Beldad, de Jong and Steehouder in my opinion did an excellent job in discussing the ways in which people respond to risks in privacy, specifically as it relates to the sharing of information online. They classified different categories of people based on the level of oncern that they have for the privacy of their information (privacy fundamentalist, pragmatist, and privacy unconcerned), gave 3 categories of the nature of privacy (privacy of the person, privacy of personal behavior,  privacy of personal communications, and privacy of personal data) how people respond to the sharing of online information based on some of these categories. While some people have no qualms whatsoever about entering and sharing personal information, others are more skeptical and use different measures in determining whether or not it is appropriate to do so. Many people seek to measure the amount of control that they have over the spread of information once submitted, whereas some people look at the risk/reward aspect of sharing their information. In other words, are the benefits of sharing this information worth the possible ramifications that may occur if something goes awry? I think that in many cases, I myself use this approach to making these decisions. As a result, I for the 1st time last month made an online purchase. I was extremely leery about submitting the necessary information (credit card numbers, etc.) to set up online accounts and make online purchases. However, after doing research and talking with close acquaintances who regularly make online purchases, I now am more comfortable in doing so.

Bolde analyzed the privacy policies of Google, the primary search engine that we all use for instant clarification of information. Although they do have protective measures in place, you have to read the fine print!!! Google is extremely cautious in the terminology that it uses in its privacy statements. “Lexical choice”, or “the systematic use or avoidance of words” is the primary measure that Google uses in order to C.T.B. (cover their behinds) in case of privacy infringement. They also state that while they have the right to share user information with third parties, it is degigned to “provide you with a better experience and to improve the quality of our services.” However, they do not tell you that this allows them to increase revenue based on the on-site advertising that they are able to create based on the use of this information. Google benefits just as much as the user does, but does not reveal how it simultaneously benefits from it.

Last but certainly not least, this week’s main event – Jurgeson/Rey vs. Ford!!! Both sides made some good points, and even agreed in some small areas in this debate. Jurgeson and Rey ended their piece by stating that Ford’s opinions have opened the door for future dialogue in reference to the classification of private vs. public. Personally, my stance is pretty clear, especially as it relates to social media – once you click on the “submit”/”send” button, your private thoughts have now become public!!!! Even with this blog, once I hit the “publish” button, I may come back 2 minutes later and edit something that I’ve said. However, if 1 person saw what was written prior to my editing, that is enough to “copy/paste” my statements, and share it with whomever they choose. Pictures, same principle – any picture is one “right click/save” away from being shared with the rest of the world, even after you have removed it. And let’s not even mention the newest cell phone technology, “screen shots”!!!!! One snap shot can make any text message, picture, e-mail, web posting or anything else public domain, even if it is intended to be private.