Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
SocialPrivacyinNetworkedPublics:
Teens’Attitudes,Practices,andStrategies
danahboydandAliceMarwick
MicrosoftResearch
[email protected]@microsoft.com
Waffles,17,NC1:Everyteenagerwantsprivacy.Everysinglelastoneofthem,
whethertheytellyouornot,wantsprivacy.Justbecauseanadultthinkstheyknowthe
persondoesn’tmeantheyknowtheperson.Andjustbecauseteenagersuseinternet
sitestoconnecttootherpeopledoesn’tmeantheydon’tcareabouttheirprivacy.We
don’ttelleverybodyeverysinglethingaboutourlives.Wetellthemgeneral
information‐names,places,whatweliketodo‐butthat’sgeneralknowledge.That’s
notsomethingyouliketokeepprivate‐‐“Oh,Iplaygames.Ibetternottellanybody
aboutthat.”Imean‐‐that’snotsomethingthatwedo.Sotogoaheadandsaythat
teenagersdon’tlikeprivacyisprettyignorantandinconsideratehonestly,Ibelieve,on
theadult’spart.
There’sawidespreadmyththatAmericanteenagersdon’tcareaboutprivacy.The
logicissimple:WhyelsewouldteenagerssharesomuchonFacebookandTwitter
andYouTube?2Thereislittledoubtthatmany–butnotall–Americanteenshave
embracedmanypopularsocialmediaservices.3Andthereislittledoubtthatthose
whohavearepostingphotos,sharinglinks,updatingstatusmessages,and
commentingoneachother’sposts.4Yet,asWafflesexplainsabove,participationin
suchnetworkedpublicsdoesnotimplythattoday’steenshaverejectedprivacyasa
value.Allteenshaveasenseofprivacy,althoughtheirdefinitionsofprivacyvary
widely.Theirpracticesinnetworkedpublicsareshapedbytheirinterpretationof
thesocialsituation,theirattitudestowardsprivacyandpublicity,andtheirabilityto
navigatethetechnologicalandsocialenvironment.Assuch,theydevelopintricate
1Thenamesusedinthisarticlearepseudonyms.Somewerechosenbytheparticipantsthemselves;
otherswerechosenbytheauthorstoreflectsimilargenderandethnicrootsasareembeddedinthe
participants’givennames.Allidentifyinginformationinteens’quoteshasbeenalteredtomaintain
confidentiality.
2A2008HarrisInteractive/CTIAsurveyaboutteens’relationshiptotheirmobilewaspublicizedas
indicatingthatkidsdon’tcareaboutprivacybecauseonly41%indicatedthattheywereconcerned
aboutprivacyandsecurityissueswhenusingtheirmobile:
http://files.ctia.org/pdf/HI_TeenMobileStudy_ResearchReport.pdfIn2010,ChrisJayHoofnagle,
JenniferKing,SuLi,andJosephTurowfoundthatyoungpeople’sattitudesaboutprivacyparallel
adults’attitudes,buttheirskillsinmanagingprivacyonlineareoftenlacking.
3AsofSeptember2009,thePewInternetandAmericanLifeProjectfoundthat73%ofAmerican
teensages12‐17useasocialnetworksite;only8%ofteensintheirsampleusedTwitter.See
Lenhartet.al.2010.
4Ofteenswhoareonsocialnetworksites,Pewfoundthat86%commentonfriends’posts.Theyalso
foundthat38%ofteensages12‐17sharedcontentonline;14%keepablog.SeeLenhartet.al.2010.
DraftDate:May9,2011
1
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
strategiestoachieveprivacygoals.Theirpracticesdemonstrateprivacyasasocial
normthatisachievedthroughawidearrayofsocialpracticesconfiguredby
structuralconditions.Howteensapproachprivacychallengesthewaysinwhich
privacyiscurrentlyconceptualized,discussed,andregulated.
Thispaperexamineshowteensunderstandprivacyandwhatstrategiestheytakein
theireffortstoachievesocialprivacy.Wedescribebothteens’practicesandthe
structuralconditionsinwhichtheyareembedded,highlightingthewaysinwhich
privacy,asitplaysoutineverydaylife,isrelatedmoretoagencyandtheabilityto
controlasocialsituationthanparticularpropertiesofinformation.Finally,we
discusstheimplicationsofteens’practices,revealingtheimportanceofsocialnorms
asaregulatoryforce.
Thedatausedinthispapercomefromethnographicfieldworkcollectedacross20
differentU.S.statesfrom2006‐2010.Inadditiontobothonlineandoffline
participantobservation,weconducted16390‐minutesemi‐structuredinterviews.5
Westrategicallyworkedtosampleacrossgender,race,ethnicity,religion,age,socio‐
economicbackground,politicalbackground,andschoolengagementlevel.Allofthe
teensthatweinterviewedwereinhighschoolorhadrecentlydroppedoutofhigh
school.Weusedajudgmentsampletoelicitdiverseperspectivesratherthan
attemptingtoobtainarepresentativesample.Privacywasthecentraltopicof58
interviewsconductedinNorthCarolina,Massachusetts,Tennessee,andWashington
DCin2010.Whilewedrawfromtheexperiencesofalltheteensweinterviewed,
thevoicesofinformantsfromtheseregionsareoverrepresentedinthediscussion.
WhatisPrivacy?
Privacyisafraughtconcept,withnoclearagreed‐upondefinition.Philosophersand
legalscholarshaveworkeddiligentlytoconceptuallylocateprivacyandoffera
frameworkforconsideringhowandwhenithasbeenviolated.6Yet,fundamentally,
privacyisasocialconstructthatreflectsthevaluesandnormsofeverydaypeople.
Howpeopleconceptualizeprivacyandlocateitintheirlifevarieswildly,
5Thisethnographicprojectisanextensionoftheonedescribedindanahboyd’s2008TakenOutof
Context:AmericanTeenSocialityinNetworkedPublics.Adetailedaccountofthemethodological
proceduresisavailablethere.
6Thedefinitionsofprivacyarenumerous.HelenNissenbaum(2010)relatesmultipledefinitionsof
privacyandgroupsthembasedonwhethertheyarenormativeordescriptive;emphasizeaccessvs.
control;oremphasizepromotingothervaluesvs.protectingaprivaterealm.Theseinclude
definitionsfromRuthGavison(“ameasureoftheaccessothershavetoyouthroughinformation,
attention,andphysicalproximity”)(68);JeffreyReiman(“theconditionunderwhichotherpeople
aredeprivedofaccesstoeithersomeinformationaboutyouorsomeexperienceofyou”)(1976,30);
Westin’s“theclaimofindividuals,groups,orinstitutionstodetermineforthemselveswhen,how,
andtowhatextentinformationaboutthemiscommunicatedtoothers(Westin1967,7),andAnita
Allen(whodefinesthreetypesofprivacy:physicalprivacy,informationalprivacy,andproprietary
privacy,71).SeeNissenbaum2010forafulldiscussion.
DraftDate:May9,2011
2
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
highlightingthatauniversalnotionofprivacyremainsenigmatic.7Whenweasked
teenstodefineprivacyforus,theircacophonousresponsesrevealthediverse
approachesthatcanbetakentounderstandprivacy.8Whilethesediscussionsdo
nothelptodetermineaprecisedefinitionofprivacy,howteensattempttoexplain
privacydemonstratesitsimportancetothem.
Bothlegallyandphilosophically,privacyhasbeenconceptualizedasadichotomyin
whichpeopleareentitledtogreaterprivacyprotectionsinthedomesticspheredue
toitsintimateandpersonalnature.9Althoughteensrecognizethespatial
dimensionofprivacy,thisdichotomydoesnotreflecttherealitiesofyoungpeople’s
lives.Forexample,Jabari(17,TN)arguesthatprivacyis“havingmyownspaceand
notnecessarilynothavingpeopleinvolvedinmylife,buthavingtheopportunitytobe
aloneortousemyspaceindividually.”Jared(17,TN)alsorecognizesthatprivacyis
usuallyunderstoodintermsofspace,buthebelievesthatitisimpossibletoactually
achievephysicalprivacybecauseeveryoneisalwaysinvadinghisspace;helivesina
one‐roomapartmentwithhisbrother,hisfather,andhisfather’sdown‐on‐his‐luck
friend.Givenfewopportunitiestoexperiencephysicalprivacy,hefocusesinstead
onwhathehascontrolover:histhoughts.“Theonlyprivacywe’vegotleftinourlives
iswhatwedon’tsayandwhatwedon’tdo,andthat’sreallywhattellsthemostabout
people,isnotjustthethoughtsbutwhatdotheynotwantpeopletoknow.”Inthis
way,Jaredsettlesforprivacyinhisheadbecauseofhisinabilitytocontrolhis
physicalenvironment.
Whenadultsthinkaboutprivacyorprivateplaces,theyoftenimaginethehomeasa
privatespace.Yet,manyoftheteensthatweinterviewedrejectedthis,highlighting
thewaysinwhichhomeisnotprivateforthem.Forexample,whendanahasked
14‐year‐oldLeighfromIowaifhomewasprivate,shesaid“Nottome,buttoour
family….Mymomcomesandlooksinmyroomandstuff.”Heather,a16‐year‐old
fromIowa,wentfurther.“Becausetherearealotofthingsthatmymomdoesthat
makemefeellikeit’snotprivate.Icanbetakingashowerandshe’llcomein,gotothe
bathroom,andleave.Shehasnorespectformypersonalprivacy.Icanbesittingonthe
computertalkingtoafriendandshe’llbereadingovermyshoulderandIdon’twant
herto.That’snotreallyprivatetome.PrivateiskindoflikeaplacewhereIcankindof
goandjustbebymyselfandnothavetoworryaboutanyonedoinganything.”When
danahaskedHeatherforanexampleofaprivateplace,shelistedPaneraBread,a
restaurantwheresheworkspart‐time.“Mycoworkers,they’llcomeandtalktome
butIstillhavemyalonetime.I’msittingtherebymyself.IfI’mlisteningtomymusic
anddoingmyhomeworkit’sjustkindofalonetime.I’mrelaxed.”Theabsenceof
7Anthropologistshavefoundwildvariationsinhowdifferentcommunitiesunderstandandprioritize
privacy.JohnL.Locke’sEavesdropping:AnIntimateHistory(2010)weavestogethermanyofthese
differentaccounts.
8Teensarenotaloneinhavingdiverseviewsaboutwhatconstitutesprivacy.Diverseadult
perspectivesarewelldocumentedinChristenaNippert‐Eng’sIslandsofPrivacy(2010).
9Allen1999;Nissenbaum2010,94;Strandburg2011
DraftDate:May9,2011
3
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
parentsisregularlyakeyfactorforteenstofeelasthoughtheyhaveprivacy.For
example,17‐year‐oldSamfromIowatolddanahthathisprivateplacesare“Inmy
caroratafriend’shouseorsomething.I’mdefinitelynotworriedaboutitbecausethey
arenotmyparents,so,I’malittlemoreopen.”Whenteensexplainwheretheycan
seekprivacy,theyfocusmoreonwhoispresentthantheparticularconfigurations
ofthespace.
Accessisakeypartofmanydefinitionsofprivacy;forexample,RuthGavisonwrites
that“privacyisalimitationofothers’accesstoanindividual”andthat“alossof
privacyoccursasothersobtaininformationaboutanindividual,payattentionto
him,orgainaccesstohim.”10Boundariestoaccessalsoplayanimportantrolein
howsometeensunderstandprivacy.Forexample,Jeromy(14,DC)saysthat
privacyis“whenyou'retryingtokeepsomethingfromtheworldoryourselforpeople
thatyoudon'tlike.”Inlistingoffdifferentexamplesofwhoshouldn’thaveaccessto
certaininformation,Jeromyleavesroomtoshare.Likewise,Meixing(17,NC)
suggeststhatprivacyinvolves“certainthoughtsorideasthatyoukeeponlyto
yourself,ormaybesomeoneelsethatisclosetoyou,butit’srelativelyconfidential.”
Bothoftheirapproachestoprivacyhighlighthowprivacyisn’tsimplybinary–
accessornoaccess–but,rather,controloverhowinformationflowsor,inother
words,controloverthesocialsituation.Maintainingcontrolisn’tnecessarilyabout
structuralconstraints.Forexample,Miguel(17,NC)arguesthatprivacyis“for
someonetorespectwhatyoudo.”Taylor(15,MA)takesthisonestepfurtherby
sayingthatprivacyis“therightyouhavetokeepingpersonalthingsprivate.”By
usingthelanguageofrights,Taylormakesitclearthatprivacyextendsbeyondthe
individual.Whatshe’sarguingforistheimportanceofsocialnormsasaregulatory
force.
InhisseminalbookCodeandOtherLawsofCyberspace,LarryLessigarguedthat
fourconstraintsserveregulatorypurposesinsociety:thelaw,socialnorms,the
market,andarchitecture(or“code”inthecaseofdigitalenvironments).11Eachof
thesefourmodesofregulationplayaroleinprivacy,butwhenitcomestoprivacyin
networkedpublics,socialnormsareoftendownplayed.Somescholarsfocusonthe
rolethatthelawshouldplayinregulatingprivacyinthesenewenvironments.12
Otherslamentthemarket’sincentivesforerodingprivacy.13Stillothershighlight
howtechnology’scodecanbeusedbothtodestroyprivacyandtoprotectprivacy.14
Whensocialnormsareinvoked,it’susuallytojustifyapproachesmadebyother
10Gavison1980,p.421.
11Lessig,Lawrence.(2006).Code:Version2.0.NewYork:BasicBooks.Page123.
12Regan,P.(1995).LegislatingPrivacy.ChapelHill:UniversityofNorthCarolinaPress
13Cohen,J.E.(2003).DRMandprivacy.CommunicationsoftheACM,46,46–49;Solove,D.J.(2004).
Thedigitalperson:Technologyandprivacyintheinformationage.NewYork:NewYorkUniversity
Press.
14Zimmer,Michael.(2007).TheQuestforthePerfectSearchEngine:Values,TechnicalDesign,andthe
FlowofPersonalInformationinSpheresofMobility(PhDDissertation,DepartmentofMedia,Culture,
andCommunication).NewYorkUniversity,NewYork.
DraftDate:May9,2011
4
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
regulatoryforces.Forexample,whentechnologyexecutiveslikeFacebook’sMark
ZuckerbergorGoogle’sEricSchmidtsuggestthatprivacyisdisappearingasasocial
norm,theyareusingthistojustifytheincreasedpublicityofpeople’sdataontheir
services.15Suchincidentsprovokepeopletorespondbyclaimingthatthatthe
socialnormsaren’tchanging,andthatprivacystillmatters.Ofcourse,socialnorms
areinherentlyunstableandconstantlyevolving;theyvarywidelyandaredifficultto
pindown.Socialnormsarerevealedwhenpeopletalkaboutissues,andwhentheir
complexpracticesandattitudesaremadevisible.Whenitcomestoprivacy,social
normsareevolving,butnotdisappearing,evenaspublicfiguresattemptto
downplayordiminishtheirpowerasaregulatoryforce.Teenagersareespecially
weddedtosocialnormsastheonlyregulatoryforcetheyfeelempoweredtoshape.
Thisbegsacriticalquestion:inlightofthepowerfulpositionsofthemarket,thelaw,
andthearchitecture,howcansocialnormsserveasapowerfulregulatoryforce
whenitcomestoprivacy?
Whentryingtolocateprivacy,youngpeoplecirclearoundthetropesthatadultsuse
todiscussprivacy.Theyspeakofsecretsandtrust,andhighlightparticularspaces
asmoreorlessprivate.Throughouttheseconversations,teensconsistentlycome
backtotheimportanceofcontrolandpersonalagency.Theybelievethatprivacy
hastodowiththeirabilitytocontrolasocialsituation,howinformationflows,and
whenandwheretheycanbeobservedbyothers.Unfortunately,teensoften
struggletoassertcontroloversituations,particularlywhentechnologyusurpstheir
controlorwhentheiragencyisundermined.Moreoftenthannot,teens
acknowledgethislackofcontrolwhenpeoplewhoholdpoweroverthem–e.g.their
parents–insistonviolatingboundariesthatteenscreateorsocialnormsthatthey
declare.Thereinliesthekeyhypocrisysurroundingteensandprivacy.Alongside
adults’complaintsthatteensdon’tcareaboutprivacywhenitcomestoonline
activitiesisanongoingbeliefthatteensdonothavetherighttoprivacywhenit
comestotheirphysicalspaces–or,inmanycases,theironlineactivities.16Parents
oftenusetheaccessibilityofteens’onlinevocalizationsasjustificationforviolating
teens’privacy.
In2006,17‐year‐oldBlyLauritano‐WernerfromMainecreatedaYouthRadio
episodetohighlightthishypocrisy.Init,sheargued“Mymomalwaysusestheexcuse
abouttheinternetbeing‘public’whenshedefendsherself.It'snotlikeIdoanythingto
beashamedof,butagirlneedsherprivacy.IdoonlinejournalssoIcancommunicate
15SeeEsguerra,R.(2009).GoogleCEOEricSchmidtDismissestheImportanceofPrivacy.Electronic
FrontierFoundation.Retrievedfromhttps://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/google‐ceo‐eric‐
schmidt‐dismisses‐privacyandJohnson,B.(2010,January11).Privacynolongerasocialnorm,says
Facebookfounder.TheGuardian.London.Retrievedfrom
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/jan/11/facebook‐privacy.
16Marwick,A.,Murgia‐Diaz,D.,&Palfrey,J.(2010).Youth,privacyandreputation(literaturereview)
(BerkmanCenterResearchPublicationNo.2010‐5).Boston:BerkmanCenterforInternetandSociety
atHarvardUniversity.Retrievedfrom
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1588163
DraftDate:May9,2011
5
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
withmyfriends.Notsomymothercouldcatchuponthelatestgossipofmylife.”17In
doingso,Blyisarguinganage‐oldrefrain;shewantstherighttobeletalone18even
–andperhapsespecially–whenshe’ssocializingwithfriends.
TeenslikeBlylacktheagencytobeabletoassertsocialnormsandadultsregularly
violateteens’understandingsofsocialdecorum.ConsiderwhathappenedinOld
Saybrook,Connecticutwhenlocallawenforcementandteachersputtogetheran
assemblyforstudentsonprivacy.19Tomakeapointaboutprivacy,theeducators
puttogetheraslideshowofimagesgrabbedfromstudents’Facebookprofilesand
displayedtheseimagestothestudentbody.Studentswerefurious.Onestudent
toldareporterthatthisstuntis“aviolationofprivacy.”Mostadultsfindthis
incredulousgiventhatthecontentwasbroadlyaccessible–andthatthestudentsin
theschoolhadalreadymostlikelyseenmanyoftheseimagesbecausetheycertainly
hadaccesstothem.Yet,bytakingtheimagesoutofcontext,theeducatorshad
violatedstudents’socialnormsand,thus,theirsenseofdignity,fairness,and
respect.Asonestudentexplainedtoareporter,“Ikindofthought,it’slikeifyouput
itonline,anyonecanseeit,butthenatthesametime,it’slikekindofnotfairforthe
policeofficerstoputthatondisplaywithouttheirpermissionandwithoutthem
knowing.”Thisincidentdoesnotrevealthatteensdon’tunderstandprivacy,but
rather,thattheylacktheagencytoassertsocialnormsandexpectthatotherswill
respectthem.Thosewhohavepoweroverthem–theirparentsandthepolice–can
usetheirpowertoviolateteens’norms,usingaccessibilityastheirjustification.In
thisway,adultsfurthermarginalizeyoungpeople,reinforcingthenotionthatthey
donothavethesocialstatusnecessarytodeserverightsassociatedwithprivacy.
Inaneraofsocialmediawhereinformationisofteneasilyaccessible,it’salltooeasy
toconflateaccessibilitywithpublicity.Yet,justbecauseteensaresocializingina
publicsettingdoesn’tmeanthattheywanttobepublicfiguresnordoesitmeanthat
theywanttobetheobjectofjustanyone’sgaze.What’satstakeconcernsnotjust
therighttobeinvisible,butwhohastherighttolook,forwhatpurposes,andto
whatends.Findingawaytomanageboundariesisjustoneofthechallengesthat
teensfaceinnavigatingnetworkedpublicsbecauseprivacyisn’tsimplyabout
controloverthesocialsituation;italsorequiresenoughagencytoaffectthese
situations.
Astheyenterintonetworkedpublics,teensaregrapplingwiththetensionsthat
surroundprivacyandpublicity.Theyaretryingtofindwaystohaveagencyand
assertcontrolinsettingswhereboththearchitectureandtheirsocialpositionmake
17YouthRadiobroadcast“ReadingMyLiveJournal”byBlyLauritano‐Werner:
http://www.youthradio.org/oldsite/society/npr060628_onlinejournal.shtml
18Warren,S.D.&Brandeis,L.D.,(1890).RighttoPrivacy.HarvardLawReview,4,193.
19Misur,S.(2011,April11).OldSaybrookHighSchoolmakesprivacypoint;Someperturbedwhen
realstudentsshowninsocial‐mediaslideshow.ShorelineTimes.NewHaven,CT.Retrievedfrom
http://www.shorelinetimes.com/articles/2011/04/11/news/doc4da2f3cb5caae518276953.txt
DraftDate:May9,2011
6
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
itverydifficultforthemtocontroltheflowofinformation.Yet,inexploring
strategiesformaintainingsocialprivacyinnetworkedpublics,theyrevealhow
socialnormsareenacted.Privacyisbothasocialnormandaprocess;itisnot
somethingthatishadsomuchassomethingthatisnegotiated.Andthepractices
whichteensengageinwhileattemptingtonegotiateprivacyshowthatthissocial
constructisnotdisappearingsimplybecausetechnologyintroducesnewhurdles.
Lifein(Networked)Publics
Sincetheyfirstbecamepopularin2003,teenshaveflockedtosocialnetworksites
tosocializewiththeirfriends.20Socialnetworksiteshavebecomethemodern‐day
equivalentofthemallormovietheater,aplacewhereteenscanhangoutwith
friendsandrunintootherfriendsandpeers.Onewayofunderstandingsocial
networksites–andotherpopulargenresofsocialmedia–isthroughthelensof
“networkedpublics.”
Networkedpublicsarepublicsthatarerestructuredbynetworkedtechnologies.
Thenotionof“apublic”referstobothahighlyaccessiblespacewherewide
audiencescangather,andacollectionofpeoplewhosharewhatSoniaLivingstone
describesas“acommonunderstandingoftheworld,asharedidentity,aclaimto
inclusiveness,aconsensusregardingthecollectiveinterest.”21BenedictAnderson
arguesthatpublicscomprisedofpeoplewhodon’toccupyaspace,butrathera
sharedidentity,canbeunderstoodasan“imaginedcommunity.”22Assuch,apublic
isnotadefinablesetofpeopleoraboundedspace,butaflexiblecategorywhere
peopleconceptualizeboundariesbutdonotcontrolthem.Giventhisunderstanding,
networkedpublicsaresimultaneously(1)thespaceconstructedthroughnetworked
technologiesand(2)theimaginedcommunitythatemergesasaresultofthe
intersectionofpeople,technology,andpractice.Facebook,forexample,servesboth
asanetworkedpublicitselfandasasiteuponwhichnetworkedpublicsgather.
Publicsservemultiplepurposes.Theycanplayacivicfunction,servingtogather
peopleinademocracy.23Buttheycanalsoplayasocialrole,enablingpeopleto
makesenseoftheworldaroundthemandunderstandtheirrelationshiptosociety.
HannahArendtarguesthat“thepresenceofotherswhoseewhatweseeandhear
whatwehearassuresusoftherealityoftheworldandourselves.”24The
20boyd,danah.2007.Whyyouth(heart)socialnetworksites:Theroleofnetworkedpublics.In
Youth,identityanddigitalmedia,ed.D.Buckingham,119–142.Cambridge,MA:MITPress.
21Livingstone,Sonia.2005.AudiencesandPublics:WhenCulturalEngagementMattersforthePublic
Sphere.Portland,OR:Intellect,9.
22Anderson,Benedict.2006.ImaginedCommunities:ReflectionsontheOriginandSpreadof
Nationalism.Newed.NewYork:Verso.
23Habermas,Jèurgen.1991.TheStructuralTransformationofthePublicSphere:AnInquiryintoa
CategoryofBourgeoisSociety.Cambridge,MA:MITPress.
24Arendt,Hannah.1998.TheHumanCondition.Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicagoPress,p.50
DraftDate:May9,2011
7
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
importanceofpublicsforidentityworkandsocialconceptualizationisprecisely
whyteenagersseekoutpublics.Yet,giventheirmarginalizedposition,they’reoften
ostracizedfromtheverypublicsthattheywishtoenter.Manyphysicalsitesof
gatheringexplicitlyorimplicitlyrestrictteenagers;teenscannotenterbarsbecause
theyareunderage,theylacktheeconomicresourcestogatherineating
establishments,andwhenteensgatherinparkinglotsoronstreetcorners,they’re
oftenaccusedofloitering.Giventhis,teensoftenseektocreatetheirownpublics;
networkedpublicsare,inmanyways,teenpublics.
NancyFrasernotedthatrepressedgroupsoftencreate“subalterncounterpublics”
which,fromacivicengagementperspective,canbeunderstoodas"parallel
discursivearenaswheremembersofsubordinatedsocialgroupsinventand
circulatecounterdiscoursestoformulateoppositionalinterpretationsoftheir
identities,interests,andneeds"25Inconsideringthepracticesofqueerindividuals,
MichaelWarnerfoundthatcounterpublicsdonotsimplyserveacivicrole;queer
individualscreatedtheirownpublicsformultiplepurposes,includingpolitical
resistanceaswellasengaginginidentityworkandnegotiatingsocialrelations.26
Thenetworked(counter)publicsthatteenscreatetendtoemphasizesociable
purposes,buttheystillservearesistantpurpose,challengingadultauthorityand
norm‐setting.
Participationinnetworkedpublicshasbecomeacorepartofteenculturebecause
teensvalueopportunitiestogatherwithpeersbroadly,especiallyinsituations
wheretheirinteractionsarenotheavilyconfiguredbyadults.Theystrugglefor
agencyinnetworkedpublics,preciselybecauseadultsareever‐presentintheir
lives.Asphysicalspacesforpeersociabilityhavedisappearedorbeenrestricted,
andasteenshavefoundtheiraccessstructurallyorsociallycurtailed,thevalueof
mediatedspaceswhereteenscangatherhasincreased.Inchoosingwheretogo,the
presenceofpeersandfriendsisthemostimportantfactor.Iffriendsandpeers
gatherinperson,teensfeeltheneedtobephysicallytheretofeelincluded.Ifthe
gatheringtakesplaceonline,beingonlinebecomessociallycritical.Thissentiment
isarticulatedbyteensintermsofsocialexpectations:
Skyler,18,CO:Ifyou'renotonMySpace,youdon'texist.
Tara,16,MI:LikeeveryonesaysgetaFacebook.Youneedtogetone.
Abigail,17,NC:You'reexpectedtobeonFacebook.
danah:Howwouldpeoplerespondifyouweren’t?
Fraser,Nancy.1992.“RethinkingthePublicSphere:AContributiontotheCritiqueofActually
25
ExistingDemocracy.”Pp.109–142inHabermasandthePublicSphere,editedbyCraigCalhoun.
Cambridge,MA:TheMITPress.(page123)
26Warner,Michael.2002.PublicsandCounterpublics.Cambridge,MA:MITPress.
DraftDate:May9,2011
8
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
Abigail:Peoplewouldaskyouwhy.You'dhavetohaveagoodreason.Ifyoudidn't
haveagoodreasonpeoplewouldbelikeyou'dhavetobelike"theinternetatmy
houseisn'tworking."Butifyoudidn'thaveagoodreasonlike"I'mjustnotonit."
Peoplewouldbelike"Whynot?Getonit.Makeanaccount."Youdon'thavetopayfor
itsoIfeellikepeoplefeelthere'sanyreasonnottobe.It'sprettymuchexpectedyou're
onFacebook.
WhileteensuseFacebookandMySpaceascommunicationchannels,theyalsouse
themasnetworkedpublics,relishingtheopportunitytoconnecttoabroader
communityofpeople.Atthesametime,they’renotinterestedinconnectingtojust
anyone.Throughthepublicarticulationof“Friends”onsocialnetworksites,teens
constructtheboundariesoftheirimaginedcommunity.Aswithallpublics,there’s
porousnesstothisformalization.Whilesometeenshavearigidsenseof
boundaries,othersrelishthepossibilityofconnectingbeyondtheirnearestand
dearest;thisiswhatmotivatesthemtoengageinanetworkedpublicratherthan
justcommunicatingviatextmessagewiththeirclosefriends.Emily,a16‐year‐old
fromPennsylvania,explainstheculturallogicofthiswhenshepointsoutthatthe
socialpossibilitiesofgoingtothemallormoviesarefargreaterthangoingtoa
friend’shouse:
“Ifyougo[out]withyourfriends,theremightbeotherpeopleyourunintothatare
yourfriendstoo.Iwouldsayit’smoreofanopportunitytoseemoreofyourfriends
thanjustgoingovertoafriend’shouse.Goingovertoafriend’shouse,theremightbe
onefriendormaybethree.Whereasgoingtothemall,itcanbesevenortwelve.”
Thesamelogicholdsfornetworkedpublics.Teensusesocialmediatogettoknow
peoplewhoaremoreacquaintancesthanfriendsortomeetfriends‐of‐friends.A
smallminorityofteensseekoutbroaderaudiences,welcomingstrangerswhoseem
tosharetheirworldview.Yet,eventeenswhowelcomebroadaudiencesdonot
assumethattheyarepublicizinginformationtoallpeopleacrossallspaceandall
timewhentheyengageinnetworkedpublics.
HowArchitectureInflectsPractices
Whilenetworkedpublicscanservethesamesocialrolesasotherpublics,the
affordancesofnetworkedtechnologiespresentnewchallengesthatinflectthesocial
dynamicsthatplayoutinnetworkedpublics.Inparticular,fouraffordancesplaya
significantroleinreconfiguringpublicsociality:
•Persistence:Digitalexpressionsareautomaticallyrecordedandarchived.
•Replicability:Digitalcontentiseasilyduplicated.
•Scalability:Thepotentialvisibilityofdigitalcontentisgreat.
•Searchability:Digitalcontentisoftenaccessiblethroughsearchengines.
DraftDate:May9,2011
9
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
Becauseofthesetechnicalaffordances,participationinnetworkedpublicsrequires
regularlycontendingwithdynamicsthataren’tcommonplaceineverydaylife.For
example,althoughjournalistsareaccustomedtowritingforinvisibleaudiences,this
isnottypicallyhowpeoplerelatetootherswhenthey’resocializing.Yet,in
networkedpublics,peoplemustgrapplewithwhatitmeanstoparticipateinasocial
situationwheretheyhavenowayoffullyunderstandingwhois–andwhoisnot–
observingtheirperformances.Justasjournalistsimaginetheiraudiencewhenthey
craftastory,sotoomustteensimaginetheiraudiencewhenevertheypost
somethingonFacebook.
Anotherdynamicthatteensmustnavigateisthecommonplacecollapsingofsocial
contexts.Whilecountlessmovieshavebeenmadeaboutsituationswherecontexts
collideineverydaylife–e.g.runningintoyourexwhenoutonadate–theseare
consideredexceptionalmoments.Yet,innetworkedpublics,itisexceptionally
difficulttoseparatecontexts.Theflatteningofdiversesocialrelationshipsintoa
monolithicgroupof“Friends”makesitdifficultforuserstonegotiatethenormal
variancesofself‐presentationthatoccurinday‐to‐daylife.Socialmediaparticipants
regularlylamentmomentswhereworldscollide.27
Athirddynamicbroughtonbythetechnologicalaffordancescommontonetworked
publicshastodowiththeblurringofwhatispublicandwhatisprivate.Associal
constructs,privacyandpublicityareaffectedbywhatisstructurallyfeasibleand
sociallyappropriate.Inrecenthistory,privacywasoftentakenforgrantedbecause
structuralconditionsmadeiteasiertonotsharethantoshare.Socialmediahas
changedtheequation.
Inunmediatedinteractions,weassumeacertainamountofprivacysimplybecause
ittakesefforttopublicizeinteractions.Whenweshareupdatesaboutourlivesover
coffee,wedon’texpectourinterlocutorstosharethemwidely,because1)wedon’t
believethatsaidinformationisinterestingenoughtobespreadwidely;2)it’s
difficulttodisseminatesocialinformationtoalargeaudienceinface‐to‐face
contexts;and3)recordingaconversationorsharingeverydetailofaninteraction
wouldviolatebothsocialnormsandthetrustassumedinarelationship.Ifwedo
believethatourinterlocutormightbeinterestedinsharingwhatwesaid,we
explicitlystatethattheinteractionisprivateandexpectthesocialnormsaroundthe
conversationtotriumph.28Andifourinterlocutorwantstopublicizeeverydetail,it
isassumedthatthisintentionwillbeannounced(e.g.,ajournalistinterviewingan
expert).Furthermore,peoplewhoarelikelytoshareasmuchastheycanremember
areoftenlabeledas“gossips”–oftenbecausetheyinitiallyviolatedthesocialnorms
aroundsharingandarenolongertrusted.Everydaysocialdynamicsarepredicated
27Marwick,Alice,anddanahboyd.2011.“Itweethonestly,Itweetpassionately:Twitterusers,
contextcollapse,andtheimaginedaudience.”NewMedia&Society13(1):114‐133.
28Thisdoesnotmeanthatsuchviolationsneveroccur.LindaTripp’srecordingsofMonicaLewinsky
confidinginherareanexampleofhowviolationsdooccur.
DraftDate:May9,2011
10
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
onthenotionthatmostinteractionsareprivate‐by‐default,public‐through‐effort.
Thedefaultisprivate,notbecauseitneedstobebutbecauseeffortisrequiredto
actuallymakethingsvisible.
Withsocialmedia,theoppositeisassumed.Theveryactofparticipationin
networkedpublicsmakescontentwidelyavailabletomanyinterestedparties,
effectivelytherelevant“public.”Ratherthanchoosingwhattoincludeorwhatto
publicize,mostteensthinkaboutwhattoexclude.Theyacceptthepublicnatureof
information,whichmightnothavebeenhistoricallyshared(perhapsbecauseitwas
toomundane),buttheycarefullyanalyzewhatshouldn’tbeshared.Disclosureis
thedefaultbecauseparticipation–and,indeed,presence–ispredicatedonit.
Technologymaynotberadicallyalteringteens’desires,butitdoescomplicatehow
theynavigateprivacy.Considerhow17‐year‐oldAliciafromNorthCarolina
understandsprivacywithrespecttoFacebook:
“Ijustthinkthat[technologyis]justredefiningwhat’sacceptableforpeopletoputout
aboutthemselves.I’vegrownupwithtechnologysoIdon’tknowhowitwasbefore
thisboomofsocialnetworking.Butitjustseemslikeinsteadofspendingallofour
timetalkingtootherindividualpeopleandsharingthingsthatwouldseemprivate,we
justspendallofourtimeputtingitinonemoduleofcommunicationwherepeoplecan
goandaccessitiftheywantto.Soit’sjustmoreconvenient.Ithinkthattheadults
thinkthataboutprivacybecausewhentheyseepicturesbeingputuporthingsthey
neverhadthatability.Sowhentheysee[ourphotoalbums]orwhentheysee
conversationsonFacebookwalltowall,theythinkthatit’sthishugebreachofprivacy
andyourpersonalideasorwhatever...LikeIsaidearlier,therearethingsyou
shouldn’tputuporyoushouldn’tsay.ButIthinkprivacyismorejustyouchoosing
whatyouwanttokeeptoyourself....AndsoIdon’tthinkthatFacebookisviolating
privacy.Ithinkit’slettingpeoplechoosehowtheywanttodefineprivacy.”
Aliciarecognizesthathowsheapproachessharingisdifferentfromthosewhogrew
upinanearlierera;shealsorecognizesthatthisisrootedintechnological
affordances.HowsheapproachesnavigatingprivacyinFacebookalso
demonstratesthatthenatureofprivacyandpublicityinpubliclifeisshifting.
Ratherthanseeingprivacyasthedefault,Aliciaseesprivacyasaconsciouschoice.
Inherinteractionsonline,sheassumesthatFacebookispublic‐by‐default,private‐
through‐effort.Shehighlightshowthismodelofprivacyislocatedinanother
change,facilitatedbytheaffordancesofFacebook,asherpeersmovefromsharing
directlytosharingabstractly.Inotherwords,whatFacebookenablesistheability
foruserstoshareinformationforotherstoconsumewhenandasappropriate–
understoodintechnologycirclesas“pull”–asopposedtohavingtodirectlytarget
specificpeople,or“push.”Apublic‐by‐defaultenvironmentdoesn’tjustreconfigure
howprivacyismanaged,buttheverynatureanddynamicofsharing.
DraftDate:May9,2011
11
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
Theaffordancesofnetworkedpublicsshapesocialdynamics,buttheydonot
determinethem.Howteensnegotiateprivacyinnetworkedpublicsvaries
tremendously,shapednotonlybytheunderlyingarchitectureofthesoftware,but
alsoyoungpeople’spersonalvaluesandsocialnormsthatsurroundthem.
VariationsinPrivacyNormsandPractices
Eventhoughalltheteensweinterviewedexpressedanappreciationforprivacyat
somelevel,theydidnotshareauniformsetofvaluesaboutprivacyandpublicity.
Justassometeenagersareextrovertedandsomeintroverted,someteensaremore
exhibitionistandsomearemoresecretive.Variationsamongindividualsareshaped
bylocalsocialnorms;sharingisvieweddifferentlyindifferentfriendgroups,
schools,andcommunities.There’salsoagenderedcomponenttoit,withteens
havingdifferentideasofwhatisappropriatetosharethatmaptostereotypical
understandingsofmaleandfemaleemotionalbehavior.When17‐year‐oldManu
emphasizesthathe’s“notthatkindofperson,”he’salsoenactingfairlywidespread
normsofmasculinity:
danah:Whenyoubrokeupwithyourgirlfriend,didyouwriteanythingaboutiton
Facebook?
Manu,17,NC:No.I’mlike‐‐I’mnotthatkindofperson‐‐Ifinditreallyweirdtohave
myemotionsoranythingonFacebookorTwitter,andit’sjust‐‐Idon’tdostuff‐‐Iknow
otherpeopledo,butIfeellikeI’llgetjudgedorjust‐‐I’mnotthatkindofpersontolet
stuffoutlikethat.Idon’tdostatuses,actually,either.
Privacymustbecontextualized.Teenunderstandingsofprivacyandhowtheycarry
theseoutvariesbyindividual,bycommunity,bysituation,byrole,andby
interaction.Inotherwords,privacy–andthenormssurroundingprivacy–cannot
bedivorcedfromcontext.29
Whenteensshareinformationaboutthemselves,therebyincreasingtheirexposure,
theydosobecausetheygainsomethingfrombeingvisible.Thereisalwaysatrade‐
off,asteensaccountforwhattheymightgainandwhattheymightloseandhow
suchcost‐benefitanalysesfitintotheirownmentalmodelsofriskandreward.
Thus,whenteensarenegotiatingprivacy,theyaren’tsimplythinkingabouta“loss”;
they’reconsideringwhattheymightgainfromrevealingthemselves.
ConsiderthewordsofMeixing,abubbly17‐year‐oldfromTennesseewhoshares
extensivelyonFacebook:
Meixing,17,TN:MostofthetimeI’maprettyextrovertedpersonsoIsharealotof
thingswithpeopleanyways...
danah:Thatmeansyoudon’tcareaboutprivacy?
29Nissenbaum2010.
DraftDate:May9,2011
12
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
Meixing:ImeanIdocareaboutprivacy,butifIfoundsomeonethatIcouldtrustthen
myfirstinstinctwouldbetosharestuffwiththatperson.Forexample,Ithink,likemy
lastboyfriendandIwewerereallycloseandthenwehadeachother’spasswordsto
Facebookandtoemailsandstuff.AndsoifIwouldgetsomethingthatIdidn’tknow
aboutthenhewouldnotifymeandlookovermystuff…Itmademefeelsaferjust
becausesomeonewastheretohelpmeoutandstuff.Itmademefeelmoreconnected
andlesslonely.BecauseIfeellikeFacebooksometimesiskindoflikealonelysport,I
feel,becauseyou’rekindofsittingthereandyou’relookingatpeoplebyyourself.Butif
someoneelseknowsyourpasswordandstuffitjustfeelsbetter.
Meixingishighlightingthetrade‐offsthatshefaceswhenshe’sthinkingabout
privacy.Ononehand,shecaresaboutprivacy,butshe’swillingtoexposeherselfin
intimatesituationsbecauseitmakesherfeelmoreconnected.Herbarriersto
sharingarerootedinhersenseoftrust.She’snotwillingtoexposeherselftojust
anyone;shesharesbothbecauseandasasignalthatshetrustssomeone.
Trustisaverysignificantissueforteenagersanditregularlyemergesindiscussions
aboutprivacy.Manyteensaren’tconfidentthattheycantrustthosearoundthem,
eventheirclosestfriends.Alltoooften,teensusetheinformationthattheygather
aboutothersto“startdrama,”performinggossipandsocialconflictforawide
audienceonsocialmedia.30Thismakessometeensverynervousaboutsharing,
evenwiththeirclosestfriends.Taylor,a15‐year‐oldinMassachusetts,questions
themotivationsbehindherfriends’decisionstoinvadeherprivacy.
Taylor,15,MA:SoIusuallygivepeoplethelightversionbecauseIdon’twantthemin
mybusinessandIreallydon’tthinkthattheyhaveanyrighttobeinmybusiness.
danah:Whydotheythinktheyhavearight?
Taylor:Becausethey’remyfriends,sotheyputthemselvesinmybusinesssometimes,
sotheythinkthattheyshouldbetheretohelpmeandprotectmewiththingsbutIcan
dealwithitmyself.
Taylordoesn’twantherfriends“inherbusiness”becauseshe’sworriedthatshe’ll
losecontrol,soshepurposelyavoidssharinganythingthatispersonalorintimate.
Butthisdoesn’tstopherfromsharingaltogether.Aphotographer,sheregularly
uploadsherworktoFacebookpreciselybecauseshewantsfeedbackandpublic
validation.
Taylor,15,MA:[Acomment]givesmeinputanditmakesmefeelgood.…Evenifit’s
negativeI’dprobablylikeitasacomment.It’sjustlikeamessageismorepersonal,
whichIappreciate,butwhenpeoplecanseethattheylikemywork,Ilikeitwhen
peoplecanseethatotherpeoplelikeitbecauseIdon’tknow,Ijustlikegettinglotsof
commentsononepictureandseeingpeoplereadthem.
30Marwick,Aliceandboyd,danah.(2011).“TheDrama!Teens,GossipandCelebrity.”PopularCulture
Association/AmericanCultureAssociationAnnualMeeting,SanAntonio,TX,April20‐24.
DraftDate:May9,2011
13
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
Inchoosingtoshareherphotographsbutnotherpersonalthoughts,Tayloristrying
toassertcontrol,therebyenactingprivacybyselectingwhatshouldandshouldnot
beshared.Sheisnotaloneinthisapproach.Manyteenswhoseeminglysharealot
onlineareactuallyconsciouslylimitingwhatisavailable.ConsiderAbigail’s
perspective:
Abigail,17,NC:IactuallyknoweverybodyI'mfriendswith[onFacebook]...ButI'mnot
goodfriendswitheverybodyonFacebook.ThepeoplethatIgotoschoolwithIknowI
knowwhatthey'redoing.That'swhyI'mfriendswiththemonFacebookbuttheydon't
needtoknowwhatI'mexactlydoingtoday.I'meatingbreakfast,thenI'mgoingto
swimpractice,thenI'mdoingmyhistoryhomework,thenI'mgoingtodothis.They
don'tneedtoknowallthat.Icanjustputanoverviewlike"Practice,homework,then
Allie's,"orsomething.Idon'tneedtosayexactlyeverythingI'mdoingattimesand
stuff.
Theaffordancesofnetworkedpublicsthatmakewidespreadsharingpossiblealso
motivateteenstousemoreprivatechannelsofcommunication–liketextmessaging
orFacebookchat–todiscussthingsthatareembarrassingorupsetting,intimateor
self‐exposing.
Althoughmostteensarequiteconsciousaboutwhattheychoosetoshare,theydon’t
alwayshavecompletecontroloverwhatothersshareaboutthem.Facebook,Flickr
andothersocialmediasitesletuserstagpicturesofotherusers,whileTwitter
[email protected],17‐year‐old
Jacquelynfindsit“weird”andembarrassingthathermotherregularlyposts
picturesofheronFacebook.Whileshe’suncomfortablewithhermothersharing
photosofher,shealsounderstandstheimpulse.“Iguessasaparent,it’sdifferent
thanbeingateenagerbecausewe’reherkidssoshewantstoshowallhercollege
friendsandhighschoolfriendswhatwe’reuptobecauseobviously,we’renotgoingto
friendherhighschoolfriendsbecausewedon’tknowthem.Itmakessense,Iguess.I
don’tknow.”
Intryingtonavigateprivacy,teensmustnotonlycontendwithwhattheychooseto
share,butwhatotherschoosetoshareaboutthem.Whilenetworkedprivacyisnot
uniquetonetworkedpublics,theaffordancesofnetworkedpublicsmagnifythis
issue,reifyingthepublic‐by‐defaultnatureofsuchenvironments.Thosewhoare
moreinclinedtoshareoftenexpectthosewhodon’twantinformationsharedto
speakup.Abigail,forexample,postsallphotosfromhercameratoFacebook
becauseit’seasierforherthanfiltering.Shegoesthroughherphotoalbumsandtags
thephotoswithherfriends’names,deletinganyphotosthatareblurry.Mostofthe
picturessheputsuphavemultiplepeopleinthem,soshe’snotinclinedtodelete
them,butunderstandsifherfriendsuntagthemselves.Ifafriendis“really
bothered”byaphotoandcomplaintoherdirectly,she’lldeleteit.Theassumption
DraftDate:May9,2011
14
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
inAbigail’sfriendgroupisthatcontentispublic‐by‐default.Suchasettingforces
teenstomakeaconsciouschoiceaboutwhattoobscure,ratherthanwhatto
publicize.
Thepublic‐by‐defaultnatureofnetworkedpublicsisespeciallyacuteonFacebook
andTwitterbecauseoftherolethatsocialstreamsplayinthoseenvironments.
Facebook’snewsfeedbroadcastsbothimplicitactions(e.g.,abrokenheartwhen
twopeoplestopbeing“inarelationship”)andsharedcontent(e.g.,newlyuploaded
photographs).ThenewsfeedandTwitter’sstreamarecentraltothosesitesandthe
firstthingthatmostparticipantsseewhentheylogin.WhileFacebook’snewsfeed
wascontroversialwhenitfirstlaunched,31it’snowafundamentalpartof
Facebook’sarchitecture.Teensshareupdatestobeseenbytheirfriends,butthey
alsorecognizethatnoteverythingsharedthroughthismechanismisactuallyseen
bytheirfriends.Whilesometeensexpecttheirfriendstoreadeveryupdateand
picturethattheypost,othersseethepublic‐by‐defaultdynamicasanopportunityto
reduceexpectations.ConsiderwhyVicki,a15‐year‐oldfromGeorgia,postsstatus
updatesinlieuofsendingprivatemessages:
Vicki,15,GA:Becauseastatusupdate,everybodycanread.Like,everybodywho
wantstoreaditcanreadit,butthey’renotobligatedtoreadit.Like,whenyousenda
message,it’s,“Ohmygosh,thispersonsentmeamessage.NowIhavetoreadthis.”
But,whenit’sanupdate,it’s,like,ifIdon’twanttoreadyourstatus,I’mnotgoingto
readyours.ButI’mgoingtoreadthenextperson’s,like,ifIwanttoreadtheirs.You
don’thavetolookatitifyoudon’twantto.
Contentthatispubliclyaccessibleisnotnecessarilyuniversallyconsumed.
Likewise,informationthatispubliclyaccessibleisnotnecessarilyintendedtobe
consumedbyjustanyone.Whileteensmaybenegotiatingprivacyinapublic‐by‐
defaultenvironment,socialnormsalsoserveacriticalroleinhowteensdo
boundarywork.
BoundaryWork
Traditionally,realmsof“private”and“public”havebeenbuiltuponasetof
dichotomiesanddivisions,whethertheybespatial(workplace,home),temporal
(“on”or“off”theclock),orobject‐related(workBlackBerryorparent’scar).These
distinctionsmustbereinforcedandre‐inscribedthroughaseriesofprocesses,
whichMichèleLamontandVirágMolnárrefertoas“boundarywork.”32Boundary
31boyd,danah.2008.“Facebook’sPrivacyTrainwreck:Exposure,invasion,andsocialconvergence.”
Convergence:TheInternationalJournalofResearchintoNewMediaTechnologies14(1):13–20.
32Lamont,M.,andV.Molnar.2002.“Thestudyofboundariesinthesocialsciences.”AnnualReviewof
Sociology167–196.ChristenaNippert‐Engextendedthisnotionofboundaryworktoindividual’s
boundariesaroundprivacy.SeeNippert‐Eng2010pp.10‐14.
DraftDate:May9,2011
15
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
workcreatessymbolicdistinctionsbetweenobjects,people,practices,and
architectures—ateen’scaris“private”yettheirparent’sis“public.”
Creating,maintaining,andmanagingboundariesisdifficultandrequiresvarious
interpretivestrategies,traditions,anddistinctionstoachieve.Teensattemptto
achievesocialprivacythroughavarietyofstrategies,demonstratinghowthey
understandarchitecture,assertnorms,andattempttobringtheirdefinitionof
privacyintoexistence.Definingandinscribingboundariesisonewaytoregulatea
setofspacesthatdonotfitneatlyintocategoriesof“public”or“private.”Whether
thesetechniquesaresuccessful,problematic,orboth,theydemonstratetheways
thatteenagersareengaginginboundaryworkbynecessity.
Themostcommonwayinwhichteenstrytodelineateboundariesisthroughthe
assertionofsocialnorms.Teenshaveanimplicitunderstandingaboutwhoshould
andshouldnotbepresentintheirsocialspaces.WhenMySpacewasthedominant
socialnetworksite,teenswouldregularlyvoicefrustrationwithadultswhodidn’t
seemtounderstandthatMySpacewas“myspace.”Inotherwords,teenswere
emphaticthatparentsandotheradultsweresupposedtoknowthattheyweren’t
welcome.Manyyoungpeoplefeltthattherewasanimplicit“keepout”signon
MySpace,meanttosignalthatadultsweren’twelcome.Toreinforcethis,teens
focusedonexplicitlyarticulatingwhotheyimaginedaspartoftheirnetworked
publicthroughthepublicarticulationof“Friends.”33Teensdisplayedtheirclosest
friendsthroughthe“Top8”list,whichappearedoneveryMySpaceprofileand
indicatedaffiliationsandsocialcontext.Inthisway,theywrotetheirintended
audienceintobeingsothatitcouldserveasasignaltoanywhohappenedacross
theirprofile.Yet,evenparentswhomightrespectsuchasignonabedroomdoor,
oftenfailedtorecognizeorrespectsuchsignalsonline.Inotherwords,evenas
teensweretryingtoassertsocialnorms,theireffortswereignored;someadultsfail
torecognizethecuesthatyoutharesignalingwhileothersjudgeteens’practiceson
theirownterms,refusingtorecognizeteens’agency.
Associalnetworksitesbecamemorewidespread–andasadultsstartedusing
FacebookandMySpaceforreasonsotherthansurveillingtheirchildren–some
teensstartedacceptingthepresenceoftheiradults,whileothersfounditawkward.
WhenIaskedAartihowshefeltabouthermotherlookingatherFacebookprofile,
shesaid:
Aarti,17,NC:Iguessit’snotthatbad,becauseIwouldn’treallydoanythingbad,but
it’skindofannoying.But,youknow,she’slooking....Ithinkit’sjustweird.Becausemy
mom‐‐IjustthinkFacebookisformyfriends,andnotmymom.
33boyd,danah(2006)."Friends,Friendsters,andMySpaceTop8:WritingCommunityIntoBeingon
SocialNetworkSites."FirstMonday,11(12).
DraftDate:May9,2011
16
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
Aarti’smessagehighlightshowprivacyandboundaryworkcometogether.Privacy
forAartiisaboutcontrollingthesocialsituation,notabouthidingthingsfromher
mother.DanielSolovecallsthisthe“nothingtohide”modelofprivacyand
vociferouslyarguesthatprivacyisalargervaluewhich“allowspeoplefreedom
fromtheintrusivenessofothers.”34Nevertheless,theprevalenceofthisview—that
youonlyneedprivacyifyou’redoingsomethingyoushouldn’t—leadsmanyteens,
whentalkingabouttheirdesireforprivacy,todisclaimthatthattheyaren’tbeing
“bad.”Aarti’sdesireforprivacyfromhermotherisn’trootedinherfeelingsof
needingtohide,butratherherdesiretohavecontroloverthesocialsituation.Aarti
feelsasthoughhermothershouldunderstandthatFacebookisn’tmeantforher.
Likewise,whenIaskedChantelleabouthowshe’dfeelifherteacherslookedather
profile,shesaid:
Chantelle,15,DC:I’dbelike‘Whyaretheyonmypage?’Iwouldn’tgotomyteacher’s
pageandlookattheirstuff,sowhyshouldtheygoonminetolookatmystuff?...I
mean,they’renotgoingtofindnothing.
Whattheseteensaretryingtovocalizeisthatsocialnetworksitesshouldhave
understoodboundaries,drivenbyacollectiveunderstandingofsocialcontexts.Yet,
online,teensareregularlyfacing“collapsedcontexts”asfriendshipandfamily,
schoolandhomecollide.35Teensstruggletomanagethesedifferentcontexts
simultaneously,buttheyrecognizethatdifferentcontextstypicallyinvolvedifferent
self‐presentations.
Carmen,17,MA:Atleastwithme,youactdifferentlyarounddifferentpeople.Everyone
Iknow,theyactacertainwayaroundcertainpeople.Andsometimesyouonlywant
themtoknowthatpartofyouIguess.AndifyouhaveprivacyIthinktheyonlyseethe
sidethatyoushow,whereifyoudon'thaveprivacythentheyseeeverything.
Youngpeoplerecognizethatprivacyisn’tauniversalvalue,butsomethingthat’s
rootedinanunderstandingofcontext.Theissueforthemisnotaboutwhocan
physicallyaccessthecontent,butwhoshouldbepresentwiththemandwhatis
sociallyappropriategiventhosepeopleandgiventhatcontext.Toreinforcethis
expectation,teensuseabroadvarietyoflinguisticandstructuralsignals.While
earlyusersofMySpacetriedtosignalboundariesonsocialnetworksitesby
carefullychoosingwhotheyfriended,parentsoftenforcedtheirchildreninto
friendingthemasaconditionofusingtheservice,devaluingtheFriendslistasa
signaloftheintendedaudience.Facebookopeneduptocollegesandhighschools
beforethegeneralpublic,creatingastructuralboundarythatisnowdefunct.Today,
manyteensuselanguagetosignalboundaries,attemptingtoclearlymarkFacebook
asaspaceforfriendsbyusingcasuallanguage,socialphotos,in‐jokes,cultural
34Solove,DanielJ.(2007).“‘I’veGotNothingtoHide’andOtherMisunderstandingsofPrivacy.”San
DiegoLawReview44:762.
35Foramoredetaileddiscussionofcollapsedcontexts,seeMarwickandboyd(2011b).
DraftDate:May9,2011
17
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
references,andotherstylesofsharingthatteensusewhentheyarewitheachother.
Unfortunately,manyadultsfailtorecognizethesestrategiesassignals,instead
projectingtheirownvaluesontoteens’practicesandjudgingteensthroughtheir
worldview.
Hunterisageeky14‐year‐oldlivingininnercityWashingtonDC.Hismommoved
fromTrinidadwhenhisolderhalf‐siblingswerequiteyoungbecausetheirfather
wasabusive.Hunter’smotherandfatherarenottogether,butHunterhasa
relationshipwithhisfather,unlikehisolder(and,forthatmatter,younger)siblings.
Hunterseeshimselfasverydifferentfromhissiblingsandcousins,whoheidentifies
as“ghetto.”Inhiswords,thismeans“notreallycaringaboutwhatpeoplethinkabout
you…[notcaring]aboutbeingsmartorhavinggoodgrades…alwaysgettinginto
trouble,becauseyouwanttostarttrouble,not‘causeyoucan’tavoidit.”Todescribe
howhissister“became”ghetto,heexplains,“herboyfriend,hedoesn’ttreatherwell,
andshehasababynow,and,everytimetheyhaveafight,shecutsoffherphone,she
disconnectsherphoneor,ifit’sdisconnected,shedoesn’twanttotalktomymom,‘Oh,
I’mnotfeelingwell,’butshe’salwaysonFacebookandalwayspostingallkindsof
nonsenseonFacebookwhichisoneofthethingsmymomgetssoupsetabout.”
AlthoughHunterlamentsherchoices,heverymuchloveshissisterandwantsherin
hislife,eventhoughhismotherworriesthatshe’sabadinfluenceonhim.Hunter
feelsconfidentaboutwhoheis–ageekwhoisproudofhisintellectualcuriosity
andprowessandwhoisgratifiedtobeanhonorstudentatacompetitivehigh
school.Ofcourse,healsorecognizesthatnoneofhisfamilymembers,otherthanhis
mom,valuehisacademicachievements,esoterictastes,orpassionforreading.
OnFacebook,Hunteris“friends”withhissisterandcousinsaswellashisfriends
fromschool;thecontextcollisionsthatoccuronthesiteareaconstantsourceof
tensionforHunter.Hetriestomakeitclearthatcertainstatusupdatesaremeant
forcertainpeople,buthisfamilymembersregularlymissthesesignals,makingit
hardforhimtomanagesocialboundariesonFacebook.
Hunter,14,DC:WhenI’mtalkingtomyfriendsonFacebookorIputupastatus,
somethingIhateiswhenpeoplewhoI’mnotaddressinginmystatusescommenton
mystatuses.In[myoldschool],peoplealwaysusedtocallmenerdyandthatIwasthe
leastblackblackpersonthatthey’veevermet,somepeoplesaythat,andIsaidon
Facebook,“ShouldItakeoffensetothefactthatsomebodyputtheringtone“Whiteand
Nerdy”forme?”anditwasajoke.Iguessweweretalkingaboutitinschool,and[my
sister]comesoutofnowhere,“Aw,babybro,”andI’mlike,no,don’tsaythat,Iwasn't
talkingtoyou.
danah:HowdopeopleknowwhoisbeingtalkedtowithFacebookstatusupdates?
Hunter:Iguessthatisapoint.Sometimesitprobablyishard,butIthinkit’sjustthe
certainwaythatyoutalk.IwilltalktomysisteradifferentwaythanI’lltalktomy
friendsatschoolorfrommyfriendsfrommyoldschool,andImightsay,“Oh,well,Ifell
asleepinMissK’sclassbyaccident,”andthey’llsay,“Oh,yeah,MissKissoboring,”and
DraftDate:May9,2011
18
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
she’slike,“Oh,well,youshouldn’tfallasleep.Youshouldpayattention.”Imean,I
thinkyoucanfigureoutthatI’mnottalkingtoyouifI’mtalkingaboutacertain
teacher.
Hunter’sstoryhighlightshowteensattempttoassertsocialnorms,andfail.Unable
tomanageboundariesthroughtheassertionofsocialnorms,teensoftenbegin
experimentingwithstructuralandsocialstrategiestoachieveprivacy.
StructuralStrategies
Frustratedbyhissisterandcousins’failuretounderstandwhatheperceivedas
acceptablesocialnorms,Hunterdecidedtotakeadifferenttactictomanagethe
collapsingofcontexts–hestartedtouseFacebook’sblockingfeatureasawayto
directlylimittheirparticipation.Forexample,hiscousinsmakefunofhis
preferenceforPokémonorLegendsofZeldaovershootergames.Sowhenheposts
aboutvideogames,heexplicitlyblockshiscousinssothattheywon’tpostnegative
commentsabouthisenthusiasmsthathewouldfind“embarrassing.”Byexplicitly
blockingpeople,hecansegmenthisaudiences.Buthealsoknowsthatthisisnot
foolproofandthat,ifhiscousinsweretofindout,theywouldbequiteupset.Inhis
mind,hisonlyotheralternativesaretode‐friendthemordeletetheircontent;
neitherapproachesappealtohim,sohe’shopingthattheywon’taccidentallysee
thathe’spostingcontentthattheycan’tsee.Thesocialpressureagainstde‐
friendingisacutetothepointwhereteenswillengageinelaboratestrategiesto
avoidit.
Facebookhasnumeroustechnicalfeaturesthatcanbeusedtosegmentaudiences
andlimitthevisibilityofinformation.Whileteenagersdousethesefeatures36,they
oftenhavemixedunderstandingsandfaithinthem.Ononehand,teensgenerally
believethattheycanuseFacebook’sprivacysettingstokeepstrangers–or
“creepers”–out;thisisoftenwhatmotivatesthemtoactivelyconfiguretheir
settingsinthefirstplace.Ofcourse,asBrandimarte,Acquisti,andLoewenstein
havenoted,this“illusionofcontrol”iswhatmotivatesFacebookuserstosharemore
withtheserviceinthefirstplace;usersbelievethattheyhavekeptstrangersout
whileremainingunawareofwhoelsemighthaveaccesstothatdata(suchas
Facebookthemselves).37Whileteensgenerallydonotaccountforinvisiblethird
parties,theydoaccountforeavesdroppersandgossipmongers.Fromthis
perspective,mostyoungpeoplearenotconvincedthatFacebook’sprivacysettings
willactuallyhelpthemcontrolhowinformationflows.Aseavesdroppers
themselves,they’vewitnessedcontentleakingwhensomeone’sfriendpostsa
responseorreferencesapost.Andthey’refullyawarethatfriendsandparentsare
36boyd,danahandEszterHargittai(2010)."FacebookPrivacySettings:WhoCares?"FirstMonday15
(8).
37Brandimarte,L.,Acquisti,A.,andLoewenstein,G.(inreview)"PrivacyConcernsandInformation
Disclosure:AnIllusionofControlHypothesis."
DraftDate:May9,2011
19
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
lookingoverpeople’sshoulders,accessinginformationinwaysthatcannotbe
controlledthroughFacebook’sprivacysettings.Thus,teenshavestarteddeveloping
innovativestructuralstrategiesforachievingprivacythatdon’trelyonFacebook’s
privacysettings.
Oneofthemostcommonstrategiesthatbothteenagersandadultsuseistoseparate
socialcontextsbysocialtool.Forinstance,someteensusedFacebookandMySpace
totalktodifferentsocialcohorts.Forawhile,teenswouldcreateseparateMySpace
profilesforseparatepurposes;thispracticewasrenderedobsoletebyFacebook’s
insistenceononeaccountperuserand,moreimportantly,bytherecommended
FriendsfeatureonFacebookthatregularlyouttedpeople’ssecondprofiles.
Mostoftheteensweinterviewedusedmultiplecommunicationchannelsand
consideredthemashavingdifferentpurposes.Forexample,teenswouldarguethat
Facebookwasmorepublic‐facing,whiletextmessagingwasmoreintimate.These
distinctionswerenotalwaysdrivenbythetechnicalaffordancesofthemodalitiesas
muchasthesocialpracticesthathadgrownuparoundthem.When17‐year‐old
ManufromNorthCarolinaexplainedthat,“Facebookislikeyellingouttoacrowd
whileTwitterisjustliketalkinginaroom,”itwasnotbecauseTwitterisinherently
moreprivatethanFacebook,butbecausehispeers,parentsandcommunityhadnot
broadlyadoptedit.TwitterservedamoreintimateroleforManuthanFacebook,at
leastforthepresenttime.Segmentingfriendgroupsbyserviceisrelatively
common,butthisisdifficulttomaintain,especiallygiventhedominanceof
Facebookinthelivesoftheteensweinterviewed.
Twoofthemoreuniquestrategieswefoundforachievingprivacyweredescribed
by18‐year‐oldMikalahand17‐year‐oldShamikainWashingtonDC.Bothgirlshave
limitedliteracy,butextensivestreetsmarts.Althoughunwillingtotalktousabout
it,ShamikahadMikalah’snametattooedonherarmandherFacebookprofilemade
itclearthattheywereinarelationship.Bothgirlswereextremelycageyand
nervoustotalkwithus;ShamikaopenedupmoreaboutherselfthanMikalah.But
eachdescribeduniquestrategiesfordealingwithFacebook.
ToAlice,MikalahdescribedthatshedeactivatedherFacebookaccounteveryday
aftershewasdonelookingatthesite.DeactivationwasintroducedbyFacebookas
analternativetodeletion;userscoulddeactivatetheircontentandforallintents
andpurposeswoulddisappearfromthesite,butiftheylaterregretteditcould
reactivetheiraccountandretrieveallofthecontent,connections,andmessages.
Mikalahdidthiseveryday,whichineffectmadeitsothatherfriendscouldonly
sendmessagesorleavecommentswhenshewasloggedin.Throughthis
mechanism,MikalahturnedFacebookintoareal‐timeservice,obliteratingboththe
benefitsaswellastheconsequencesofasynchronicity.Sheknewthatadultswould
trytolookatherprofileduringthedaytimeandshedidn’twanttobesearchable;
sheregularlyhadtodealwiththestateanddidn’ttrustadults.Butshereasonably
DraftDate:May9,2011
20
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
assumedthatmostadultswouldbelesslikelytobelookingforheratnightwhen
shegotonline.Thus,ineffect,shecreatedaninvisibilitycloakforherFacebook
usage–lettingherstayvisibletothosethatcouldseeherwhenshewasaroundand
beinginvisibletothepryingeyesofthoseinpowerwhowerelookingforherwhen
shewasn’taround.
Shamikatookadifferentapproach.Assheexplainedtodanah,shefoundthat
Facebookcontributedtodramabyprovidingaplethoraofpastcommentsthatcould
beusedagainstpeoplewheneverafriendshiporrelationshipturnedsour.Thus,
shepreferredtominimizeherriskbydeletingeverycommentshereceivedaftershe
readit.Furthermore,she’dwriteacommentonsomeoneelse’spageandthen
deleteitthenextday,presumablyaftertheyhadseenit.Shamika’sconstant
deletionturnedFacebookintoamoreephemeralspace,destabilizingthepersistent
natureofthespace.WhileShamikafullyunderstoodthatpeoplecouldsaveher
posts,shefeltthattheextrahurdlewasthedifferencebetweennormalandcreepy.
Forher,thisactofdeletionmeantareductioninconflict,andshewastryingtostay
outoftroublebecauseshehadreceivedseveralschoolsuspensionsalready.Theless
informationthatwasoutthereforjealouspeerstomisinterpret,thebetter.For
Shamika,Facebookisa“lighttouch”communicationstructure,meaningthatshecan
checkinwithwhat’shappeningwithhercommunitywithouthavingtohaveadeep
emotionalinvestment;thisisveryimportanttoher.Butitdoesn’tneedtobe
persistenttobeuseful.
Whiletechnicalstrategiestolimitaccesscanbehelpful,thesetechniquesarenot
foolproof.Theaffordancesofnetworkedpublicscreateslippages.Manyteenshave
storiesofwhensomethingthoughttoberelatively“private”onFacebookleaked
beyonditsintendedcontext.Whetherduetoparentswatchingovertheshoulderor
friendscopyingandpastingstatusmessages,thetechnologiesdonotprovide
accurateindicatorsofwhatisvisibletowhom,highlightinghowcontrollingaccessis
notalwaysthebestcourse.
SocialStrategies
Recognizingthatsocialnormsandstructurallimitationsareoftenineffective,many
teenstakeadifferenttactictoachievesocialprivacy:theylimitthemeaningoftheir
messages.Thisisnotanewstrategyforthedigitalera,norisitsomethingreserved
solelyforteens,butthecomplexityofachievingprivacyinnetworkedpublicshas
motivatedcountlessteenstoactassumingthattheyarebeingsurveilled.
InMassachusetts,17‐year‐oldCarmenregularlystrugglestomanagehermother’s
misinterpretationsofeverythingshesaysonFacebook.Inshort,Carmen’smother
hasatendencytooverreact.Furthermore,shehasatendencytorevealher
overreactionsintheformofFacebookcomments.
Carmen,17,MA:[Mymother]tendstocommentoneverything.I’mlike,goaway.
danah:Doyoueverdeletehercomments?
DraftDate:May9,2011
21
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
Carmen:No,becausethenIfeelbad.Idon’twanttofeelbad.She’sgottenbetter,now
shejustsendsmemessages.
danah:Whydon'tyouwanthercommenting?
Carmen:Becausethenitscareseveryoneaway.Everyonekindofdisappearsafterthe
mompost....Andit’sjustuncoolhavingyourmomalloveryourwall,that’sjustlame.
Carmenloveshermotherandlikesthathermothercaresaboutwhat’shappeningin
herlife,buttheseoverreactionscanbestifling.WhenCarmenbrokeupwithher
boyfriend,therelationshipwasn'tworkingbutshewasstillsad.Shewantedher
friendstoknowhowshewasfeeling,butshewasafraidthatifshepostedamoody
messagetoFacebook,hermotherwouldassumeshewassuicidal.Shedidn’twant
toupsethermother,soratherthanpostingasappymessage,shechosetopostlyrics
from"AlwaysLookontheBrightSideofLife."Hergeekyfriendsimmediately
recognizedthesongfrom"LifeofBrian"andknewthatthesongwassungwhenthe
maincharacterwasabouttobeexecuted.Hermother,ontheotherhand,didnot
realizethatthewordswereasonglyric,letalonerecognizetheMontyPython
reference.ShetookthewordsliterallyandcommentedonCarmen'spost,noting
thatsheseemedtobedoingreallywell.Herfriends,familiarwiththeMontyPython
reference–andwitnessingCarmen’smother’smisinterpretationinhercomment–
textedhertogetthefullstory.
Byencodinghermessagesothatonlyherfriendscandecodethemeaningofit,
Carmenisengagedinanactof“socialsteganography.”Steganographyisanage‐old
tacticofhidinginformationinplainsight,drivenbythenotionof“securitythrough
obscurity.”38Stegnographicmessagesaresentthroughchannelswherenooneis
evenawarethatamessageishidden.Forexample,intheancientGreektext“The
Histories,”Demaratushidamessageinthewoodbeneaththewaxofawaxtablet
whileHistiaeustattooedamessageonaslave'sheadthatwasrenderedinvisible
whenhishairgrew.Inbothcases,themessagewaseasilyaccessiblebutrequired
knowingthatamessageexistedinthefirstplace.39Suchtechniquesarealsopartof
contemporarychildren’splaywithtoyslikeinvisibleinkpens.Steganographyisn't
powerfulbecauseofstrongencryption;it'spowerfulbecausepeopledon'tthinkto
lookforahiddenmessage.ThemeaningbehindCarmen’ssonglyricspostis,forall
intentsandpurposes,invisible.Toanyonereadingthemessage,itsimplylookslike
ahappypost.Andevenifthereaderrecognizesitassonglyricsandunderstands
theMontyPythonreference,theydon’tunderstandthefullimplicationsunless
they’recloseenoughtoCarmentoknowthatshejustendedtherelationshipwith
herboyfriend.Unlockingthemeaningofthatpostrequiresrecognizingmultiple
referents.
38Petitcolas,FabianA.P.,RossJ.Anderson,andMarkusG.Kuhn.(1999,July)."InformationHiding:A
survey."ProceedingsoftheIEEE(specialissueonprotectionofmultimediacontent)87(7):1062–
78.
39Ibid.
DraftDate:May9,2011
22
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
Whilesometeenschoosetohideinplainsight,otherspostencodedmessages
intendedasvisibledisplaysofin‐jokesorobscurereferents,oraremeantto
encouragecertainpeopletorespondwhileisolatingothers.InNorthCarolina,17‐
year‐oldJacquelynpostedasimplemessageonherFacebook:“Yes!”Asapremier
ballerina,shewasregularlycompetingforroleswithanotherballerinawhoshedid
notparticularlylike.Sheregularlycomplainedaboutthistoherclosefriends.
Whenthesecondballerinadecidedtoleavethecompany,Jacquelynimmediately
wrote“Yes!”onherWall.Sheunderstoodthatherclosestfriendswouldprobably
guesswhathadjusthappenedandthatanyonewhowasclosetoherwould
approachherin‐personorviatextmessagetoaskherwhatthegoodnewswas.She
alsoknewthatifshewasaskedaboutthemessagebyanyoneshedidn’twantto
sharethegossipwith,shecouldofferanalternativeexplanationtotheseemingly
innocuousmessage.Plausibledeniabilityisanimportantpartofthisstrategy.
Jacquelyndidn’twanttostartanydrama,whichiswhyshewasintentionally
opaqueabouthermessage,butotherteensusethisstrategytocreateconflict.As
Camilleexplains:
Camille,17,NC:Ifyou'retalkingaboutsomebodyonFacebook,theycanseeit…not
directlytalkingaboutsomebody,buttalkingaboutthemwithoutusingtheirnames,
andthen,they'llstarttalkingaboutthemwithoutusingtheirname,andit'sobviously
theyknowthey'remakingfunofeachother.
Alice:Howwouldyoutalkaboutsomeonewithoutusingtheirname?
Camille:Likeeverybodywilluseaquotethatsomebodysaid,andthenthey'llbelike,
that'ssostupidorsomething,whoisshe,andthenanotherpersonwillsayit,andthen
they'll,like,respondtosomethingelse,andkindofmakingfunofthemindirectly,
fighting.
Alice:Sowhydoyouthinksomeonewoulddothat?
Camille:Idon'tknow,it'sdrama,kindofentertaining.
InNorthCarolina,danahwasgoingthroughFacebookwith17‐yearoldSerenawhen
shestumbledonastatusupdatewrittenbyKristy.Kristy'supdatesaid:"I'msick
andtiredofallofthis"andwasalready"Liked"bymorethan30people.Unableto
interpretthepost,danahaskedSerenatoexplain.Serenabeganalengthystoryof
howKristywasfightingwithanothergirl,Cathy,overaboy.Cathyhadwritten
"She'ssuchabitch"onherFacebookwall,whichwaslikedbyawholehostof
Cathy'sfriends.Kristyhadpostedthismessageinresponse,andnowKristy'sfriends
hadbackedherbylikingtheupdate.Serenawasabystanderinthisargument,but
sheknewhowtointerpreteachmessage;danah,asanoutsider,didnot.Cathyand
Kristyareperformingforotherstosee,buttheyarealsolimitingthemeaningto
thosewhoareintheknow.Indoingso,theycanexcludepeoplewhoarenotpartof
thecycleofgossipatschool,namelyparents,teachers,andpeersoutsideoftheir
immediatesocialsphere.
DraftDate:May9,2011
23
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
Whenteenagerspostencodedmessages,theyknowthatpeopleoutsideoftheir
intendedaudiencewillbecurious.Somewillinvestigate,whileotherswillbeupset.
Stillothersfindtheuninterpretablecontentfrustratingbecauseitclogsup
Facebook.
danah:Andhowdoyoufeelaboutthingsthatyoudon’tunderstand?
Jenna,17,NC:Itdependswhoitis.Ifit’ssomeonethatIwanttoknowwhatthey’re
talkingaboutthenI’lltrytoinvestigateit.I’lllookatthewall,aconversationor
something.Butifit’slikethatIdon’treallycarewhatso‐and‐soisdoing.Ihavefriends
fromwhenIwenttoMalaysia.TheywereallaboutFacebook.SoIhave50friendsfrom
Malaysianow.AndsometimesIhidethembecausewhateverthey’retalkingaboutis
confusingtomebecauseIdon’tknowwhatthey’retalkingaboutorIgetstufffrom
themthatIdon’treallywant.
Someteensviewencodedmessagesassecretsmeanttobedecoded;theyrelishthe
opportunitytoeavesdrop.Yet,forthemostpart,manyyoungpeopleseesuch
messagesasnoneoftheirbusiness,choosingtoignorethem.Similarly,plentyof
teensbelievethatjustbecauseamessagecanbeseendoesn’tmeanthatothers
shouldbelooking.Theyexpectpeopletoignorewhat’snotmeantforthem.
Theseactsofencodingmessagesareawayofassertingcontroloverasocial
situation,buttheydonotalwaysachievetheirintendedeffect,particularlywhen
peersarecuriousandnosy.InMassachusetts,17‐yearoldKellywasunhappyabout
herrelationshipbutdidn'thavethenervetobreakupwithherseriouslydepressed
boyfriend.Tosetthestagefordoingso,shestartedpostingmorbidmessagesand
unhappy"emo"lyricstoherFacebook.Herfriendsknewwhatshewasuptoand
didn'tconfrontheraboutit,butagirlinherclassthatshedidn'tknowverywell
tookthesemessagesseriouslyandnotifiedtheirguidancecounselorthatKelly
mightbesuicidal.Kellywasirritatedbecauseshefeltthatthosemessageswere
meantforthoseclosesttoher,notpeopleshebarelyknew.
Manyteenshavestartedtorealizethatlimitingaccesstomeaningcanbeamore
powerfultoolforprivacythantryingtolimitaccesstocontentitself.These
strategiesallowthemtorestrictinformationbasedonsocialknowledge,not
structuralaccess.Whilenotallteenagersarecarefullycraftingcontenttobe
understoodbyalimitedaudience,manyareexploringtechniquestoexpress
themselvesprivatelyinsituationswheretheyassumethatothersarewatching.
Theyarenotalwayspreparedforhowtheircontentgetsmisinterpreted–andthey
stillbelievethattheyshouldhavetherighttobeletalone–buttheyareactively
creatingcounterpublicsinfullview.
PrivacyinPublic
DraftDate:May9,2011
24
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
Byusingdifferentstrategiestoachieveprivacyinnetworkedpublics,teensare
simultaneouslyrevealingtheimportanceofprivacyandpubliclife.Theywantto
participateinnetworkedpublics,buttheyalsowanttohavecontroloverthesocial
situationsthattakeplacethere.Theywanttobevisible,butonlytocertainpeople.
Theywanttoberecognizedandvalidated,butonlybycertainpeople.Thisisnota
contradictorystance;itparallelshowpeoplehavealwaysengagedinpublicspaces.
Examiningthepracticesofurbanlife,sociologistErvingGoffmanrecognizedthat
peopleregularlygooutoftheirwaytoignoreeachotherinbusyenvironments.In
restaurants,peopleoftendinecloseenoughtooverheareveryconversation,but
theypretendtonotlistenin.Thisactof“givingsomeonespace”isagiftofprivacy.
Goffmancallsit“civilinattention.”40Civilinattentionisasocialnorm,drivenbyan
idealofrespect.Staringatsomeoneoropenlylisteninginontheirconversationsis
aviolationofsocialnormswhichmakespeopleuneasybecauseitisexperiencedas
aninvasionofprivacy.Forteens,thesameholdstrueonline;theyexpectpeople–
mostnotably,thosewhoholdpoweroverthem–torespecttheirspace.
Teensoftenusethelanguageofsurveillanceormonitoringtohighlightthe
differencebetweenpeoplelookingatthemforsociablepurposesratherthana
power‐ladengaze.Forexample,inIowa,17‐year‐oldSamexplains:“Ijustthinkit’sa
completeinvasionofyourprivacytolookatyourkids’Facebookunlessyoureallyfeel
likethey’reindanger.ButIknowthatthereareparentsthatmonitortheirkids’
Facebook.”Samrecognizesthatmostparentsengageinactsofsurveillancebecause
theyareworried,buthestilldoesn’tagreewiththis.Inotherwords,justbecause
peoplehaveaccessdoesn’tmeanthatthey’rewelcome.Thisisarefrainthat
underscoresteens’generalattitudestowardsprivacyinnetworkedpublics.
Bothonlineandoffline,teenshavebeenexcludedfrompublicspacesortoldthat
theyaren’twelcome.AsGillValentinehasdocumented,moralpanics–suchas
“strangerdanger”–areoftenusedtojustifyyoungpeople’sexclusionfrompublic
places.41Inexamininghowpublicparkswentfromchild‐friendlytodangerous
throughtheuseofstrangerdangermessaging,shearguedthat“byreproducinga
misleadingmessageaboutthegeographyofdanger,stranger‐dangereducational
campaignscontributetowardsproducingpublicspaceas‘naturally’or‘normally’an
adultspacewherechildrenareatriskfrom‘deviant’others.”42Thesesamemoral
panicshavebeenusedtoexplainwhyteensshouldnotbeusingsocialnetwork
sites.43Yetteenscontinuetoflocktonetworkedpublicspreciselybecausetheyare
40Goffman,E.1966.Behaviorinpublicplaces:notesonthesocialorganizationofgatherings.New
York:SimonandSchuster.
41Valentine,Gill.2004.PublicSpaceandtheCultureofChildhood.Hants,UK:Ashgate.
42Ibid,p.27.
43Marwick,Alice.2008.“ToCatchaPredator?TheMySpaceMoralPanic.”FirstMonday13(6):article
3.RetrievedDecember3,2008
(http://www.uic.edu/htbin.cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2152/1966).
DraftDate:May9,2011
25
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
someoftheonlyspacestowhichtheyhaveaccess.44Intryingtocreateaplacefor
themselvesinthesespaces,theyarenottryingtobepublic,butrather,tobeina
public.Theywantaspacewheretheycansocializewithpeersandmakesenseof
publiclifemoregenerally.
Publiclifehasvaluebeyondpoliticalideals;itisthroughparticipationinpubliclife
thatpeopledevelopasenseofsocialnorms,learntonavigatesocialrelations,and
begintounderstandsocietywritlarge.Thepoliticizedpublicspherecannotexist
withoutthesocialpublicsphere.Byengaginginnetworkedpublics,teensaretaking
thefirststeptowardsbeingpubliccitizens;theyaretryingtounderstandwhothey
areinrelationtolargersociety.Engaginginpubliclifedoesnotentailthrowing
privacyoutthewindow.
Privacyisinastateoffluxnotbecausethevaluessurroundingithaveradically
changed,butbecausetheinfrastructurethroughwhichpeopleengagewitheach
otherhas.Networkedtechnologiesintroducenewchallenges,particularlyin
environmentsthatarepublic‐by‐default.Privacycannotbeassumed,especially
whenpowerfulindividualsorentitiesareinterestedinleveragingnewfound
opportunitiesforaccesstounderminesocialnorms.Whenparentsassertthatthey
havetherighttoknowsimplybecauseinformationisaccessible,theyundermine
theirchildren’sagency.Andagencyisessentialtobeingabletoachieveprivacy.
Fundamentally,privacyisasocialnorm.Legalregulationislegislatedtoprotect
individualsfromharm.Themarketcompetesinoppositedirections,tryingto“win”
bothbyenhancingprivacyandleveragingopportunitiestoinvadepeople’sprivacy
forfinancialgains.Likewise,technologieswillbebuiltbothtoprotectanderode
privacy.Butwhenitcomestosocialprivacy,thebiggestbattleswillbearoundthe
socialnormsthatregulateit.Inotherwords,whatissociallyappropriatein
networkedpublics?Howarenormssignaledandviolationsrecognized?What
socialsanctionscanbeusedtocurbviolations?Therearenoclearanswerstothis,
butwhatisclearisthatteenagersareworkinghardtobringsocialnormsintothe
equation.They’redevelopingstrategiesformanagingprivacyinpublicspacesas
theytrytoassertcontroloversocialsituations.Theymaynotalwaysbesuccessful,
andtheymayconsistentlyfaceviolationsoftheirprivacy,buttheyarenot
discardingprivacyasaresult.
References
Allen,A.L.(1999).CoercingPrivacy.WilliamandMaryLawReview40(3):723–724.
Anderson,Benedict.(2006).ImaginedCommunities:ReflectionsontheOriginand
SpreadofNationalism.Newed.NewYork:Verso.
44boyd2008b.
DraftDate:May9,2011
26
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
Arendt,Hannah.(1998).TheHumanCondition.Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicago
Press
boyd,danah(2006)."Friends,Friendsters,andMySpaceTop8:WritingCommunity
IntoBeingonSocialNetworkSites."FirstMonday,11(12).
boyd,d.(2007).Whyyouth(heart)socialnetworksites:Theroleofnetworked
publics.InYouth,identityanddigitalmedia,ed.D.Buckingham,119–142.
Cambridge,MA:MITPress.
boyd,d.(2008a).“Facebook’sPrivacyTrainwreck:Exposure,invasion,andsocial
convergence.”Convergence:TheInternationalJournalofResearchintoNewMedia
Technologies14(1):13–20.
boyd,d.(2008b).Takenoutofcontext:Americanteensocialityinnetworked
publics.PhDDissertation,UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1344756.
boyd,danahandEszterHargittai(2010)."FacebookPrivacySettings:WhoCares?"
FirstMonday15(8).
Brandimarte,L.,Acquisti,A.,andLoewenstein,G.(inreview)"PrivacyConcernsand
InformationDisclosure:AnIllusionofControlHypothesis."
Cohen,J.E.(2003).DRMandprivacy.CommunicationsoftheACM,46,46–49
Gavison,Ruth.(1980).Privacyandthelimitsofthelaw.YaleLawJournal89:421‐
471.
Esguerra,R.(2009).GoogleCEOEricSchmidtDismissestheImportanceofPrivacy.
ElectronicFrontierFoundation.Retrievedfrom
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/google‐ceo‐eric‐schmidt‐dismisses‐
privacy
Fraser,Nancy.(1992).“RethinkingthePublicSphere:AContributiontotheCritique
ofActuallyExistingDemocracy.”Pp.109–142inHabermasandthePublicSphere,
editedbyCraigCalhoun.Cambridge,MA:TheMITPress.(page123)
Goffman,E.(1966).Behaviorinpublicplaces:notesonthesocialorganizationof
gatherings.NewYork:SimonandSchuster.
Habermas,Jèurgen.1991.TheStructuralTransformationofthePublicSphere:An
InquiryintoaCategoryofBourgeoisSociety.Cambridge,MA:MITPress.
DraftDate:May9,2011
27
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
Hoofnagle,ChrisJay,JenniferKing,SuLi,andJosephTurow.(2010,April14).“How
DifferentareYoungAdultsfromOlderAdultsWhenitComestoInformationPrivacy
AttitudesandPolicies?”Workingpaperavailableat:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1589864
Johnson,B.(2010,January11).Privacynolongerasocialnorm,saysFacebook
founder.TheGuardian.London.Retrievedfrom
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/jan/11/facebook‐privacy.
Lamont,M.,andV.Molnar.(2002).Thestudyofboundariesinthesocialsciences.
AnnualReviewofSociology167–196.
Lenhart,Amanda,K.Purcell,A.Smith,andK.Zickuhr.(2010).Socialmediaand
youngadults.Washington,DC:PewInternet&AmericanLifeProject,February3.
http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Social‐Media‐and‐Young‐Adults.aspx.
Lessig,Lawrence.(2006).Code:Version2.0.NewYork:BasicBooks.Retrievedfrom
http://codev2.cc/
Livingstone,Sonia.(2005).AudiencesandPublics:WhenCulturalEngagement
MattersforthePublicSphere.Portland,OR:Intellect
Locke,JohnL.(2010).Eavesdropping:AnIntimateHistory.NewYork:Oxford
UniversityPress,USA.
Marwick,Alice.(2008).ToCatchaPredator?TheMySpaceMoralPanic.First
Monday13(6):article3.
http://www.uic.edu/htbin.cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2152/196
6.
Marwick,Alice,Murgia‐Diaz,D.,&Palfrey,John.(2010).Youth,privacyand
reputation(literaturereview)(BerkmanCenterResearchPublicationNo.2010‐5).
Boston:BerkmanCenterforInternetandSocietyatHarvardUniversity.Retrieved
fromhttp://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1588163
Marwick,Aliceanddanahboyd.(2011b).“TheDrama!Teens,GossipandCelebrity.”
PopularCultureAssociation/AmericanCultureAssociationAnnualMeeting,San
Antonio,TX,April20‐24.
Marwick,Aliceanddanahboyd.(2011a).“Itweethonestly,Itweetpassionately:
Twitterusers,contextcollapse,andtheimaginedaudience.”NewMedia&Society13
(1):114‐133.
DraftDate:May9,2011
28
Work‐in‐ProgressPaperfordiscussionatthePrivacyLawScholarsConferenceonJune2,
2011inBerkeley,CA.Feedbackwanted!
Misur,S.(2011,April11).OldSaybrookHighSchoolmakesprivacypoint;Some
perturbedwhenrealstudentsshowninsocial‐mediaslideshow.ShorelineTimes.
NewHaven,CT.Retrievedfrom
http://www.shorelinetimes.com/articles/2011/04/11/news/doc4da2f3cb5caae51
8276953.txt
Nippert‐Eng,ChristenaE.(2010).IslandsofPrivacy.Chicago:UniversityofChicago
Press.
Nissenbaum,Helen.(2010).PrivacyinContext:Technology,Policy,andtheIntegrity
ofSocialLife.PaloAlto,CA:StanfordUniversityPress.
Petitcolas,FabianA.P.,RossJ.Anderson,andMarkusG.Kuhn.(1999,July).
"InformationHiding:Asurvey."ProceedingsoftheIEEE(specialissueonprotection
ofmultimediacontent)87(7):1062–78.
Regan,P.(1995).LegislatingPrivacy.ChapelHill:UniversityofNorthCarolinaPress
Reiman,J.(1976).Privacy,intimacyandpersonhood.PhilosophyandPublicAffairs
6(1):26‐44.
Solove,DanielJ.(2004).Thedigitalperson:Technologyandprivacyinthe
informationage.NewYork:NewYorkUniversityPress
Solove,DanielJ.(2007).‘I’veGotNothingtoHide’andOtherMisunderstandingsof
Privacy.SanDiegoLawReview44:762.
Strandburg,K.J.(2011).Home,HomeontheWeb:TheFourthAmendmentand
TechnosocialChange.MarylandLawReview.
Valentine,Gill.(2004).PublicSpaceandtheCultureofChildhood.Hants,UK:Ashgate
Warner,Michael.2002.PublicsandCounterpublics.Cambridge,MA:MITPress
Warren,S.D.&Brandeis,L.D.,(1890).RighttoPrivacy.HarvardLawReview,4,193.
Westin,A.(1967).PrivacyandFreedom.NewYork:Atheneum.
Zimmer,Michael.(2007).TheQuestforthePerfectSearchEngine:Values,Technical
Design,andtheFlowofPersonalInformationinSpheresofMobility(PhDDissertation,
DepartmentofMedia,Culture,andCommunication).NewYorkUniversity,New
York.
DraftDate:May9,2011
29