We all have something to hide
Young people are exposing themselves on the Internet in a manner that would be unthinkable in IRL (In Real Life). Unpleasant experiences and increased know-how have not made them more prudent. These are the results of a new study commissioned by the Swedish Data Inspection Board. In his debate contribution, General Director Göran Gräslund says that young people have embarked upon a dangerous path. Imprudence today can be devastating in the future. Education is apparently not enough – attitudes to integrity must be changed.
I met a journalist yesterday who said he had just completed a mini survey in which he posed the same question to five people. One of the interviewees was Johan, 18 years of age. He was very decided on one point: “You may not print my surname in the newspaper, only my first name. It’s a matter of integrity.” Shortly thereafter, the journalist was in on MySpace on the Internet and decided to search for Johan’s name. He was listed there. Not only had he provided his surname, there was also a large amount of personal information available to the general public.
How is this possible? Could it be that being part of a site among friends and acquaintances feels safe, almost like home? Perhaps even so safe and familiar that it is possible, without risk, to expose oneself a little extra to gain attention? There are indications that this might be the case. For the second year in a row, the Swedish Data Inspection Board engaged a research firm to query 500 young people between the ages of 14 and 18 about their attitudes towards the Internet and integrity. The responses indicate that their behaviour involves risks.
The computer is the most important gadget in the lives of young people; 85 per cent surf and chat on a daily basis – most of them several times a day. (One might expect that mobile phones would be most important, but “only” 52 per cent send SMS messages on a daily basis.) The survey shows that young people are very open to the Internet and do not limit usage due to reasons of integrity. Eighty-five per cent of those queried have published photographs of themselves, and three out of four enter comments on the Internet using their real name. As expected, the oldest users are most knowledgeable and are also most aware of the risks. One surprising result is that increased levels of knowledge do not seem to impact behaviour. Using the Internet to the full extent possible is apparently so important that users knowingly expose themselves to risks.
However, anyone who thinks he or she has nothing to hide has embarked upon a dangerous path. We all have something to hide. Truthful information out of context can also be devastating. You are the image of yourself found on the Internet, and that image is very difficult to change. We read, basically on a daily basis, of cases of harassment and individuals whose identity has been used by someone else on the Internet when making statements. It is easier to lie convincingly about someone we know a great deal about. Furthermore, since memory capacity is basically free of charge, information published by users is almost always stored somewhere. The information can turn up again far into the future. A potential employer might find it when you apply for a job, or swindlers, con artists or even blackmailers might use it.
Many of the young people who responded to the survey already have experienced incidents that should have made them act more prudently. Over half of those queried say that someone has written “unfair things” about them on the Internet, a fourth say they have been sexually harassed and every fourth young person responded that someone else has used their identity on the Internet. However, this does not seem to concern them.
Another noteworthy aspect that emerged from the survey is that over half of all parents seem to be unaware of what their children are doing on the Internet. An increasing proportion of young people (37 per cent compared to 32 per cent from last year’s survey) responded that they have made a conscious effort to conceal their Internet activities from their parents.
Thus, the results of the survey are contradictory. At the same time that young people are exposing themselves on the Internet, they are also attempting to conceal their activities. An increasing majority (66 per cent compared to 60 per cent last year) would prefer that actual surfing be completely anonymous, but only 15 per cent avoid specific websites to prevent others from ascertaining what their interests are. What attitudes do contemporary youth actually have to integrity? Do they really care, or is selling out their personal information in exchange for being able to mingle and gain visibility worth it? One answer might be: Young people do care, but they look upon the situation differently than adults do. They want to protect their personal sphere from teachers, parents and siblings, but they consider the sites as their friends. The youth of today have grown up with the Internet; for example, Barbie.com is aimed at girls between the ages of two and eleven. These types of sites speak kindly to children, and have as much significance and inspire as much confidence as any adult.
What is the conclusion? And what should the Swedish Data Inspection’s role be? Behaviour that involves risk is obviously not the result of a lack of knowledge, so it is not possible to eradicate it via education. The problem seems to be based on a basic attitude to personal integrity, or, in more common terms, “the right to be left alone”. Naturally, the Swedish Data Inspection Board is not responsible for deciding when someone should feel offended, but we do feel a responsibility in terms of presenting facts, pointing out risks and working for better solutions in terms of integrity. If we are to change basic attitudes, everyone must help: decision-makers, teachers and especially parents.
Göran Gräslund
Director General, the Swedish Data Inspection Board
