Editing Privacy (section)

===Social networking===
{{main|Privacy concerns with social networking services}}

Several online social network sites (OSNs) are among the top 10 most visited websites globally. Facebook for example, as of August 2015, was the largest social-networking site, with nearly 2.7 billion<ref>{{Cite web|title=Facebook: active users worldwide|url=https://www.statista.com/statistics/264810/number-of-monthly-active-facebook-users-worldwide/|access-date=2020-10-11|website=Statista|language=en}}</ref> members, who upload over 4.75 billion pieces of content daily. While [[Twitter]] is significantly smaller with 316 million registered users, the US [[Library of Congress]] recently announced that it will be acquiring and permanently storing the entire archive of public Twitter posts since 2006.<ref name="web-means-end-of-forgetting"/>

A review and evaluation of scholarly work regarding the current state of the value of individuals' privacy of online social networking show the following results: "first, adults seem to be more concerned about potential privacy threats than younger users; second, policy makers should be alarmed by a large part of users who underestimate risks of their information privacy on OSNs; third, in the case of using OSNs and its services, traditional one-dimensional privacy approaches fall short".<ref>Hugl, Ulrike (2011), "Reviewing Person's Value of Privacy of Online Social Networking," ''Internet Research'', 21(4), in press, http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?issn=1066-2243&volume=21&issue=4&articleid=1926600&show=abstract {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140328144007/http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?issn=1066-2243&volume=21&issue=4&articleid=1926600&show=abstract |date=2014-03-28 }}</ref> This is exacerbated by [[Data re-identification|deanonymization]] research indicating that personal traits such as sexual orientation, race, religious and political views, personality, or intelligence can be inferred based on a wide variety of [[digital footprints]], such as samples of text, browsing logs, or Facebook Likes.<ref name="Kosinski 2013 5802–5805">{{cite journal|last=Kosinski|first=Michal|author2=Stillwell, D. |author3=Graepel, T. |title=Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences|year=2013|volume=110|issue=15|pages=5802–5805|doi=10.1073/pnas.1218772110|pmid=23479631|pmc=3625324|bibcode=2013PNAS..110.5802K|doi-access=free}}</ref>

Intrusions of social media privacy are known to affect employment in the United States. [[Microsoft]] reports that 75 percent of U.S. recruiters and human-resource professionals now do online research about candidates, often using information provided by search engines, social-networking sites, photo/video-sharing sites, personal web sites and blogs, and [[Twitter]]. They also report that 70 percent of U.S. recruiters have rejected candidates based on internet information. This has created a need by many candidates to control various online [[privacy settings]] in addition to controlling their online reputations, the conjunction of which has led to legal suits against both social media sites and US employers.<ref name="web-means-end-of-forgetting"/>

====Selfie culture====
{{further|#Privacy paradox and economic valuation}}

[[Selfies]] are popular today. A search for photos with the hashtag #selfie retrieves over 23 million results on Instagram and 51 million with the hashtag #me.<ref>{{Cite news|date=2013-06-07|title=Self-portraits and social media: The rise of the 'selfie'|language=en-GB|work=BBC News|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22511650|access-date=2021-03-17}}</ref> However, due to modern corporate and governmental surveillance, this may pose a risk to privacy.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Giroux|first=Henry A.|date=2015-05-04|title=Selfie Culture in the Age of Corporate and State Surveillance|journal=Third Text|volume=29|issue=3|pages=155–164|doi=10.1080/09528822.2015.1082339|s2cid=146571563|issn=0952-8822}}</ref> In a research study which takes a sample size of 3763, researchers found that for users posting selfies on social media, women generally have greater concerns over privacy than men, and that users' privacy concerns inversely predict their selfie behavior and activity.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Dhir|first1=Amandeep|last2=Torsheim|first2=Torbjørn|last3=Pallesen|first3=Ståle|last4=Andreassen|first4=Cecilie S.|date=2017|title=Do Online Privacy Concerns Predict Selfie Behavior among Adolescents, Young Adults and Adults?|journal=Frontiers in Psychology|language=en|volume=8|page=815|doi=10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00815|pmid=28588530|pmc=5440591|issn=1664-1078|doi-access=free}}</ref>

====Online harassment====
{{main|Online harassment}}
{{further|Revenge porn|Doxxing|Content moderation}}

An invasion of someone's privacy may be widely and quickly disseminated over the Internet. When social media sites and other online communities fail to invest in [[content moderation]], an invasion of privacy can expose people to a much greater volume and degree of harassment than would otherwise be possible. [[Revenge porn]] may lead to [[misogynist]] or [[homophobic]] harassment, such as in the [[suicide of Amanda Todd]] and the [[suicide of Tyler Clementi]]. When someone's physical location or other sensitive information is leaked over the Internet via [[doxxing]], harassment may escalate to direct physical harm such as [[stalking]] or [[swatting]].

Despite the way breaches of privacy can magnify online harassment, online harassment is often used as a justification to curtail [[freedom of speech]], by removing the expectation of privacy via [[#Anonymity|anonymity]], or by enabling law enforcement to invade privacy without a [[search warrant]]. In the wake of Amanda Todd's death, the Canadian parliament proposed a motion purporting to stop bullying, but Todd's mother herself gave testimony to parliament rejecting the bill due to its provisions for warrantless breaches of privacy, stating "I don't want to see our children victimized again by losing privacy rights."<ref name="ctv-todd-mp-motion">{{cite web |url= http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/in-wake-of-amanda-todd-suicide-mps-to-debate-anti-bullying-motion-1.995254 |title= In wake of Amanda Todd suicide, MPs to debate anti-bullying motion |publisher=CTV News |date= October 14, 2012 |author=CTVNews.ca Staff |access-date= October 17, 2012 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131029213910/http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/in-wake-of-amanda-todd-suicide-mps-to-debate-anti-bullying-motion-1.995254 |archive-date= October 29, 2013 |df=mdy-all}}</ref><ref name="2013 Bill C-13">{{cite web | url=https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/05/13/amanda_todds_mother_raises_concerns_about_cyberbullying_bill.html | title=Amanda Todd's mother raises concerns about cyberbullying bill: Families of cyberbullying victims want legislation, but some have concerns about warrantless access to Canadians personal data. | work=www.thestar.com | date=2014-04-13 | access-date=2016-09-12 | author=Boutilier, Alex | url-status=live | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161028011059/https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/05/13/amanda_todds_mother_raises_concerns_about_cyberbullying_bill.html | archive-date=October 28, 2016 | df=mdy-all }}</ref><ref name="Justice Committee on May 13th, 2014">{{cite web | url=https://openparliament.ca/committees/justice/41-2/24/carol-todd-1/ | title=Carol Todd's Testimony regarding Bill C-13 | publisher=www.openparliament.ca | date=2014-05-14 | access-date=2016-09-12 | author=Todd, Carol | url-status=live | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160918140017/https://openparliament.ca/committees/justice/41-2/24/carol-todd-1/ | archive-date=September 18, 2016 | df=mdy-all }}</ref>

Even where these laws have been passed despite privacy concerns, they have not demonstrated a reduction in online harassment. When the [[Korea Communications Commission]] introduced a registration system for online commenters in 2007, they reported that malicious comments only decreased by 0.9%, and in 2011 it was repealed.<ref name="chosun-kcc-registration">{{cite web|title=Real-Name Online Registration to Be Scrapped|url=https://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2011/12/30/2011123001526.html|website=[[The Chosun Ilbo]]|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230423035426/https://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2011/12/30/2011123001526.html|archive-date=2023-04-23|url-status=live}}</ref> A subsequent analysis found that the set of users who posted the most comments actually increased the number of "aggressive expressions" when forced to use their real name.<ref name="kcc-law-real-name-analysis">{{cite conference|url=https://www.computer.org/csdl/proceedings-article/hicss/2012/06149194/12OmNyKJiDq|title=Empirical analysis of online anonymity and user behaviors: the impact of real name policy|author-link1=A. Acquisti|author-link2=Soodong Kim|author-link3=Daegon Cho|year=2012|publisher=[[IEEE Computer Society]]|edition=45th|conference=Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences}}</ref>

In the US, while federal law only prohibits online harassment based on protected characteristics such as gender and race,<ref name="us-federal-cyberbullying">{{cite web|title=Law, Policies and Regulations|date=24 September 2019 |url=https://www.stopbullying.gov/resources/laws|access-date=2023-06-19}}</ref> individual states have expanded the definition of harassment to further curtail speech: Florida's definition of online harassment includes "any use of data or computer software" that "Has the effect of substantially disrupting the orderly operation of a school."<ref name="florida-cyberbullying">{{cite web|title=Florida Anti-Bullying Laws and Policies|date=24 September 2019 |url=https://www.stopbullying.gov/resources/laws/florida|access-date=2023-06-19}}</ref>