor policies. Does it sound convincing? The question is not whether it sounds convincing or not, but would it really matter to an average Joe, whether there is one simple policy or a number of complicated one’s? Does it make our life easier in any way? It probably does not have any impact on our convenience, and if the policy suits anyone, it is really Google itself. By aggregating all the data that Google has been able to collect across its products, Google gets in an advantageous position as compared to its competitors. What should really concern us is that if the policy does not offer any convenience, does it complicates our lives in some ways? Is there anything worrisome about this change?

Should what you buy, where you buy, what you watch, who you communicate with and everything seemingly mundane about you interest someone? You’d probably think it doesn’t. Experts however believe that it is a matter of concern for those who bother about their privacy. In a way, this implies that most of the users would be worried about their data privacy if they have a choice. It is a ‘right’ that most liberal societies value. But then nobody is forcing any individual to use the services of such search, social networking or entertainment providing companies.

The question that data privacy merging policy of Google has raised is that do we really understand the consequences of allowing a service provider to use the data any which way they like. Anindya Ghose, visiting Professor at Wharton emphasizes that the context where our data may be used now changes from the context when we provide that data in context of Google’s announcement of revised policy.

Who is really in a position to confront the company for understanding the policy better are the regulators of the State. EU in a way attempted to do that, when Google responded that they are already past that point and that they are not collecting any more data. They are only aggregating the data in new ways.

Google claims to collect information either the way we share that information, such as our personal information, email, address, telephone number or credit card or, through the services that they offer such as search or social network. Google in its policy states that “If you want to take full advantage of the sharing features we offer, we might also ask you to create a publicly visible Google Profile, which may include your name and photo,” So embedded in this statement is the fact that for the want of full features, the user may have to part with some personal private information. Other ways that Google gets information on the user is through the device used for search, log information on user’s device, search queries, IP addresses, and telephony log information. While this may sound intimidating, the policy also says that they would have an opt-in which can allow a user to choose the information that it shares. Google Dashboard would enable and facilitate making of that choice. It is particularly the location based services that may appear of special concern to users. While the services may be convenient for users, it does provide an uncomfortable feeling about sharing your location with anyone you don’t know.

It is a catch 22 situation. The average user may feel like a Zombie not being able to comprehend what could pan out for them if they continue to use the services offered by Google. On the other hand, the only choice they may have is stop using the logged in services from Google. So, in a way it appears you are damned if you agree and damned if you don’t.

With the kind of dependency that we have on Google and its products, Google is in every possible position to dictate terms with its user and do whatsoever with the data that they have on us. Google is not alone; Facebook and anybody who offers us a free service would have to have a way of trading the information that can collect to meet their financial needs. Nothing comes for free. It is only about positioning and making people aware of how the data about them is being used.

While in the current scenario, with Google having a sort of monopoly on search, user may not have ample ammunition to fire back the Google policy. The user does not have a choice at this stage. In a little distant future, however, Privacy Laws may become strengthened. This would happen in response to how data becomes available to third parties. There may also be possible scenario where a user can guard their personal data by opting in for a paid service. Microsoft that has been campaigning actively for data privacy may get an advantage over others if it gels with the users interests.

The current scenario is only about an opportunity to get a debate in perspective; it is only after the full understanding of the implications that nation states may also modify and invoke their privacy laws to allow a service provider to operate in their country. Right now, “Big Brother” will continue to watch you, this time Big Brother being an internet giant who is negotiating information for every move you make and you find yourself volunteering to provide that information.