Ethics, Data, and Privacy in the Technological Age

This week's reading situated us within legal and moral frameworks of looking at internet privacy, data and ethics. I guess it speaks to a naivety I've held since childhood, but I was honestly floored to find out how little control we have over what we place online. It seems a little jarring that the social media platforms, as opposed to its constituents are the ones who lie with that sort of power. The Determann piece was an expository one taking a critical look at ethical internet usage and the sacredness of one's personal information. He details 12 common misconceptions having to do with our relation to our own data, an internet version of the statute of limitations he calls "the right to be forgotten," as well as legality of activity on social media, the ability to remain anonymous, and the purported threat that SM's (and the greater Internet's) conspicuous advertising has on our privacy. He also details our relation to social media companies and the often unsavory practices they engage in such as reliance on hidden consent through various Terms and Conditions we all invariably agree to without thinking. With critical viewpoint, making such claims as "people care more about getting free media than they do about their own privacy," they offer an almost punitive, warning stance to those who regularly engage socially on the internet.
The Markham and Buchanan article was fascinating from an anthropologist's viewpoint, especially in light of some of the points they brought up. First off is the simple fact that this manifesto of sorts is, in their words, "to be taken as a guideline." To that end, they set themselves as paragons of internet ethics, as something to strive toward in a brand of publication I had not formerly seen or read. Their point about having to revisit what the idea of a "human subject" might be resonated with me, as I had been thinking the same thing while reading these articles. In such a technological age, can we really restrict what is human to the physical domain, or do we need to be giving our virtual creations, thoughts, and data much more theoretical clout and include them in this definition? Later, they recognize the range of ethical possibilities that could occur and which might arise when engaging in Internet research due to circumstantial events and personal distinctions in ethical sensibilities. Striking to me was that this article is mostly taken up by a list of questions sorted into categories, the point of which is to consistently remind the researcher of the impact they could be having on the "people" they are researching.
The Boellstorf article took at a look at anthropology through a modern lens, detailing the various ramifications that Internet research has and its ability to impact the practice of anthropology, relating particularly to the selection of a research question, field site, and population or group of study. Central to the themes of this reading was the idea that the Internet brings with it a new cache of cultural information not previously examined or utilized, and that there constantly exists the possibility to increase or fine tune the scope and qualities of one's study as previously unknown bits of relevant knowledge present themselves. In addition, through introduction of Internet research, such hallmarks of the discipline now have their definitions being questioned and broadened, so that we may now think of a "community" as a cohort that meets regularly to play an MMORPG, and a fieldsite or population as existing outside of any restrictive geo-spatial realm.