By saying “I have nothing to hide,” you are saying that it’s OK for the government to infringe on the rights of potentially millions of your fellow Americans, possibly ruining their lives in the process.
I think this is not as well understood as the "a crime can always be found" counter argument & it is much more nefarious. By being drilled with, "well, you have nothing to hide, correct, so what's the big deal?" it forces you to be suspicious of others who are concerned with their rights, like "I have nothing to hide, so what are they hiding"? This also distracts from the fact that we should be eying law enforcement with suspicion when there's a push to roll back our rights, not our neighbors. Overall, the point of this rhetoric just creates a new wedge to drive between groups that can be exploited for political gain.
I've got nothing to hide. That doesn't mean I want you looking in my underwear drawer. There's nothing in there but underwear, but no, you still can't have a look.
We need to change the word Privacy to Confidentiality.
Everywhere and everything in the tech world needs to have an ethical framework in place driven by strong legislation.
For me being a retired psychotherapist I have applied confidentiality to my practice for over 20 years.
I not only apply this valuable practice to clients but also to everyone in my personal life.
The old saying: "Without confidentiality there is no trust", speaks volumes about the lack of privacy we all experience today.
I certainly do not trust anything in the tech world.
Extract from the BACP Ethical Framework:
We will protect the confidentiality and privacy of clients by:
a. actively protecting information about clients from unauthorised access or disclosure
b. informing clients about how the use of personal data and information that they share with us will be used and who is within the circle of confidentiality, particularly with access to personally identifiable information
c. requiring that all recipients of personally identifiable information have agreed to treat such information as confidential in accordance with any legal requirements and what has been agreed with the client at the time of disclosure
d. informing clients about any reasonably foreseeable limitations of privacy or confidentiality in advance of our work together, for example, communications to ensure or enhance the quality of work in supervision or training, to protect a client or others from serious harm including safeguarding commitments, and when legally required or authorised to disclose
e. taking care that all contractual requirements concerning the management and communication of client information are mutually compatible
f. ensuring that disclosure of personally identifiable information about clients is authorised by client consent or that there is a legally and ethically recognised justification
g. using thoroughly anonymised information about clients where this provides a practical alternative to sharing identifiable information
Imagine if the big tech companies suddenly created a similar ethical framework for their services.
I think this is not as well understood as the "a crime can always be found" counter argument & it is much more nefarious. By being drilled with, "well, you have nothing to hide, correct, so what's the big deal?" it forces you to be suspicious of others who are concerned with their rights, like "I have nothing to hide, so what are they hiding"? This also distracts from the fact that we should be eying law enforcement with suspicion when there's a push to roll back our rights, not our neighbors. Overall, the point of this rhetoric just creates a new wedge to drive between groups that can be exploited for political gain.