Keeping Up Appearances: Audience Segregation in Social Network Sites

Chapter

Abstract

In the last couple of years research has shown that most social network sites pose serious privacy and security risks for individual users. Based on the existing analyses of privacy and security risks in social network sites, we have clustered these risks in two large categories. One category revolves around the notion of “audience segregation”, which is the partitioning of different audiences and the compartmentalisation of social spheres. Since audience segregation is an important tool in everyday interactions between people in the real world, we argue that social network sites ought to include this mechanism as well. In this article we discuss the necessity of audience segregation in view of privacy and security in social network sites and its lack in current social network sites. We then present a privacy-preserving social network site, called Clique that is being developed to consistently provide audience segregation to users.

Keywords

Personal Information Social Network Site Draft Version Personal Content Disclosure Regulation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Acquisti, A., and R. Gross, “Imagined communities: Awareness, information sharing, and privacy on the Facebook.” (paper presented at 6th Workshop on Privacy Enhancing Technologies, Cambridge, UK, 2006): 36–58.Google Scholar
  2. Ala-Mutka, K., D. Broster, R. Cachia, C. Centeno, C. Feijóo, A. Haché, S. Kluzer, S. Lindmark, W. Lusoli, G. Misuraca, Y. Punie, and J.A. Valverde, The impact of social computing on the EU information society and economy. Seville: IPTS/JRC, 2009.Google Scholar
  3. boyd, d., “Facebook’s privacy trainwreck.” Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 14 (2008a): 13–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. boyd, d., “Why youth (heart) social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life.” In MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning – Youth, Identity, and Digital Media Volume, edited by D. Buckingham, 119–142. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2008b.Google Scholar
  5. boyd, d., and N.B. Ellison, “Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13 (2007): 210–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Branaman, A., “Goffman’s social theory.” In The Goffman reader, edited by C.C. Lemert and A. Branaman, xlv-lxxxii. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 1997.Google Scholar
  7. Donath, J., and d. boyd, “Public displays of connection.” BT Technology Journal 22 (2004): 71–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Goffman, E., The presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1959.Google Scholar
  9. Grimmelmann, J., “Facebook and the social dynamics of privacy [draft version],” (2008), http://works.bepress.com/james_grimmelmann/20/ (last accessed on July 6, 2009).
  10. Gross, R., and A. Acquisti, “Information revelation and privacy in online social networks.” (paper presented at WPES’05, Alexandria, Virginia, USA, 2005): 71–81.Google Scholar
  11. Meyrowitz, J. No sense of place: The impact of electronic media on social behavior. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1985.Google Scholar
  12. Nissenbaum, H. “Privacy as contextual integrity.” Washington Law Review 79 (2004): 119–159.Google Scholar
  13. O’Hara, K., and N. Shadbolt. The spy in the coffee machine. Oxford: Oneworld Publications, 2008.Google Scholar
  14. Palen, L., and P. Dourish. “Unpacking ‘privacy’ for a networked world” (paper presented at Computer-Human Interaction (CHI) Conference 2003, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA, 5–10 April, 2003): 129–137.Google Scholar
  15. Solove, D.J. The future of reputation: Gossip, rumor, and privacy on the Internet. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2007.Google Scholar
  16. Thaler, R.H., and C.R. Sunstein. Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2008.Google Scholar
  17. Tufekci, Z. “Can you see me now? Audience and disclosure regulation in online social network sites.” Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society 28 (2008): 20–36.Google Scholar
  18. Van den Berg, B. “Self, script, and situation: Identity in a world of ICTs.” In The future of identity in the information society: Proceedings of the third IFIP WG 9.2, 9.6/11.6, 11.7/FIDIS International Summer School on the Future of Identity in the Information Society, edited by S. Fischer-Hübner, P. Duquenoy, A. Zuccato and L. Martucci, 63–77. New York, NY: Springer, 2008.Google Scholar
  19. Van den Berg, B. The situated self: Identity in a world of Ambient Intelligence. Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers, 2010.Google Scholar
  20. Walzer, M. Spheres of justice: A defense of pluralism and equality. New York, NY: Basic Books, 1983.Google Scholar
  21. Young, A.L., and A. Quan-Haase, “Information revelation and internet privacy concerns on social network sites: A case study of Facebook.” (paper presented at C&T ‘09, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA, 25–27 June, 2009): 265–274.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology and Society (TILT), Tilburg UniversityTilburgThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations