1. Facebook Founder Mark Zuckerberg once said, “Privacy is no longer a social norm.

” Do
you agree with him? Explain your answer.

I agree to a small extent. Privacy as a social norm may have declined but still exists.

In this essay, privacy in terms of control of usage and sharing of personal information will be
discussed.1 Social norms are behaviour that is accepted by society.2 It consists of injunctive
norms – what people approve of, and descriptive norms – what they actually do.3

Share but care

The popularity of social media makes people more comfortable with sharing their personal
information. But voluntary sharing of private lives should be distinguished from involuntary
disclosure or usage of personal information which is an infringement of privacy. For example,
people use Facebook to share photos and videos which may reveal a lot of personal information,
but they care about their privacy. Recently, Facebook settled $650 million for a privacy lawsuit,
alleging that its collection of biometric images without consent violated the Illinois Biometric
Information Privacy Act. Over 1.4 million Facebook users filed claims for the settlement.4

Impotence leads to tolerance

However, these users only filed their claims after the settlement has been made – they were
passive and did not sue the firm by themselves. This may show that as many resources are
needed to sue Big Techs or resist their privacy-infringing policies, most people practically have
no choice but to accept the trade-offs of using their services.

The similar happens with video surveillance. The prevalence of security cameras, especially
those levelling at residence, caused residents to be worried about their privacy. But they are
unable to enquire about the details of the camera, such as what it captures and how the videos

1
Sabine Trepte, “The Social Media Privacy Model: Privacy and Communication in the Light of Social Media
Affordances,” Communication Theory, July 2020, https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtz035.
2
Maria Lapinski, Rajiv Rimal, “An Explication of Social Norms,” Communication Theory 15, no. 2 (2005): pp.
127-147, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2005.tb00329.x.
3
Alexander K. Saeri et al., “Predicting Facebook Users’ Online Privacy Protection: Risk, Trust, Norm Focus
Theory, and the Theory of Planned Behavior” The Journal of Social Psychology 154, no. 4 (2014): pp. 352-369,
https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2014.914881.
4
Peter Blumberg, “Facebook to Pay Illinois Users $650m to Settle Privacy Case,” Al Jazeera. November 25,
2020. https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2020/11/25/millions-pass-on-facebooks-650m-privacy-settlement.
are used. 5 The incapability of citizens to battle with big firms and public authorities may lead
to a “norm” of bearing with the privacy encroachment.

Rising public awareness

Despite the above, people are more aware of privacy issues. In Hong Kong’s recent social
movement, concerns about data privacy have arisen. Allegations of surveillance by the
authorities, such as the Mainland authorities or the Police Force, also raise the public’s
awareness of privacy issues. For instance, the Police Force acquired the text messages in
activist Joshua Wong’s phone – which was passcode-locked, and Wong did not provide the
passcode. This triggered the public’s concern – about the authority’s legitimacy to do so and
also the privacy infringement. During the protests, there has been a preference of Telegram
over other messaging applications due to its functions like secret chats and self-destruction of
messages, which aid anonymity and confidentiality. 6 People are more alert to privacy and
security settings of various applications and learn how to protect their data, such as by using
encryption or two-factor authentication. This shows that they do not only care but also act to
protect their privacy.

Laws reinforce the norm

Lessig’s Four Modalities of Regulation shows that laws indirectly affect norms. Laws could
also reflect social norms as laws generally prohibit unacceptable behaviour. Doxxing, which is
the non-consensual disclosure of an individual’s personal information for harassment or
intimidation, is a privacy infringement. In Hong Kong, doxxing activities has mushroomed
dramatically amid the escalation of social and political conflicts. 7 Victims include police
officers, judges and arrested persons who participated in protests. Given the prevalence of
doxxing, does it mean that privacy is no longer the norm? What is common may be a
descriptive norm, but the behaviour may not be accepted as an injunctive norm. The Court has
granted injunctions which prohibit doxxing of police officers and judicial officers. A man was
recently sentenced to two-year imprisonment for doxxing in violation of the Personal Data

5
RTHK.HK, 鏗鏘集：天眼. November 16, 2020.
6
Zen Soo, “What is Telegram and why did the messaging app prove so popular during the Hong Kong
protests?” South China Morning Post (SCMP). June 14, 2019. https://www.scmp.com/tech/apps-
social/article/3014382/what-telegram-and-why-did-messaging-app-prove-so-popular-during
7
Sum Lok-hei, “Hong Kong protests: with nearly 5,000 doxxing complaints since unrest erupted, officials mull
new powers for privacy commissioner” SCMP. January 9, 2020. https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-
kong/politics/article/3045239/hong-kong-protests-nearly-5000-doxxing-complaints-unrest
(Privacy) Ordinance. 8 Many overseas jurisdictions such as New Zealand and Singapore
adopted regulations that criminalise doxxing.9 These could reflect that doxxing, as a privacy
infringement, is unaccepted by societies. Privacy remains an injunctive norm.

Double standards

However, concerning descriptive norms, “double standards” may exist. People display less
respect for others’ privacy. For instance, a survey commissioned by the Privacy Commissioner
for Personal Data shows that most young people do not ask for their friends’ permission before
uploading the photo on social media whereas older people tend not to share their friends’
information. 10 This shows that compared to digital immigrants, digital natives may have the
assumption that what they consider acceptable are accepted by others. The norm of declining
respect for others’ privacy may arise on social media, which is perceived as a place where users
give “implied consent” for a lower standard of privacy to apply.

Another example is the emergence of “internet judges” or online witch-hunting. Many people
have the habit of sharing their views on social media along with photos taken without
permission. For instance, people took photos of a woman breastfeeding in the public and
posted it online.11 The saying of “pictures or it didn’t happen” shows how popular photo-taking
and posting is. Many people think that it is acceptable to share and thus share this information.
This shows that respect for privacy may decline, both in terms of injunctive and descriptive
norms.

Conclusion

To conclude, privacy as a social norm may have diminished, especially for descriptive norms
regarding others’ privacy. But people’s awareness has increased so privacy remains at least as
an injunctive norm.

Word count: 1100

8
Jasmine Siu, “Hong Kong protests: two years’ jail for first person found guilty of doxxing police, families
amid anti-government unrest” SCMP. November 3, 2020. https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-and-
crime/article/3108216/hong-kong-protests-two-years-jail-first-found-guilty
9
Stephen Wong. “Weaponisation of Personal Data and Duty of Social Media”. Hong Kong Lawyer January
2020. http://www.hk-lawyer.org/content/weaponisation-personal-data-and-duty-social-media
10
Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data, Baseline Survey of Public Attitudes on Privacy and Data Protection
2014 Main Report.
11
Chew Hui Min. “Breastfeeding in public is normal, says mother who nursed her daughter without a cover on a
train” The Strait Times. March 16, 2017. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/breastfeeding-in-public-is-
normal-says-mother-who-nursed-her-daughter-without-a-cover-on-a