Data mine: Big data and the erosion of privacy

The Snowden Effect and Big Brother are two elements that go hand in hand. What is the Snowden Effect? Most are familiar with Edward Snowden and his revelations regarding the United States' National Security Agency (NSA) and the 'five eyes' but, for those not familiar, let's quickly review what brought Snowden to the forefront of public consciousness.

• Snowden shot to international attention after disclosing classified documents he acquired while working as an NSA contractor.

• His leaked documents revealed numerous global surveillance programmes, many of them run by the NSA and in cooperation with what is known as the 'five eyes', 'nine eyes', 'fourteen eyes' - the list goes on. Essentially, the more governments cooperating, the greater number of eyes in the group in coordination with relevant telecommunication companies, web and social media companies across the globe.

• His disclosures have fuelled debates worldwide on mass surveillance, government secrecy and the balance between national security and information privacy.

Copious amounts of data are being accumulated and shared today across regions of the globe, many of which claim (and wish to) keep their information internally within their borders. This affects corporate, legal and consumer industries gathering and analysing information
and forming predictive forward-based analytics from information shared across regions, borders, clients, customers and consumers alike.

As a result of Snowden's revelations, how much has changed forever in our understanding and acceptance of privacy? To generate thought on this, I often ask the following question when presenting on privacy: "How many are concerned with privacy after the Snowden revelations, and how many are concerned with Big Brother?" The majority of hands will go up, but not all.

I then ask the question: "How many have changed their online habits as a result?" Virtually no hands will go up.

It is intriguing that individuals want a degree of privacy, but have very little expectation of it becoming reality. There is a sense of inevitability to the topic; 'Big Brother is watching you' is a true statement many have come to accept. This opinion is considered as true the world over and it relates as fully to law firms and their clients as it does to business investment strategy.

The underlying method of interchange between Snowden, the free-flowing information system and the right to
privacy is, of course, big data. What makes social and search organisations like Facebook and Google so effective is their ability to build predictive and targeted advertising revenues based on our online habits and behaviours. This is very similar to how the NSA would like to track our data habits.

Law firms can also employ Big Brother and leverage the same methods to best anticipate and integrate with our clients' needs, while driving continual adaptation, process efficiency and behavioural change within our own organisations.

Portent of paradox

A fascinating element of the Snowden effect is that it highlights our online individuality and preferences, as well as the thought processes and behaviours of the collective. It heightens our privacy concerns, but also points out how we can reach others and come together as a group. It raises our concerns about hacking and provides hackers with more power and a broader range within which to operate. At the same time, it provides governments not already following the NSA process with a blueprint on how to move forward and where improvements need to lie. The Snowden effect is a portent of paradoxes.

If no one region, corporation or client is immune from the touch of another, how do we implement into an existing business model an updated strategic framework based on this phenomenon? One way is by embracing the paradox, both as individuals and as business leaders. We embrace our path forward and look toward understanding the best method we could possibly have in making our way along it, with all elements in play. Only then can we take the appropriate steps in approaching organisational change and technological investment.

Embracing social culture, while at the same time negating its polarising effects, is absolutely something we must do. Innovations in big data are only just beginning to accelerate.

Snowden fallout

The fallout from the Snowden effect can be seen worldwide. There is a wide-ranging impact on how information freeflow is leveraged between regions, economies, corporations, virtual realities and mediums. This is affecting:

• privacy;

• legislation;

• law firms;

• client data sharing;

• predictive analytics in developing velocity billing;

• new technology innovations; and

• intellectual property integration.

In the post-Snowden world, no region, corporation or law firm is truly immune
to the touch of another. Considering this, it is important to understand how we can best learn how to approach shared data environments within our industries and organisations. Snowden's revelations
in 2013 shifted the way we approach
data worldwide.

At a recent conference, a debate arose regarding one region potentially being more economically effective than another relative to the amount of open data borders they would share. In a nutshell, the view pushed forward was that, the more open and free-ranging
data accessibility is, the better it is for
the economy.

The Snowden effect alters this perception. It allows us to move forward with an evolving understanding of the paradoxes inherent in data protection, privacy within regions and data stored across multiple regions, as well as data only stored specifically within regions as legislation dictates. This understanding is open to being deliberately taken out of context in the larger understanding of the cloud, big data, corporate espionage, governmental espionage and data pulled directly from consumers.

Social search and consumer corporations across the globe pull targeted ad revenues directly toward their bottom line based on the same methods employed by the NSA. These corporations were correct in crying foul when the NSA pulled their consumer data, and yet there was an element of irony in their doing so. In essence, the NSA is carrying to an extreme what these social search corporations have been doing all along for the sake of their bottom lines.

Investments in privacy

Bridging across business and consumer worlds, we should look toward the investments in privacy that Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, Amazon, Facebook and others are making. We should attempt to understand and anticipate their next investment moves, while better understanding our relative moves as
an industry. In doing so, we also take
into account the privacy investments
they are making in response to the Snowden revelations.

These same social and search companies have indicated a change in direction regarding their level of cooperation with the NSA. Privacy within this realm will be a consistent tug-of-war between those with the funds and consumer base to develop systems to withstand the funding and interests of entities like the NSA.

At the same time, entities like the
NSA the globe over continue to operate with a legitimate need to protect their citizens. These evolutions and the paradoxes they bring in their wake all directly impact upon our clients and industries by creating opportunities for existing business as well as entrepreneurs building businesses in adaptation to
these realities.

Privacy evolutions

Will we gain or lose privacy in our future evolutions post-Snowden? There will always be a push-and-pull battle between the right to privacy, the right to share
and the idea that everyone has access
to everyone else's information for the
sake of national security and advertising.

When looking toward a potential Kurzweilian future reality - where we are all connected to the cloud through digital interfaces, bioware and other technology - where is our right to privacy then?
This right to privacy evolves through
a consumer response, a bioware response and responses towards invasion of privacy by the free market, privacy-protecting solutions and a free market versus nations effect. And yet, paradoxically, the right to privacy also evolves through nations taking steps to protect their citizens from the
Big Brother realities of the free market.

In essence, both the free market and nations have the potential, through development and enterprise, to disrupt the capability for data information gathering, simply because the individual consumer demands it. A primary example lies within facial recognition technology. Entrepreneurs take note; there must be a way to block and disrupt the ability of software to successfully track facial recognition, and consumers can drive
that change as a right to privacy.

In these instances, governments can argue that their ability to protect the populace, and military and law enforcement's ability to conduct needed operations, are compromised. Viewpoints for and against these perceptions are meeting together as our businesses, personalities and perceptions change through continual consumer integration. This results in more push-and-pull relationships in privacy evolutions.

In one context, the argument is
about consumer-driven free market
nations and the advertising that drives them. On another level, it is about those advocating a right to privacy. In yet another sphere are governmental and military agencies with valid needs for security. All elements within these contexts are continually evolving and therefore alternate between cooperation and adversity at the same time.

Eric Hunter is director of knowledge, innovation and technology strategies at Bradford & Barthel (www.bradfordbarthel.com). This article is drawn from his Managing Partner report The Sherlock Syndrome, published in November 2014. Pick up the report today for only £50 - email publishing@ark-group.com or call +44(0) 207 566 5792 quoting code KF-SS-1 to place your order.