How the shady world of the data industry strips away our freedoms
Practices of big technology companies pose threats to our privacy and democracy, writes Professor Uri Gal from the University of Sydney Business School.
The recent questioning of the heads of Amazon, Facebook, Google and Apple in the US Congress has highlighted the听听their practices pose to our privacy and democracy.
However these big four companies are only part of a vast, sophisticated system of mass surveillance.
In this network are thousands of data brokers, ad agencies and technology companies 鈥� some of them Australian. They harvest data from听, often without their explicit consent or knowledge.
Currently, this includes data related to the COVID-19 pandemic. For instance, data giant Palantir has provided听听to the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention.
How much do they know?
Data companies gather data about our online activity, location,听, health and even how we听. They use a range of techniques, such as:
- web-trackers planted on听, which follow our browsing activity
- 鈥渟mart鈥� home devices听
- 听sending our data to unknown third parties, including sensitive information such as听
- 听tracking our purchasing habits and听.
This expansive tracking generates听听that can reveal every facet of our lives including our family status, income, political affiliation, interests, friendships and sexual orientation.
Data companies use this information to compile detailed individual consumer profiles. These are used for purposes such as听, determining our听听and assessing the听.
The data industry in Australia
Some of the world鈥檚 largest data companies operate in Australia.
Data companies largely operate in the shadows. We rarely know who has collected information about us, how they use it, whom they give it to, whether it鈥檚 correct, or how much money is being made by it.
Quantium is an Australian data analytics firm that acquires data from various companies. In the past few years these have included NAB, CoreLogic, Woolworths (which owns 50% of the company) and Foxtel, according to Quantium itself.
Such associations听听鈥渢ap into the consumer data ecosystem with an unrivalled picture of the behaviours of more than 80% of Australian households, spanning banking, household and retail transactions鈥�.
A听Quantium spokesperson told The Conversation most of its work is 鈥渄ata science and AI (artificial intelligence) work with first-party de-identified data supplied by the client鈥�. From this, Quantium delivers 鈥渋nsights and AI/decision support tools鈥� for clients.
Anonymised or 鈥渄e-identified鈥� data still听carries risks of being . Even, as explained in an ACCC report on customer loyalty schemes, published last year.
Therefore, each code is unique to an individual and can be used to听听.
A lack of transparency
With a revenue of more than听听last year, the insights from Quantium鈥檚 data seem to be proving valuable.
From this revenue, more than听听came from projects commissioned by the Australian government. This includes two 2020 engagements:
a 鈥淐OVID-19 Data Analytics鈥� project worth more than A$10 million with a contract period from March 17, 2020 to December 31, 2020
a 鈥淨uantium Health Data Analytics鈥� project valued at more than A$7.4 million with a contract period from July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021.
Quantium鈥檚 spokesperson said they could not discuss the details of the contracts without government approval.
In the past decade, the Australian government has commissioned dozens of projects to other data analytics firms worth more than A$200 million.
These include a A$13.8 million Debt Recovery Service project with听听and a A$3.3 million National Police Checks project with听听鈥� both started in 2016. It鈥檚 unclear what and how much data has been shared for these projects.
Last year, the ACCC Quantium wasas one of several largerthe companies put on notice by Australia鈥檚 consumer watchdog for sharing that participate in the exchange of loyalty schemes data with third parties, often without consumers鈥� knowledge orexplicit consent.
Quantium鈥檚 spokesperson told The Conversation the company 鈥渄oes not deal with personally identifiable information and does not share data with any third party whether identified or de-identified鈥�.
How do they work?
Data companies largely operate in the shadows. We rarely know who has collected information about us, how they use it, whom they give it to, whether it鈥檚 correct, or how much money is being made from it.
LiveRamp (formerly Acxiom) is a US-based company partnered with Australia鈥檚 Nine Entertainment Co.听听allows the Nine Network to give marketers access to online and offline data to target consumers across Nine鈥檚 digital network.
This data may include the Australian electoral roll, to which LiveRamp听.
Similarly, Optum is a US-based health data company that听听from hospital records, electronic health records and insurance claims.
It has data on听听and used this to develop a predictive algorithm that was shown to听.
Compromising our democracy
The prevalence, scope and stealth of the abovementioned data practices are not congruent with the basic principles of a liberal democracy.
According to philosopher Isaiah Berlin, liberal democracies can only thrive if they have autonomous citizens with听:
- freedom to听freely speak, choose and protest
- freedom from听undue inspection and intervention.
Our data-driven world signals an extreme diminishing of both these freedoms. Our freedom of choice is harmed when our informational environments are doctored to nudge us towards听.
Our private space is all but gone in a digital environment where everything we do is recorded, processed and used by commercial and governmental entities.
How can we protect ourselves?
Although our ability to disconnect from the digital world and control our data is听, there are still听听to protect our privacy.
We should focus on implementing legislation to protect our civil liberties. The Australian听听and听听stop short of ensuring the appropriate data protections. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission highlighted this in its听.
In 2014, the US Federal Trade Commission听听legislation to allow consumers to identify which brokers have data about them 鈥� and that they be able to access it.
It also recommended:
- brokers be required to reveal their data sources
- retailers disclose to consumers that they share their data with brokers
- consumers be allowed to opt out.
If we care about our freedoms, we should try to ensure similar legislation is introduced in Australia.
This article was first published in . Professor Uri Gal is an expert in the intersection between digital technology, people and organisations from the University of Sydney Business School's Discipline of Business Information Systems.
