This chapter continues to study social media platforms but with a focus on the relationship between citizens and companies, particularly the co-production of data that serves as an important company instrument in the state–company partnership. It reveals inequalities in data production among citizens, systematically varying in terms of geographical distribution, privacy concerns, motivations, and choice. It differentiates different types of user behavior – discussing (producing political content and metadata) and lurking (producing metadata). Based on the China Internet Survey (CIS) 2018, it finds that Chinese users have similar motivations to users in other contexts, thus contributing to data production as privacy concerns remain less important compared to other motivations. This conceptualization of co-production rests not only on user participation on platforms, but also on the role of platform architecture and technological infrastructure that afford users’ choices. Through examining the role of the Great Chinese Firewall, the chapter finds that only about 12 percent of internet users jump the firewall to seek political information. A comparison of the three most popular platforms regarding their technological design show that Weibo and Baidu Tieba facilitate the production of political content more effectively compared to WeChat.

Machine-readable humanity is an evocative idea, and it is this idea which Hanley et al. spell out and critically discuss in their contribution. They are interested in exploring the technological as well as the moral side of the meaning of machine-readability. They start by differentiating between various ways to collect (and read) data and to develop classification schemes. They argue that traditional top-down data collection (first the pegs and then the collection according to the pegs) is less efficient than more recent machine readability, which is dynamic, because of the successive advances of data and predictive analytics (“big data”), machine learning, deep learning, and AI. Discussing the advantages as well as the dangers of this new way to read humans, they conclude that we should be especially cautious vis-à-vis the growing field of digital biomarkers since in the end they could not only endanger privacy and entrench biases, but also obliterate our autonomy. Seen in this light, apps (like AdNauseam) that restrict data collection as a form of protest against behavioral profiling also constitute resistance to the inexorable transformation of humanity into a standing reserve: humans on standby, to be immediately at hand for consumption by digital machines.

Cohen adapts the doughnut model of sustainable economic development to suggest ways for policymakers to identify regulatory policies that can better serve the humans who live in digital spaces. She does this in two steps. First, she demonstrates that a similarly doughnut-shaped model can advance the conceptualization of the appropriate balance(s) between surveillance and privacy. Second, she demonstrates how taking the doughnut model of privacy and surveillance seriously can help us think through important questions about the uses, forms, and modalities of legitimate surveillance.

The Human Rights Act requires courts to decide cases in conformity with the rights protected by the European Convention on Human Rights in so far as possible. Employees must bring a claim under UK employment law and then the rights, whether at common law or under statute, should conform to the Convention rights such as the right to respect for private life, freedom to manifest a religion, and freedom of expression.

This chapter examines the development of a right to privacy against the press in Article 8 ECHR and the legal principles that apply in such cases. It considers the obligations that Article 8 imposes in respect of the activities of private actors, the criteria for balancing competing rights, and the role of the margin of appreciation and the ECtHR in that process. The chapter then considers the impact of Articles 8 and 10 on domestic law and the development of the tort of misuse of private information. This offers important insight into the ways in which the Convention rights and the HRA have shaped the common law. Finally, the chapter concludes with observations on prospects for the future and proposals to limits privacy rights.

Many of the psychological topics we have discussed have focused on the mind of the individual, but humans are a fundamentally social species. Recently, the nature of our social interactions has transformed, through our new abilities to connect with people online. This chapter discusses psychological principles of social networks, and how to quantify social networks via graph theory. The chapter examines the small-world phenomenon and the role of social ties via these graph theory measures. We then look at the case of online social networks, what can be learned about you from your profile, and how their use impacts psychological measures. The chapter concludes by showcasing findings on social network representations in the brain, and touching on ethical questions related to social media privacy concerns and AI-based social interactions.

In the digital economy, quality is increasingly becoming the predominant variable of competition. Markets are expected to seek out that state of affairs in which product quality rather than efficiency is maximized. But an effective conceptual resolution of what constitutes product quality is more complex and elusive than previously thought, and there has been a widespread repudiation of the notion that dominant online platforms can be held accountable for failing to deliver something that a single descriptive standard would command them to produce. Furthermore, microeconomic theory provides little guidance for evaluating how adjustments in the level of competition in a market have a bearing on product quality. This chapter suggests that claims relating to product quality can best be resolved by underscoring loyalty. Product quality, viewed from this perspective, provides a framework for assessing the behavior of digital platforms while at the same time legitimizing the manner in which zero-price markets operate. The issue is most prominent with regard to search engine rankings, privacy, and the sale of goods in online marketplaces.

The area where social media has undoubtedly been most actively regulated is in their data and privacy practices. While no serious critic has proposed a flat ban on data collection and use (since that would destroy the algorithms that drive social media), a number of important jurisdictions including the European Union and California have imposed important restrictions on how websites (including social media) collect, process, and disclose data. Some privacy regulations are clearly justified, but insofar as data privacy laws become so strict as to threaten advertising-driven business models, the result will be that social media (and search and many other basic internet features) will stop being free, to the detriment of most users. In addition, privacy laws (and related rules such as the “right to be forgotten”) by definition restrict the flow of information, and so burden free expression. Sometimes that burden is justified, but especially when applied to information about public figures, suppressing unfavorable information undermines democracy. The chapter concludes by arguing that one area where stricter regulation is needed is protecting children’s data.

This brief introduction argues that the current, swirling debates over the ills of social media are largely a reflection of larger forces in our society. Social media is accused of creating political polarization, yet polarization long predates social media and pervades every aspect of our society. Social media is accused of a liberal bias and “wokeness”; but in fact, conservative commentators accuse every major institution of our society, including academia, the press, and corporate America, of the same sin. Social media is said to be causing psychological harm to young people, especially young women. But our society’s tendency to impose image-consciousness on girls and young women, and to sexualize girls at ever younger ages, pervades not just social but also mainstream media, the clothing industry, and our culture more generally. And as with polarization, this phenomenon long predates the advent of social media. In short, the supposed ills of social media are in fact the ills of our broader culture. It is just that the pervasiveness of social media makes it the primary mirror in which we see ourselves; and apparently, we do not much like what we see.

Generative AI has catapulted into the legal debate through the popular applications ChatGPT, Bard, Dall-E, and others. While the predominant focus has hitherto centred on issues of copyright infringement and regulatory strategies, particularly within the ambit of the AI Act, it is imperative to acknowledge that generative AI also engenders substantial tension with data protection laws. The example of generative AI puts a finger on the sore spot of the contentious relationship between data protection law and machine learning built on the unresolved conflict between the protection of individuals, rooted in fundamental data protection rights and the massive amounts of data required for machine learning, which renders data processing nearly universal. In the case of LLMs, which scrape nearly the whole internet, this training inevitably relies on and possibly even creates personal data under the GDPR. This tension manifests across multiple dimensions, encompassing data subjects’ rights, the foundational principles of data protection, and the fundamental categories of data protection. Drawing on ongoing investigations by data protection authorities in Europe, this paper undertakes a comprehensive analysis of the intricate interplay between generative AI and data protection within the European legal framework.

There is a conflict in law and in journalism ethics regarding the appropriateness of truthful but scandalous information: What should be published and what should be edited out? In the past, judges routinely gave the press the right to make such determinations and often sided with journalists even in surprising situations in which the privacy of the individual seemed clear. In modern internet times, however, some courts are more willing to side with the privacy of individuals over First Amendment press freedoms – and the case brought by professional wrestler Hulk Hogan against the Gawker website for publishing his sex tape without permission is one example. This chapter uses that scenario to explore the clash between an individual’s privacy rights and the rights of the press to decide what is news.

Since the 1990s, big data has rapidly grown, influencing business, government, and healthcare. Fueled by networked devices, social media, and affordable cloud storage, it features voluminous datasets with diverse types, rapid updates, and accuracy concerns. Applications span retail, manufacturing, transportation, finance, and education, yielding benefits like data-driven decisions, optimization, personalized marketing, scientific progress, and fraud detection. However, challenges arise from complexity, necessitating interdisciplinary collaboration, privacy issues, potential cyberattacks, and the need for robust data protections. Accurate interpretation is crucial, given the risk of costly misinterpretations. Moreover, significant resources for storage, processing, and analysis raise environmental concerns, while legal and ethical considerations add complexity. Overreliance on data may lead to missed opportunities, underscoring the importance of balancing insights with human judgment. In conclusion, big data offers immense potential but poses significant challenges. Navigating this landscape requires a nuanced understanding, fostering responsible data practices to unlock its potential for informed decision-making and advancements across diverse fields.

This chapter deals with the relationship between digital monies and basic societal values such as privacy and individual freedom. Threats to privacy and related concerns have risen in the digital age. Information technologies allow companies and governments to collect, store, maintain, and disseminate information on all dimensions of individual and collective life. Privacy is a basic human need defended by legislations and constitutions worldwide. Privacy helps explaining the attractiveness of cash. Some of today’s commercial applications of information technology imply intrusions into the personal sphere. Societal concerns about anonymity, because it facilitates unlawful and criminal activity, must also be taken into consideration, but there are reasons why some privacy of monetary transactions should be preserved, and cash is uniquely suited for that. Another question concerns freedom to choose the money. This idea was proposed originally by the so-called Austrian school of thought. Followers of the school of thought associated with Friedrich von Hayek argued that currencies should compete with one another. That school however underestimated important objections; first and foremost is the collective interest ingredient of a well-functioning money, which makes private competition ill-suited as means for promoting good monies. The chapter concludes explaining why some of these objections apply to crypto assets as well.

This chapter deals with cash (banknotes and coins), the oldest and most traditional form of money in existence. Cash involves a paradox: On the one hand, it is technologically less advanced that modern means of payments like cards and apps, so one could presume that it should decline in use and eventually disappear. On the other, however, evidence for almost the whole world shows that the demand for cash is increasing, although it is used less frequently for certain types of transactions like online commerce, retail stores, and restaurants. Criminal activities may explain part of the puzzle, but not much. One advantage of cash is that it can be seen and touched, therefore appealing to the senses and conveying a sense of security. Another is that it ensures absolute privacy of transactions. Other important characteristics explaining the popularity of cash are that it is simple (it requires no technology or complication whatsoever); definitive (it instantly settles any financial obligation); private and personal (it appeals to the desire of confidentiality); and self-sufficient (it does not depend on any other infrastructure functioning). We conclude therefore that physical cash is a useful complement of a robust and diversified monetary system, in which digital means of payments gradually prevail.

Jewish experiences, from life in cramped Judenhäuser always subject to Gestapo violence, to the suffering of individuals and families in a variety of ghettos in eastern Europe, are discussed. This includes the geographies of the Holocaust, house committees and activities within and outside ghetto walls, and also communal organizations, economic activities, self-help, and familial strategies.