ABOUT
CONSENSUAL DOXXING
To provide a glimpse into how our seemingly mundane actions online might have adverse effects on our lives, this project examines the multitude of assumptions that could be made about any individual based on their personal online data, through the example of producing a data analysis based on an individual known as X who agreed for their online activities to be recorded over the course of a week.
Through this exploration and a complimentary deep dive into the issue, this project hopes to encourage a shift in mindset towards the need for more data privacy from consumers.
more about the designer: kiNLIN.XYZ
BEHIND THE ART DIRECTION
The visual direction began with the perspective of being viewed by machines, which inspired the bitmap treatment of images. To enhance the notion of losing your identity to what is being perceived by these entities, the glitching or sweeping effect was used to manipulate these images.
As transparency or the need to present “things as they are” is a core motivation of the project, all images used in the project are lifted directly from the recorded footage during the data collection, which consists of screen recordings of the subject’s phone and laptop activities.
These images are then further manipulated into collages to mimic the loose perceptions that data brokers have of their subjects, hinting their relation to corresponding inferences but not truly representing the truth.
The overall dark visual tone of the project seeks to jolt these readers to the urgency of the message, with the dominant colour red used not only as a symbol of danger/threat, but also to guide readers to areas that require their attention.
Additionally, the constant trail of red attached to mouse movement is intentional to make readers more aware and weary of their journey across the website, where every move taken can’t be erased and is permanently etched into this online experience.
The display typeface, Sonic, was chosen as its movement-like extended forms embody how rapid digitisation has made it hard for consumers to see past customised conveniences, therefore requiring those who seek the truth to metaphorically put in effort to understand the message behind what is being presented.
The serif typeface, Cirka, was chosen to express the danger of being intimate and surrendering our identity and essentially ourselves to these entities, as all of this data exchange is being done with consent, whether fully understood or not.
The sans typeface, Neue Machina, was chosen to complement the display typeface, with its geometric features serving as a more legible representation of the robot or machinery aesthetic.
THREAT OF
ABSURDITY
Are these ridiculous
assumptions really taken
seriously?
In an interview discussing our relationship with the Internet of Things, Powell, an Assistant Professor in Media and Communications at the London School of Economics, posits that our trust in this network of seamlessly connected devices to benefit us has blinded us from the fact that the data which is created and circulated constantly around this network, serves only the interests of the network itself rather than us (Sumner 325).
This data, according to Powell, will be analysed and accumulated by these companies and their partners, existing outside of our control for an indeterminate amount of time (Sumner 326).
As such, consumers should consider that this data is not only valuable and made available to us who wish to know how fit we are, but also to firms that sell fitness trackers, as well as any entity that purchases these aggregated fitness tracker data.
Take the fitness tracker as an example. There is an implicit understanding that our data will be passively collected on top of registered information such as name, date of birth, contact details, height and weight that we willingly surrender to these devices and services. However, most, if not all of us are unaware of the full extent of our participation in this relationship.
We need to understand that this data, or any personal data we surrender to such entities, will therefore no longer exist within the narrative that we wish to tell ourselves. Instead, it exists, as Powell states, in the wider ecosystem as our data double (Sumner 328).
“It’s out in the world, having a life, creating relationships about a single person and groups of people who undertake similar actions. The results of the analysis of those data doubles are open to lots of different entities.”
- Powell, an Assistant Professor in Media and Communications at the London School of Economics.
THE
UNFORTUNATE
TRUTH
In a recent study on the effectiveness of data brokers, researchers cemented that not only can these speculations be incredibly misleading, profiles based on these assumptions are alse so inaccurate that it would be better if the profilers guessed instead (just like how this project has attempted).
For example, a profiler identifying a person’s gender is only likely to be accurate 42% of the time (Neumann et al. 8), which means even if they can pinpoint our identities online, their profiles of us are still highly likely to be inaccurate.
Therein lies the danger for these erroneous inferences to cause negative consequences for us, as former employee of the National Security Agency of USA and data privacy critic Doss cautions.
According to her, it is more likely than ever that even sensitive searches about biological weapons that stemmed from curiosity or news-watching will possibly be archived into aggregated data about her by data brokers.
In his established profile, he was described as in his 50s, married with children, with a graduate degree and employed. But none of that was true, he was 29, unmarried and jobless (Savage).
This would mean searches around mental illnesses or medical conditions, potentially harmful or unsociable activities would also be included in that data archive. The same would hold true for the rest of any of our online and offline activities that could be misinterpreted in that fashion (Doss 30-31).
“Everyone is vulnerable to manipulation because no one has unmediated access to information. ...Companies like Twitter, or Facebook are carefully curating their content for you. They are selling your attention to unknown actors who want to influence you.”
- Veliz, an academic and critically-acclaimed writer on digital ethics.
MOVING
FORWARD
Privacy is a collective effort, affecting our loved ones, other citizens and those like us. It’s time to stop surrendering our private information to entities that may be harmful to us in the future, even if it’s not evident right now.
To aid those who wish to guard their privacy, a guidebook consisting of advice from various privacy critics was created for this project. It is available for readers to download and print at home, so that such advice can be reviewed in a more recognised physical medium and hopefully shared amongst their community, especially with those who are less technologically adept.
LAST CHAPTER
THREAT OF
ABSURDITY
Are these ridiculous
assumptions really taken
seriously?
In an interview discussing our relationship with the Internet of Things, Powell, an Assistant Professor in Media and Communications at the London School of Economics, posits that our trust in this network of seamlessly connected devices to benefit us has blinded us from the fact that the data which is created and circulated constantly around this network, serves only the interests of the network itself rather than us (Sumner 325).
THE
UNFORTUNATE
TRUTH
In a recent study on the effectiveness of data brokers, researchers cemented that not only can these speculations be incredibly misleading, profiles based on these assumptions are alse so inaccurate that it would be better if the profilers guessed instead (just like how this project has attempted).
For example, a profiler identifying a person’s gender is only likely to be accurate 42% of the time (Neumann et al. 8), which means even if they can pinpoint our identities online, their profiles of us are still highly likely to be inaccurate.Therein lies the danger for these erroneous inferences to cause negative consequences for us, as former employee of the National Security Agency of USA and data privacy critic Doss cautions.
According to her, it is more likely than ever that even sensitive searches about biological weapons that stemmed from curiosity or news-watching will possibly be archived into aggregated data about her by data brokers.
In his established profile, he was described as in his 50s, married with children, with a graduate degree and employed. But none of that was true, he was 29, unmarried and jobless (Savage).
This would mean searches around mental illnesses or medical conditions, potentially harmful or unsociable activities would also be included in that data archive. The same would hold true for the rest of any of our online and offline activities that could be misinterpreted in that fashion (Doss 30-31).
“Everyone is vulnerable to manipulation because no one has unmediated access to information. ...Companies like Twitter, or Facebook are carefully curating their content for you. They are selling your attention to unknown actors who want to influence you.”
- Veliz, an academic and critically-acclaimed writer on digital ethics.
MOVING
FORWARD
Privacy is a collective effort, affecting our loved ones, other citizens and those like us. It’s time to stop surrendering our private information to entities that may be harmful to us in the future, even if it’s not evident right now.
To aid those who wish to guard their privacy, a guidebook consisting of advice from various privacy critics was created for this project. It is available for readers to download and print at home, so that such advice can be reviewed in a more recognised physical medium and hopefully shared amongst their community, especially with those who are less technologically adept.
NEXT CHAPTER