essay on social media privacy

Feb 15, 2023

6 Example Essays on Social Media | Advantages, Effects, and Outlines

Got an essay assignment about the effects of social media we got you covered check out our examples and outlines below.

Social media has become one of our society's most prominent ways of communication and information sharing in a very short time. It has changed how we communicate and has given us a platform to express our views and opinions and connect with others. It keeps us informed about the world around us. Social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and LinkedIn have brought individuals from all over the world together, breaking down geographical borders and fostering a genuinely global community.

However, social media comes with its difficulties. With the rise of misinformation, cyberbullying, and privacy problems, it's critical to utilize these platforms properly and be aware of the risks. Students in the academic world are frequently assigned essays about the impact of social media on numerous elements of our lives, such as relationships, politics, and culture. These essays necessitate a thorough comprehension of the subject matter, critical thinking, and the ability to synthesize and convey information clearly and succinctly.

But where do you begin? It can be challenging to know where to start with so much information available. Jenni.ai comes in handy here. Jenni.ai is an AI application built exclusively for students to help them write essays more quickly and easily. Jenni.ai provides students with inspiration and assistance on how to approach their essays with its enormous database of sample essays on a variety of themes, including social media. Jenni.ai is the solution you've been looking for if you're experiencing writer's block or need assistance getting started.

So, whether you're a student looking to better your essay writing skills or want to remain up to date on the latest social media advancements, Jenni.ai is here to help. Jenni.ai is the ideal tool for helping you write your finest essay ever, thanks to its simple design, an extensive database of example essays, and cutting-edge AI technology. So, why delay? Sign up for a free trial of Jenni.ai today and begin exploring the worlds of social networking and essay writing!

Want to learn how to write an argumentative essay? Check out these inspiring examples!

We will provide various examples of social media essays so you may get a feel for the genre.

6 Examples of Social Media Essays

Here are 6 examples of Social Media Essays:

The Impact of Social Media on Relationships and Communication

Introduction:.

The way we share information and build relationships has evolved as a direct result of the prevalence of social media in our daily lives. The influence of social media on interpersonal connections and conversation is a hot topic. Although social media has many positive effects, such as bringing people together regardless of physical proximity and making communication quicker and more accessible, it also has a dark side that can affect interpersonal connections and dialogue.

Positive Effects:

Connecting People Across Distances

One of social media's most significant benefits is its ability to connect individuals across long distances. People can use social media platforms to interact and stay in touch with friends and family far away. People can now maintain intimate relationships with those they care about, even when physically separated.

Improved Communication Speed and Efficiency

Additionally, the proliferation of social media sites has accelerated and simplified communication. Thanks to instant messaging, users can have short, timely conversations rather than lengthy ones via email. Furthermore, social media facilitates group communication, such as with classmates or employees, by providing a unified forum for such activities.

Negative Effects:

Decreased Face-to-Face Communication

The decline in in-person interaction is one of social media's most pernicious consequences on interpersonal connections and dialogue. People's reliance on digital communication over in-person contact has increased along with the popularity of social media. Face-to-face interaction has suffered as a result, which has adverse effects on interpersonal relationships and the development of social skills.

Decreased Emotional Intimacy

Another adverse effect of social media on relationships and communication is decreased emotional intimacy. Digital communication lacks the nonverbal cues and facial expressions critical in building emotional connections with others. This can make it more difficult for people to develop close and meaningful relationships, leading to increased loneliness and isolation.

Increased Conflict and Miscommunication

Finally, social media can also lead to increased conflict and miscommunication. The anonymity and distance provided by digital communication can lead to misunderstandings and hurtful comments that might not have been made face-to-face. Additionally, social media can provide a platform for cyberbullying , which can have severe consequences for the victim's mental health and well-being.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, the impact of social media on relationships and communication is a complex issue with both positive and negative effects. While social media platforms offer many benefits, such as connecting people across distances and enabling faster and more accessible communication, they also have a dark side that can negatively affect relationships and communication. It is up to individuals to use social media responsibly and to prioritize in-person communication in their relationships and interactions with others.

The Role of Social Media in the Spread of Misinformation and Fake News

Social media has revolutionized the way information is shared and disseminated. However, the ease and speed at which data can be spread on social media also make it a powerful tool for spreading misinformation and fake news. Misinformation and fake news can seriously affect public opinion, influence political decisions, and even cause harm to individuals and communities.

The Pervasiveness of Misinformation and Fake News on Social Media

Misinformation and fake news are prevalent on social media platforms, where they can spread quickly and reach a large audience. This is partly due to the way social media algorithms work, which prioritizes content likely to generate engagement, such as sensational or controversial stories. As a result, false information can spread rapidly and be widely shared before it is fact-checked or debunked.

The Influence of Social Media on Public Opinion

Social media can significantly impact public opinion, as people are likelier to believe the information they see shared by their friends and followers. This can lead to a self-reinforcing cycle, where misinformation and fake news are spread and reinforced, even in the face of evidence to the contrary.

The Challenge of Correcting Misinformation and Fake News

Correcting misinformation and fake news on social media can be a challenging task. This is partly due to the speed at which false information can spread and the difficulty of reaching the same audience exposed to the wrong information in the first place. Additionally, some individuals may be resistant to accepting correction, primarily if the incorrect information supports their beliefs or biases.

In conclusion, the function of social media in disseminating misinformation and fake news is complex and urgent. While social media has revolutionized the sharing of information, it has also made it simpler for false information to propagate and be widely believed. Individuals must be accountable for the information they share and consume, and social media firms must take measures to prevent the spread of disinformation and fake news on their platforms.

The Effects of Social Media on Mental Health and Well-Being

Social media has become an integral part of modern life, with billions of people around the world using platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter to stay connected with others and access information. However, while social media has many benefits, it can also negatively affect mental health and well-being.

Comparison and Low Self-Esteem

One of the key ways that social media can affect mental health is by promoting feelings of comparison and low self-esteem. People often present a curated version of their lives on social media, highlighting their successes and hiding their struggles. This can lead others to compare themselves unfavorably, leading to feelings of inadequacy and low self-esteem.

Cyberbullying and Online Harassment

Another way that social media can negatively impact mental health is through cyberbullying and online harassment. Social media provides a platform for anonymous individuals to harass and abuse others, leading to feelings of anxiety, fear, and depression.

Social Isolation

Despite its name, social media can also contribute to feelings of isolation. At the same time, people may have many online friends but need more meaningful in-person connections and support. This can lead to feelings of loneliness and depression.

Addiction and Overuse

Finally, social media can be addictive, leading to overuse and negatively impacting mental health and well-being. People may spend hours each day scrolling through their feeds, neglecting other important areas of their lives, such as work, family, and self-care.

In sum, social media has positive and negative consequences on one's psychological and emotional well-being. Realizing this, and taking measures like reducing one's social media use, reaching out to loved ones for help, and prioritizing one's well-being, are crucial. In addition, it's vital that social media giants take ownership of their platforms and actively encourage excellent mental health and well-being.

The Use of Social Media in Political Activism and Social Movements

Social media has recently become increasingly crucial in political action and social movements. Platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram have given people new ways to express themselves, organize protests, and raise awareness about social and political issues.

Raising Awareness and Mobilizing Action

One of the most important uses of social media in political activity and social movements has been to raise awareness about important issues and mobilize action. Hashtags such as #MeToo and #BlackLivesMatter, for example, have brought attention to sexual harassment and racial injustice, respectively. Similarly, social media has been used to organize protests and other political actions, allowing people to band together and express themselves on a bigger scale.

Connecting with like-minded individuals

A second method in that social media has been utilized in political activity and social movements is to unite like-minded individuals. Through social media, individuals can join online groups, share knowledge and resources, and work with others to accomplish shared objectives. This has been especially significant for geographically scattered individuals or those without access to traditional means of political organizing.

Challenges and Limitations

As a vehicle for political action and social movements, social media has faced many obstacles and restrictions despite its many advantages. For instance, the propagation of misinformation and fake news on social media can impede attempts to disseminate accurate and reliable information. In addition, social media corporations have been condemned for censorship and insufficient protection of user rights.

In conclusion, social media has emerged as a potent instrument for political activism and social movements, giving voice to previously unheard communities and galvanizing support for change. Social media presents many opportunities for communication and collaboration. Still, users and institutions must be conscious of the risks and limitations of these tools to promote their responsible and productive usage.

The Potential Privacy Concerns Raised by Social Media Use and Data Collection Practices

With billions of users each day on sites like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, social media has ingrained itself into every aspect of our lives. While these platforms offer a straightforward method to communicate with others and exchange information, they also raise significant concerns over data collecting and privacy. This article will examine the possible privacy issues posed by social media use and data-gathering techniques.

Data Collection and Sharing

The gathering and sharing of personal data are significant privacy issues brought up by social media use. Social networking sites gather user data, including details about their relationships, hobbies, and routines. This information is made available to third-party businesses for various uses, such as marketing and advertising. This can lead to serious concerns about who has access to and uses our personal information.

Lack of Control Over Personal Information

The absence of user control over personal information is a significant privacy issue brought up by social media usage. Social media makes it challenging to limit who has access to and how data is utilized once it has been posted. Sensitive information may end up being extensively disseminated and may be used maliciously as a result.

Personalized Marketing

Social media companies utilize the information they gather about users to target them with adverts relevant to their interests and usage patterns. Although this could be useful, it might also cause consumers to worry about their privacy since they might feel that their personal information is being used without their permission. Furthermore, there are issues with the integrity of the data being used to target users and the possibility of prejudice based on individual traits.

Government Surveillance

Using social media might spark worries about government surveillance. There are significant concerns regarding privacy and free expression when governments in some nations utilize social media platforms to follow and monitor residents.

In conclusion, social media use raises significant concerns regarding data collecting and privacy. While these platforms make it easy to interact with people and exchange information, they also gather a lot of personal information, which raises questions about who may access it and how it will be used. Users should be aware of these privacy issues and take precautions to safeguard their personal information, such as exercising caution when choosing what details to disclose on social media and keeping their information sharing with other firms to a minimum.

The Ethical and Privacy Concerns Surrounding Social Media Use And Data Collection

Our use of social media to communicate with loved ones, acquire information, and even conduct business has become a crucial part of our everyday lives. The extensive use of social media does, however, raise some ethical and privacy issues that must be resolved. The influence of social media use and data collecting on user rights, the accountability of social media businesses, and the need for improved regulation are all topics that will be covered in this article.

Effect on Individual Privacy:

Social networking sites gather tons of personal data from their users, including delicate information like search history, location data, and even health data. Each user's detailed profile may be created with this data and sold to advertising or used for other reasons. Concerns regarding the privacy of personal information might arise because social media businesses can use this data to target users with customized adverts.

Additionally, individuals might need to know how much their personal information is being gathered and exploited. Data breaches or the unauthorized sharing of personal information with other parties may result in instances where sensitive information is exposed. Users should be aware of the privacy rules of social media firms and take precautions to secure their data.

Responsibility of Social Media Companies:

Social media firms should ensure that they responsibly and ethically gather and use user information. This entails establishing strong security measures to safeguard sensitive information and ensuring users are informed of what information is being collected and how it is used.

Many social media businesses, nevertheless, have come under fire for not upholding these obligations. For instance, the Cambridge Analytica incident highlighted how Facebook users' personal information was exploited for political objectives without their knowledge. This demonstrates the necessity of social media corporations being held responsible for their deeds and ensuring that they are safeguarding the security and privacy of their users.

Better Regulation Is Needed

There is a need for tighter regulation in this field, given the effect, social media has on individual privacy as well as the obligations of social media firms. The creation of laws and regulations that ensure social media companies are gathering and using user information ethically and responsibly, as well as making sure users are aware of their rights and have the ability to control the information that is being collected about them, are all part of this.

Additionally, legislation should ensure that social media businesses are held responsible for their behavior, for example, by levying fines for data breaches or the unauthorized use of personal data. This will provide social media businesses with a significant incentive to prioritize their users' privacy and security and ensure they are upholding their obligations.

In conclusion, social media has fundamentally changed how we engage and communicate with one another, but this increased convenience also raises several ethical and privacy issues. Essential concerns that need to be addressed include the effect of social media on individual privacy, the accountability of social media businesses, and the requirement for greater regulation to safeguard user rights. We can make everyone's online experience safer and more secure by looking more closely at these issues.

In conclusion, social media is a complex and multifaceted topic that has recently captured the world's attention. With its ever-growing influence on our lives, it's no surprise that it has become a popular subject for students to explore in their writing. Whether you are writing an argumentative essay on the impact of social media on privacy, a persuasive essay on the role of social media in politics, or a descriptive essay on the changes social media has brought to the way we communicate, there are countless angles to approach this subject.

However, writing a comprehensive and well-researched essay on social media can be daunting. It requires a thorough understanding of the topic and the ability to articulate your ideas clearly and concisely. This is where Jenni.ai comes in. Our AI-powered tool is designed to help students like you save time and energy and focus on what truly matters - your education. With Jenni.ai , you'll have access to a wealth of examples and receive personalized writing suggestions and feedback.

Whether you're a student who's just starting your writing journey or looking to perfect your craft, Jenni.ai has everything you need to succeed. Our tool provides you with the necessary resources to write with confidence and clarity, no matter your experience level. You'll be able to experiment with different styles, explore new ideas , and refine your writing skills.

So why waste your time and energy struggling to write an essay on your own when you can have Jenni.ai by your side? Sign up for our free trial today and experience the difference for yourself! With Jenni.ai, you'll have the resources you need to write confidently, clearly, and creatively. Get started today and see just how easy and efficient writing can be!

Start Writing With Jenni Today

Sign up for a free Jenni AI account today. Unlock your research potential and experience the difference for yourself. Your journey to academic excellence starts here.

Open Access is an initiative that aims to make scientific research freely available to all. To date our community has made over 100 million downloads. It’s based on principles of collaboration, unobstructed discovery, and, most importantly, scientific progression. As PhD students, we found it difficult to access the research we needed, so we decided to create a new Open Access publisher that levels the playing field for scientists across the world. How? By making research easy to access, and puts the academic needs of the researchers before the business interests of publishers.

We are a community of more than 103,000 authors and editors from 3,291 institutions spanning 160 countries, including Nobel Prize winners and some of the world’s most-cited researchers. Publishing on IntechOpen allows authors to earn citations and find new collaborators, meaning more people see your work not only from your own field of study, but from other related fields too.

Brief introduction to this section that descibes Open Access especially from an IntechOpen perspective

Want to get in touch? Contact our London head office or media team here

Our team is growing all the time, so we’re always on the lookout for smart people who want to help us reshape the world of scientific publishing.

Home > Books > Security and Privacy From a Legal, Ethical, and Technical Perspective

Social Media, Ethics and the Privacy Paradox

Submitted: 11 September 2019 Reviewed: 19 December 2019 Published: 05 February 2020

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.90906

Cite this chapter

There are two ways to cite this chapter:

From the Edited Volume

Security and Privacy From a Legal, Ethical, and Technical Perspective

Edited by Christos Kalloniatis and Carlos Travieso-Gonzalez

To purchase hard copies of this book, please contact the representative in India: CBS Publishers & Distributors Pvt. Ltd. www.cbspd.com | [email protected]

Chapter metrics overview

3,994 Chapter Downloads

Impact of this chapter

Total Chapter Downloads on intechopen.com

Total Chapter Views on intechopen.com

Overall attention for this chapters

Today’s information/digital age offers widespread use of social media. The use of social media is ubiquitous and cuts across all age groups, social classes and cultures. However, the increased use of these media is accompanied by privacy issues and ethical concerns. These privacy issues can have far-reaching professional, personal and security implications. Ultimate privacy in the social media domain is very difficult because these media are designed for sharing information. Participating in social media requires persons to ignore some personal, privacy constraints resulting in some vulnerability. The weak individual privacy safeguards in this space have resulted in unethical and undesirable behaviors resulting in privacy and security breaches, especially for the most vulnerable group of users. An exploratory study was conducted to examine social media usage and the implications for personal privacy. We investigated how some of the requirements for participating in social media and how unethical use of social media can impact users’ privacy. Results indicate that if users of these networks pay attention to privacy settings and the type of information shared and adhere to universal, fundamental, moral values such as mutual respect and kindness, many privacy and unethical issues can be avoided.

• social media

Author Information

Nadine barrett-maitland *.

• University of Technology, Jamaica, West Indies

Jenice Lynch

*Address all correspondence to: [email protected]

1. Introduction

The use of social media is growing at a rapid pace and the twenty-first century could be described as the “boom” period for social networking. According to reports provided by Smart Insights, as at February 2019 there were over 3.484 billion social media users. The Smart Insight report indicates that the number of social media users is growing by 9% annually and this trend is estimated to continue. Presently the number of social media users represents 45% of the global population [ 1 ]. The heaviest users of social media are “digital natives”; the group of persons who were born or who have grown up in the digital era and are intimate with the various technologies and systems, and the “Millennial Generation”; those who became adults at the turn of the twenty-first century. These groups of users utilize social media platforms for just about anything ranging from marketing, news acquisition, teaching, health care, civic engagement, and politicking to social engagement.

The unethical use of social media has resulted in the breach of individual privacy and impacts both physical and information security. Reports in 2019 [ 1 ], reveal that persons between the ages 8 and 11 years spend an average 13.5 hours weekly online and 18% of this age group are actively engaged on social media. Those between ages 12 and 15 spend on average 20.5 hours online and 69% of this group are active social media users. While children and teenagers represent the largest Internet user groups, for the most part they do not know how to protect their personal information on the Web and are the most vulnerable to cyber-crimes related to breaches of information privacy [ 2 , 3 ].

In today’s IT-configured society data is one of, if not the most, valuable asset for most businesses/organizations. Organizations and governments collect information via several means including invisible data gathering, marketing platforms and search engines such as Google [ 4 ]. Information can be attained from several sources, which can be fused using technology to develop complete profiles of individuals. The information on social media is very accessible and can be of great value to individuals and organizations for reasons such as marketing, etc.; hence, data is retained by most companies for future use.

Privacy or the right to enjoy freedom from unauthorized intrusion is the negative right of all human beings. Privacy is defined as the right to be left alone, to be free from secret surveillance, or unwanted disclosure of personal data or information by government, corporation, or individual ( dictionary.com ). In this chapter we will define privacy loosely, as the right to control access to personal information. Supporters of privacy posit that it is a necessity for human dignity and individuality and a key element in the quest for happiness. According to Baase [ 5 ] in the book titled “A Gift of Fire: Social, Legal and Ethical Issues for Computing and the Internet,” privacy is the ability to control information about one’ s self as well as the freedom from surveillance from being followed, tracked, watched, and being eavesdropped on. In this regard, ignoring privacy rights often leads to encroachment on natural rights.

Intrusion—this can be viewed as encroachment (physical or otherwise) on ones liberties/solitude in a highly offensive way.

Privacy facts—making public, private information about someone that is of no “legitimate concern” to anyone.

False light—making public false and “highly offensive” information about others.

Appropriation—stealing someone’s identity (name, likeness) to gain advantage without the permission of the individual.

Technology, the digital age, the Internet and social media have redefined privacy however as surveillance is no longer limited to a certain pre-defined space and location. An understanding of the problems and dangers of privacy in the digital space is therefore the first step to privacy control. While there can be clear distinctions between informational privacy and physical privacy, as pointed out earlier, intrusion can be both physical and otherwise.

This chapter will focus on informational privacy which is the ability to control access to personal information. We examine privacy issues in the social media context focusing primarily on personal information and the ability to control external influences. We suggest that breach of informational privacy can impact: solitude (the right to be left alone), intimacy (the right not to be monitored), and anonymity (the right to have no public personal identity and by extension physical privacy impacted). The right to control access to facts or personal information in our view is a natural, inalienable right and everyone should have control over who see their personal information and how it is disseminated.

“Freely given—an individual must be given a genuine choice when providing consent and it should generally be unbundled from other terms and conditions (e.g., access to a service should not be conditional upon consent being given).”

“Specific and informed—this means that data subjects should be provided with information as to the identity of the controller(s), the specific purposes, types of processing, as well as being informed of their right to withdraw consent at any time.”

“Explicit and unambiguous—the data subject must clearly express their consent (e.g., by actively ticking a box which confirms they are giving consent—pre-ticked boxes are insufficient).”

“Under 13s—children under the age of 13 cannot provide consent and it is therefore necessary to obtain consent from their parents.”

Arguments can be made that privacy is a cultural, universal necessity for harmonious relationships among human beings and creates the boundaries for engagement and disengagement. Privacy can also be viewed as instrumental good because it is a requirement for the development of certain kinds of human relationships, intimacy and trust [ 7 ]. However, achieving privacy is much more difficult in light of constant surveillance and the inability to determine the levels of interaction with various publics [ 7 ]. Some critics argue that privacy provides protection against anti-social behaviors such as trickery, disinformation and fraud, and is thought to be a universal right [ 5 ]. However, privacy can also be viewed as relative as privacy rules may differ based on several factors such as “climate, religion, technological advancement and political arrangements” [ 8 , 9 ]. The need for privacy is an objective reality though it can be viewed as “culturally rational” where the need for personal privacy is viewed as relative based on culture. One example is the push by the government, businesses and Singaporeans to make Singapore a smart nation. According to GovTech 2018 reports there is a push by the government in Singapore to harness the data “new gold” to develop systems that can make life easier for its people. The [ 10 ] report points out that Singapore is using sensors robots Smart Water Assessment Network (SWAN) to monitor water quality in its reservoirs, seeking to build smart health system and to build a smart transportation system to name a few. In this example privacy can be describe as “culturally rational” and the rules in general could differ based on technological advancement and political arrangements.

In today’s networked society it is naïve and ill-conceived to think that privacy is over-rated and there is no need to be concerned about privacy if you have done nothing wrong [ 5 ]. The effects of information flow can be complex and may not be simply about protection for people who have something to hide. Inaccurate information flow can have adverse long-term implications for individuals and companies. Consider a scenario where someone’s computer or tablet is stolen. The perpetrator uses identification information stored on the device to access their social media page which could lead to access to their contacts, friends and friends of their “friends” then participate in illegal activities and engage in anti-social activities such as hacking, spreading viruses, fraud and identity theft. The victim is now in danger of being accused of criminal intentions, or worse. These kinds of situations are possible because of technology and networked systems. Users of social media need to be aware of the risks that are associated with participation.

3. Social media

The concept of social networking pre-dates the Internet and mass communication as people are said to be social creatures who when working in groups can achieve results in a value greater than the sun of its parts [ 11 ]. The explosive growth in the use of social media over the past decade has made it one of the most popular Internet services in the world, providing new avenues to “see and be seen” [ 12 , 13 ]. The use of social media has changed the communication landscape resulting in changes in ethical norms and behavior. The unprecedented level of growth in usage has resulted in the reduction in the use of other media and changes in areas including civic and political engagement, privacy and safety [ 14 ]. Alexa, a company that keeps track of traffic on the Web, indicates that as of August, 2019 YouTube, Facebook and Twitter are among the top four (4) most visited sites with only Google, being the most popular search engine, surpassing these social media sites.

Social media sites can be described as online services that allow users to create profiles which are “public, semi-public” or both. Users may create individual profiles and/or become a part of a group of people with whom they may be acquainted offline [ 15 ]. They also provide avenues to create virtual friendships. Through these virtual friendships, people may access details about their contacts ranging from personal background information and interests to location. Social networking sites provide various tools to facilitate communication. These include chat rooms, blogs, private messages, public comments, ways of uploading content external to the site and sharing videos and photographs. Social media is therefore drastically changing the way people communicate and form relationships.

Today social media has proven to be one of the most, if not the most effective medium for the dissemination of information to various audiences. The power of this medium is phenomenal and ranges from its ability to overturn governments (e.g., Moldova), to mobilize protests, assist with getting support for humanitarian aid, organize political campaigns, organize groups to delay the passing of legislation (as in the case with the copyright bill in Canada) to making social media billionaires and millionaires [ 16 , 17 ]. The enabling nature and the structure of the media that social networking offers provide a wide range of opportunities that were nonexistent before technology. Facebook and YouTube marketers and trainers provide two examples. Today people can interact with and learn from people millions of miles away. The global reach of this medium has removed all former pre-defined boundaries including geographical, social and any other that existed previously. Technological advancements such as Web 2.0 and Web 4.0 which provide the framework for collaboration, have given new meaning to life from various perspectives: political, institutional and social.

4. Privacy and social media

Social medial and the information/digital era have “redefined” privacy. In today’s Information Technology—configured societies, where there is continuous monitoring, privacy has taken on a new meaning. Technologies such as closed-circuit cameras (CCTV) are prevalent in public spaces or in some private spaces including our work and home [ 7 , 18 ]. Personal computers and devices such as our smart phones enabled with Global Positioning System (GPS), Geo locations and Geo maps connected to these devices make privacy as we know it, a thing of the past. Recent reports indicate that some of the largest companies such as Amazon, Microsoft and Facebook as well as various government agencies are collecting information without consent and storing it in databases for future use. It is almost impossible to say privacy exists in this digital world (@nowthisnews).

The open nature of the social networking sites and the avenues they provide for sharing information in a “public or semi-public” space create privacy concerns by their very construct. Information that is inappropriate for some audiences are many times inadvertently made visible to groups other than those intended and can sometimes result in future negative outcomes. One such example is a well-known case recorded in an article entitled “The Web Means the End of Forgetting” that involved a young woman who was denied her college license because of backlash from photographs posted on social media in her private engagement.

Technology has reduced the gap between professional and personal spaces and often results in information exposure to the wrong audience [ 19 ]. The reduction in the separation of professional and personal spaces can affect image management especially in a professional setting resulting in the erosion of traditional professional image and impression management. Determining the secondary use of personal information and those who have access to this information should be the prerogative of the individual or group to whom the information belongs. However, engaging in social media activities has removed this control.

Privacy on social networking sites (SNSs) is heavily dependent on the users of these networks because sharing information is the primary way of participating in social communities. Privacy in SNSs is “multifaceted.” Users of these platforms are responsible for protecting their information from third-party data collection and managing their personal profiles. However, participants are usually more willing to give personal and more private information in SNSs than anywhere else on the Internet. This can be attributed to the feeling of community, comfort and family that these media provide for the most part. Privacy controls are not the priority of social networking site designers and only a small number of the young adolescent users change the default privacy settings of their accounts [ 20 , 21 ]. This opens the door for breaches especially among the most vulnerable user groups, namely young children, teenagers and the elderly. The nature of social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter and other social media platforms cause users to re-evaluate and often change their personal privacy standards in order to participate in these social networked communities [ 13 ].

While there are tremendous benefits that can be derived from the effective use of social media there are some unavoidable risks that are involved in its use. Much attention should therefore be given to what is shared in these forums. Social platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are said to be the most effective media to communicate to Generation Y’s (Gen Y’s), as teens and young adults are the largest user groups on these platforms [ 22 ]. However, according to Bolton et al. [ 22 ] Gen Y’s use of social media, if left unabated and unmonitored will have long-term implications for privacy and engagement in civic activities as this continuous use is resulting in changes in behavior and social norms as well as increased levels of cyber-crime.

Today social networks are becoming the platform of choice for hackers and other perpetrators of antisocial behavior. These media offer large volumes of data/information ranging from an individual’s date of birth, place of residence, place of work/business, to information about family and other personal activities. In many cases users unintentionally disclose information that can be both dangerous and inappropriate. Information regarding activities on social media can have far reaching negative implications for one’s future. A few examples of situations which can, and have been affected are employment, visa acquisition, and college acceptance. Indiscriminate participation has also resulted in situations such identity theft and bank fraud just to list a few. Protecting privacy in today’s networked society can be a great challenge. The digital revolution has indeed distorted our views of privacy, however, there should be clear distinctions between what should be seen by the general public and what should be limited to a selected group. One school of thought is that the only way to have privacy today is not to share information in these networked communities. However, achieving privacy and control over information flows and disclosure in networked communities is an ongoing process in an environment where contexts change quickly and are sometimes blurred. This requires intentional construction of systems that are designed to mitigate privacy issues [ 13 ].

5. Ethics and social media

Can this post be regarded as oversharing?

Has the information in this post been distorted in anyway?

What impact will this post have on others?

As previously mentioned, users within the ages 8–15 represent one of the largest social media user groups. These young persons within the 8–15 age range are still learning how to interact with the people around them and are deciding on the moral values that they will embrace. These moral values will help to dictate how they will interact with the world around them. The ethical values that guide our interactions are usually formulated from some moral principle taught to us by someone or a group of individuals including parents, guardians, religious groups, and teachers just to name a few. Many of the Gen Y’s/“Digital Babies” are “newbies” yet are required to determine for themselves the level of responsibility they will display when using the varying social media platforms. This includes considering the impact a post will have on their lives and/or the lives of other persons. They must also understand that when they join a social media network, they are joining a community in which certain behavior must be exhibited. Such responsibility requires a much greater level of maturity than can be expected from them at that age.

It is not uncommon for individuals to post even the smallest details of their lives from the moment they wake up to when they go to bed. They will openly share their location, what they eat at every meal or details about activities typically considered private and personal. They will also share likes and dislikes, thoughts and emotional states and for the most part this has become an accepted norm. Often times however, these shares do not only contain information about the person sharing but information about others as well. Many times, these details are shared on several social media platforms as individuals attempt to ensure that all persons within their social circle are kept updated on their activities. With this openness of sharing risks and challenges arise that are often not considered but can have serious impacts. The speed and scale with which social media creates information and makes it available—almost instantaneously—on a global scale, added to the fact that once something is posted there is really no way of truly removing it, should prompt individuals to think of the possible impact a post can have. Unfortunately, more often than not, posts are made without any thought of the far-reaching impact they can have on the lives of the person posting or others that may be implicated by the post.

6. Why do people share?

cause related

personal connection to content

to feel more involved in the world

to define who they are

to inform and entertain

People generally share because they believe that what they are sharing is important. It is hoped that the shared content will be deemed important to others which will ultimately result in more shares, likes and followers.

Figure 1 below sums up the findings of Berger and Milkman [ 25 ] which shows that the main reason people feel the need to share content on the varying social media platform is that the content relates to what is deemed as worthy cause. 84% of respondents highlighted this as the primary motivation for sharing. Seventy-eight percent said that they share because they feel a personal connection to the content while 69 and 68%, respectively said the content either made them feel more involved with the world or helped them to define who they were. Forty-nine percent share because of the entertainment or information value of the content. A more in depth look at each reason for sharing follows.

Why people share source: Global Social Media Research. thesocialmediahat.com [ 26 ].

7. Content related to a cause

Social media has provided a platform for people to share their thoughts and express concerns with others for what they regard as a worthy cause. Cause related posts are dependent on the interest of the individual. Some persons might share posts related to causes and issues happening in society. In one example, the parents of a baby with an aggressive form of leukemia, who having been told that their child had only 3 months to live unless a suitable donor for a blood stem cell transplant could be found, made an appeal on social media. The appeal was quickly shared and a suitable donor was soon found. While that was for a good cause, many view social media merely as platforms for freedom of speech because anyone can post any content one creates. People think the expression of their thoughts on social media regarding any topic is permissible. The problem with this is that the content may not be accepted by law or it could violate the rights of someone thus giving rise to ethical questions.

8. Content with a personal connection

When social media users feel a personal connection to their content, they are more inclined to share the content within their social circles. This is true of information regarding family and personal activities. Content created by users also invokes a deep feeling of connection as it allows the users to tell their stories and it is natural to want the world or at least friends to know of the achievement. This natural need to share content is not new as humans have been doing this in some form or the other, starting with oral history to the media of the day; social media. Sharing the self-created content gives the user the opportunity of satisfying some fundamental needs of humans to be heard, to matter, to be understood and emancipated. The problem with this however is that in an effort to gratify the fundamental needs, borders are crossed because the content may not be sharable (can this content be shared within the share network?), it may not be share-worthy (who is the audience that would appreciate this content?) or it may be out of context (does the content fit the situation?).

9. Content that makes them feel more involved in the world

One of the driving factors that pushes users to share content is the need to feel more in tune with the world around them. This desire is many times fueled by jealousy. Many social media users are jealous when their friends’ content gets more attention than their own and so there is a lot of pressure to maintain one’s persona in social circles, even when the information is unrealistic, as long as it gets as much attention as possible. Everything has to be perfect. In the case of a photo, for example, there is lighting, camera angle and background to consider. This need for perfection puts a tremendous amount of pressure on individuals to ensure that posted content is “liked” by friends. They often give very little thought to the amount of their friend’s work that may have gone on behind the scenes to achieve that perfect social post.

Social media platforms have provided everyone with a forum to express views, but, as a whole, conversations are more polarized, tribal and hostile. With Facebook for instance, there has been a huge uptick in fake news, altered images, dangerous health claims and cures, and the proliferation of anti-science information. This is very distressing and disturbing because people are too willing to share and to believe without doing their due diligence and fact-checking first.

10. Content that defines who they are

Establishing one’s individuality in society can be challenging for some persons because not everyone wants to fit in. Some individuals will do all they can to stand out and be noticed. Social media provides the avenue for exposure and many individuals will seek to leverage the media to stand out of the crowd and not just be a fish in the school. Today many young people are currently being brought up in a culture that defines people by their presence on social media where in previous generations, persons were taught to define themselves by their career choices. These lessons would start from childhood by asking children what they wanted to be when they grew up and then rewarding them based on the answers they give [ 27 ]. In today’s digital era, however, social media postings and the number of “likes” or “dislikes” they attract, signal what is appealing to others. Therefore, post that are similar to those that receive a large number of likes but which are largely unrealistic are usually made for self-gratification.

11. Content that informs and entertains

The acquisition of knowledge and skills is a vital part of human survival and social media has made this process much easier. It is not uncommon to hear persons realizing that they need a particular knowledge set that they do not possess say “I need to lean to do this. I’ll just YouTube it.” Learning and adapting to change in as short as possible time is vital in today’s society and social media coupled with the Internet put it all at the finger tips. Entertainment has the ability to bring people together and is a good way for people to bond. It provides a diversion from the demands of life and fills leisure time with amusement. Social media is an outlet for fun, pleasurable and enjoyable activities that are so vital to human survival [ 28 ]. It is now common place to see persons watching a video, viewing images and reading text that is amusing on any of the available social media platforms. Quite often these videos, images and texts can be both informative and entertaining, but there can be problems however as at times they can cross ethical lines that can lead to conflict.

12. Ethical challenges with social media use

The use of modern-day technology has brought several benefits. Social media is no different and chief amongst its benefit is the ability to stay connected easily and quickly as well as build relationships with people with similar interests. As with all technology, there are several challenges that can make the use of social media off putting and unpleasant. Some of these challenges appear to be minor but they can have far reaching effects into the lives of the users of social media and it is therefore advised that care be taken to minimize the challenges associated with the use of social media [ 29 ].

A major challenge with the use of social media is oversharing because when persons share on social media, they tend to share as much as is possible which is often times too much [ 24 ]. When persons are out and about doing exciting things, it is natural to want to share this with the world as many users will post a few times a day when they head to lunch, visit a museum, go out to dinner or other places of interest [ 30 ]. While this all seems relatively harmless, by using location-based services which pinpoint users with surprising accuracy and in real time, users place themselves in danger of laying out a pattern of movement that can be easily traced. While this seems more like a security or privacy issue it stems from an ethical dilemma—“Am I sharing too much?” Oversharing can also lead to damage of user’s reputation especially if the intent is to leverage the platform for business [ 24 ]. Photos of drunken behavior, drug use, partying or other inappropriate content can change how you are viewed by others.

Another ethical challenge users of social media often encounter is that they have no way of authenticating content before sharing, which becomes problematic when the content paints people or establishments negatively. Often times content is shared with them by friends, family and colleagues. The unauthenticated content is then reshared without any thought but sometimes this content may have been maliciously altered so the user unknowingly participates in maligning others. Even if the content is not altered the fact that the content paints someone or something in a bad light should send off warning bells as to whether or not it is right to share the content which is the underlying principle of ethical behavior.

13. Conflicting views

Some of the challenges experienced by social media posts are a result of a lack of understanding and sometimes a lack of respect for the varying ethical and moral standpoints of the people involved. We have established that it is typical for persons to post to social media sites without any thought as to how it can affect other persons, but many times these posts are a cause of conflict because of a difference of opinion that may exist and the effect the post may have. Each individual will have his or her own ethical values and if they differ then this can result in conflict [ 31 ]. When an executive of a British company made an Instagram post with some racial connotations before boarding a plane to South Africa it started a frenzy that resulted in the executive’s immediate dismissal. Although the executive said it was a joke and there was no prejudice intended, this difference in views as to the implications of the post, resulted in an out of work executive and a company scrambling to maintain its public image.

14. Impact on personal development

In this age of sharing, many young persons spend a vast amount of time on social media checking the activities of their “friends” as well as posting on their own activities so their “friends” are aware of what they are up to. Apart from interfering with their academic progress, time spent on these posts at can have long term repercussions. An example is provided by a student of a prominent university who posted pictures of herself having a good time at parties while in school. She was denied employment because of some of her social media posts. While the ethical challenge here is the question of the employee’s right to privacy and whether the individual’s social media profile should affect their ability to fulfill their responsibilities as an employee, the impact on the individual’s long term personal growth is clear.

15. Conclusion

In today’s information age, one’s digital footprint can make or break someone; it can be the deciding factor on whether or not one achieves one’s life-long ambitions. Unethical behavior and interactions on social media can have far reaching implications both professionally and socially. Posting on the Internet means the “end of forgetting,” therefore, responsible use of this medium is critical. The unethical use of social media has implications for privacy and can result in security breaches both physically and virtually. The use of social media can also result in the loss of privacy as many users are required to provide information that they would not divulge otherwise. Social media use can reveal information that can result in privacy breaches if not managed properly by users. Therefore, educating users of the risks and dangers of the exposure of sensitive information in this space, and encouraging vigilance in the protection of individual privacy on these platforms is paramount. This could result in the reduction of unethical and irresponsible use of these media and facilitate a more secure social environment. The use of social media should be governed by moral and ethical principles that can be applied universally and result in harmonious relationships regardless of race, culture, religious persuasion and social status.

Analysis of the literature and the findings of this research suggest achieving acceptable levels of privacy is very difficult in a networked system and will require much effort on the part of individuals. The largest user groups of social media are unaware of the processes that are required to reduce the level of vulnerability of their personal data. Therefore, educating users of the risk of participating in social media is the social responsibility of these social network platforms. Adapting universally ethical behaviors can mitigate the rise in the number of privacy breaches in the social networking space. This recommendation coincides with philosopher Immanuel Kant’s assertion that, the Biblical principle which states “Do unto others as you have them do unto you” can be applied universally and should guide human interactions [ 5 ]. This principle, if adhered to by users of social media and owners of these platforms could raise the awareness of unsuspecting users, reduce unethical interactions and undesirable incidents that could negatively affect privacy, and by extension security in this domain.

• 1. Chaffey D. Global Social Media Research. Smart Insights. 2019. Retrieved from: https://www.smartinsights.com/social-media-marketing/social-media-strategy/new-global-social-media-research/
• 2. SmartSocial. Teen Social Media Statistics (What Parents Need to Know). 2019. Retrieved from: https://smartsocial.com/social-media-statistics/
• 3. Wisniewski P, Jia H, Xu H, Rosson MB, Carroll JM. Preventative vs. reactive: How parental mediation influences teens’ social media privacy behaviors. In: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing; ACM; 2015. pp. 302-316
• 4. Chai S, Bagchi-Sen S, Morrell C, Rao HR, Upadhyaya SJ. Internet and online information privacy: An exploratory study of preteens and early teens. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication. 2009; 52 (2):167-182
• 5. Baase S. A Gift of Fire. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education Limited (Prentice Hall); 2012
• 6. Richards NM, Solove DJ. Prosser’s privacy law: A mixed legacy. California Law Review. 2010; 98 :1887
• 7. Johnson DG. Computer ethics. In: The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Computing and Information. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education (Prentice Hall); 2004. pp. 65-75
• 8. Cohen JE. What privacy is for. Harvard Law Review. 2012; 126 :1904
• 9. Moore AD. Toward informational privacy rights. San Diego Law Review. 2007; 44 :809
• 10. GOVTECH. Singapore. 2019. Retrieved from: https://www.tech.gov.sg/products-and-services/smart-nation-sensor-platform/
• 11. Weaver AC, Morrison BB. Social networking. Computer. 2008; 41 (2):97-100
• 12. Boulianne S. Social media use and participation: A meta-analysis of current research. Information, Communication and Society. 2015; 18 (5):524-538
• 13. Marwick AE, Boyd D. Networked privacy: How teenagers negotiate context in social media. New Media & Society. 2014; 16 (7):1051-1067
• 14. McCay-Peet L, Quan-Haase A. What is social media and what questions can social media research help us answer. In: The SAGE Handbook of Social Media Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publishers; 2017. pp. 13-26
• 15. Gil de Zúñiga H, Jung N, Valenzuela S. Social media use for news and individuals’ social capital, civic engagement and political participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2012; 17 (3):319-336
• 16. Ems L. Twitter’s place in the tussle: How old power struggles play out on a new stage. Media, Culture and Society. 2014; 36 (5):720-731
• 17. Haggart B. Fair copyright for Canada: Lessons for online social movements from the first Canadian Facebook uprising. Canadian Journal of Political Science (Revue canadienne de science politique). 2013; 46 (4):841-861
• 18. Andrews LB. I Know Who You are and I Saw What You Did: Social Networks and the Death of Privacy. Simon and Schuster, Free Press; 2012
• 19. Echaiz J, Ardenghi JR. Security and online social networks. In: XV Congreso Argentino de Ciencias de la Computación. 2009
• 20. Barrett-Maitland N, Barclay C, Osei-Bryson KM. Security in social networking services: A value-focused thinking exploration in understanding users’ privacy and security concerns. Information Technology for Development. 2016; 22 (3):464-486
• 21. Van Der Velden M, El Emam K. “Not all my friends need to know”: A qualitative study of teenage patients, privacy, and social media. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 2013; 20 (1):16-24
• 22. Bolton RN, Parasuraman A, Hoefnagels A, Migchels N, Kabadayi S, Gruber T, et al. Understanding Generation Y and their use of social media: A review and research agenda. Journal of Service Management. 2013; 24 (3):245-267
• 23. Cohn C. Social Media Ethics and Etiquette. CompuKol Communication LLC. 20 March 2010. Retrieved from: https://www.compukol.com/social-media-ethics-and-etiquette/
• 24. Nates C. The Dangers of Oversharing of Social Media. Pure Moderation. 2018. Retrieved from: https://www.puremoderation.com/single-post/The-Dangers-of-Oversharing-on-Social-Media
• 25. Berger J, Milkman K. What makes online content go viral. Journal of Marketing Research. 2011; 49 (2):192-205
• 26. The Social Media Hat. How to Find Amazing Content for Your Social Media Calendar (And Save Yourself Tons of Work). 29 August 2016. Retrieved from: https://www.thesocialmediahat.com/blog/how-to-find-amazing-content-for-your-social-media-calendar-and-save-yourself-tons-of-work/
• 27. People First. Does what you do define who you are. 15 September 2012. Retrieved from: https://blog.peoplefirstps.com/connect2lead/what-you-do-define-you
• 28. Dreyfus E. Does what you do define who you are. Psychologically Speaking. 2010. Retrieved from: https://www.edwarddreyfusbooks.com/psychologically-speaking/does-what-you-do-define-who-you-are/
• 29. Business Ethics Briefing. The Ethical Challenges and Opportunities of Social Media Use. (Issue 66). 2019. Retrieved from: https://www.ibe.org.uk/userassets/briefings/ibe_social_media_briefing.pdf
• 30. Staff Writer. The consequences of oversharing on social networks. Reputation Defender. 2018. Retrieved from: https://www.reputationdefender.com/blog/social-media/consequences-oversharing-social-networks
• 31. Business Ethics Briefing. The Ethical Challenges of Social Media. (Issue 22). 2011. Retrieved from: https://www.ibe.org.uk/userassets/briefings/ibe_briefing_22_the_ethical_challenges_of_social_media.pdf

© 2020 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Continue reading from the same book

Edited by Christos Kalloniatis

Published: 09 September 2020

By Ebru Celikel Cankaya

1106 downloads

By Aikaterini-Georgia Mavroeidi, Angeliki Kitsiou and...

969 downloads

By Bata Krishna Tripathy

1395 downloads

IntechOpen Author/Editor? To get your discount, log in .

Discounts available on purchase of multiple copies. View rates

Local taxes (VAT) are calculated in later steps, if applicable.

Support: [email protected]

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• Teens, Social Media, and Privacy

Table of Contents

• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• Part 1: Teens and Social Media Use
• Part 2: Information Sharing, Friending, and Privacy Settings on Social Media
• Part 3: Reputation Management on Social Media
• Part 4: Putting Privacy Practices in Context: A Portrait of Teens’ Experiences Online

Teens share a wide range of information about themselves on social media sites; 1 indeed the sites themselves are designed to encourage the sharing of information and the expansion of networks. However, few teens embrace a fully public approach to social media. Instead, they take an array of steps to restrict and prune their profiles, and their patterns of reputation management on social media vary greatly according to their gender and network size. These are among the key findings from a new report based on a survey of 802 teens that examines teens’ privacy management on social media sites:

• Teens are sharing more information about themselves on social media sites than they did in the past. For the five different types of personal information that we measured in both 2006 and 2012, each is significantly more likely to be shared by teen social media users in our most recent survey.

Teen Twitter use has grown significantly: 24% of online teens use Twitter, up from 16% in 2011.

The typical (median) teen facebook user has 300 friends, while the typical teen twitter user has 79 followers..

• Focus group discussions with teens show that they have waning enthusiasm for Facebook, disliking the increasing adult presence, people sharing excessively, and stressful “drama,” but they keep using it because participation is an important part of overall teenage socializing.

60% of teen Facebook users keep their profiles private, and most report high levels of confidence in their ability to manage their settings.

Teens take other steps to shape their reputation, manage their networks, and mask information they don’t want others to know; 74% of teen social media users have deleted people from their network or friends list., teen social media users do not express a high level of concern about third-party access to their data; just 9% say they are “very” concerned., on facebook, increasing network size goes hand in hand with network variety, information sharing, and personal information management..

• In broad measures of online experience, teens are considerably more likely to report positive experiences than negative ones. For instance, 52% of online teens say they have had an experience online that made them feel good about themselves.

Teens are sharing more information about themselves on social media sites than they did in the past.

Teens are increasingly sharing personal information on social media sites, a trend that is likely driven by the evolution of the platforms teens use as well as changing norms around sharing. A typical teen’s MySpace profile from 2006 was quite different in form and function from the 2006 version of Facebook as well as the Facebook profiles that have become a hallmark of teenage life today. For the five different types of personal information that we measured in both 2006 and 2012, each is significantly more likely to be shared by teen social media users on the profile they use most often.

• 91% post a photo of themselves , up from 79% in 2006.
• 71% post their school name , up from 49%.
• 71% post the city or town where they live , up from 61%.
• 53% post their email address , up from 29%.
• 20% post their cell phone number , up from 2%.

In addition to the trend questions, we also asked five new questions about the profile teens use most often and found that among teen social media users:

• 92% post their real name to the profile they use most often. 2
• 84% post their interests , such as movies, music, or books they like.
• 82% post their birth date .
• 62% post their relationship status .
• 24% post videos of themselves .

Older teens are more likely than younger teens to share certain types of information, but boys and girls tend to post the same kind of content.

Generally speaking, older teen social media users (ages 14-17), are more likely to share certain types of information on the profile they use most often when compared with younger teens (ages 12-13).

Older teens who are social media users more frequently share:

• Photos of themselves on their profile (94% older teens vs. 82% of younger teens)
• Their school name (76% vs. 56%)
• Their relationship status (66% vs. 50%)
• Their cell phone number (23% vs. 11%)

While boys and girls generally share personal information on social media profiles at the same rates, cell phone numbers are a key exception.  Boys are significantly more likely to share their numbers than girls (26% vs. 14%). This is a difference that is driven by older boys. Various differences between white and African-American social media-using teens are also significant, with the most notable being the lower likelihood that African-American teens will disclose their real names on a social media profile (95% of white social media-using teens do this vs. 77% of African-American teens). 3

16% of teen social media users have set up their profile to automatically include their location in posts.

Beyond basic profile information, some teens choose to enable the automatic inclusion of location information when they post. Some 16% of teen social media users said they set up their profile or account so that it automatically includes their location in posts. Boys and girls and teens of all ages and socioeconomic backgrounds are equally likely to say that they have set up their profile to include their location when they post. Focus group data suggests that many teens find sharing their location unnecessary and unsafe, while others appreciate the opportunity to signal their location to friends and parents.

Twitter draws a far smaller crowd than Facebook for teens, but its use is rising. One in four online teens uses Twitter in some way. While overall use of social networking sites among teens has hovered around 80%, Twitter grew in popularity; 24% of online teens use Twitter, up from 16% in 2011 and 8% the first time we asked this question in late 2009.

African-American teens are substantially more likely to report using Twitter when compared with white youth.

Continuing a pattern established early in the life of Twitter, African-American teens who are internet users are more likely to use the site when compared with their white counterparts. Two in five (39%) African-American teens use Twitter, while 23% of white teens use the service.

Public accounts are the norm for teen Twitter users.

While those with Facebook profiles most often choose private settings, Twitter users, by contrast, are much more likely to have a public account.

• 64% of teens with Twitter accounts say that their tweets are public, while 24% say their tweets are private.
• 12% of teens with Twitter accounts say that they “don’t know” if their tweets are public or private.
• While boys and girls are equally likely to say their accounts are public, boys are significantly more likely than girls to say that they don’t know (21% of boys who have Twitter accounts report this, compared with 5% of girls).

Overall, teens have far fewer followers on Twitter when compared with Facebook friends; the typical (median) teen Facebook user has 300 friends, while the typical (median) teen Twitter user has 79 followers. Girls and older teens tend to have substantially larger Facebook friend networks compared with boys and younger teens.

Teens’ Facebook friendship networks largely mirror their offline networks. Seven in ten say they are friends with their parents on Facebook.

Teens, like other Facebook users, have different kinds of people in their online social networks. And how teens construct that network has implications for who can see the material they share in those digital social spaces:

• 98% of Facebook-using teens are friends with people they know from school.
• 91% of teen Facebook users are friends with members of their extended family.
• 89% are connected to friends who do not attend the same school.
• 76% are Facebook friends with brothers and sisters.
• 70% are Facebook friends with their parents.
• 33% are Facebook friends with other people they have not met in person.
• 30% have teachers or coaches as friends in their network.
• 30% have celebrities, musicians or athletes in their network.

Older teens tend to be Facebook friends with a larger variety of people, while younger teens are less likely to friend certain groups, including those they have never met in person.

Older teens are more likely than younger ones to have created broader friend networks on Facebook. Older teens (14-17) who use Facebook are more likely than younger teens (12-13) to be connected with:

• Friends who go to different schools (92% vs. 82%)
• People they have never met in person, not including celebrities (36% vs. 25%)
• Teachers or coaches (34% vs. 19%)

Girls are also more likely than boys (37% vs. 23%) to be Facebook friends with coaches or teachers, the only category of Facebook friends where boys and girls differ.

African-American youth are nearly twice as likely as whites to be Facebook friends with celebrities, athletes, or musicians (48% vs. 25%).

Focus group discussions with teens show that they have waning enthusiasm for Facebook.

In focus groups, many teens expressed waning enthusiasm for Facebook. They dislike the increasing number of adults on the site, get annoyed when their Facebook friends share inane details, and are drained by the “drama” that they described as happening frequently on the site. The stress of needing to manage their reputation on Facebook also contributes to the lack of enthusiasm. Nevertheless, the site is still where a large amount of socializing takes place, and teens feel they need to stay on Facebook in order to not miss out.

Users of sites other than Facebook express greater enthusiasm for their choice.

Those teens who used sites like Twitter and Instagram reported feeling like they could better express themselves on these platforms, where they felt freed from the social expectations and constraints of Facebook. Some teens may migrate their activity and attention to other sites to escape the drama and pressures they find on Facebook, although most still remain active on Facebook as well.

Teens have a variety of ways to make available or limit access to their personal information on social media sites. Privacy settings are one of many tools in a teen’s personal data management arsenal. Among teen Facebook users, most choose private settings that allow only approved friends to view the content that they post.

Most keep their Facebook profile private. Girls are more likely than boys to restrict access to their profiles.

Some 60% of teens ages 12-17 who use Facebook say they have their profile set to private, so that only their friends can see it. Another 25% have a partially private profile, set so that friends of their friends can see what they post. And 14% of teens say that their profile is completely public. 4

• Girls who use Facebook are substantially more likely than boys to have a private (friends only) profile (70% vs. 50%).
• By contrast, boys are more likely than girls to have a fully public profile that everyone can see (20% vs. 8%).

Most teens express a high level of confidence in managing their Facebook privacy settings.

More than half (56%) of teen Facebook users say it’s “not difficult at all” to manage the privacy controls on their Facebook profile, while one in three (33%) say it’s “not too difficult.” Just 8% of teen Facebook users say that managing their privacy controls is “somewhat difficult,” while less than 1% describe the process as “very difficult.”

Teens’ feelings of efficacy increase with age:

• 41% of Facebook users ages 12-13 say it is “not difficult at all” to manage their privacy controls, compared with 61% of users ages 14-17.
• Boys and girls report similar levels of confidence in managing the privacy controls on their Facebook profile.

For most teen Facebook users, all friends and parents see the same information and updates on their profile.

Beyond general privacy settings, teen Facebook users have the option to place further limits on who can see the information and updates they post. However, few choose to customize in that way: Among teens who have a Facebook account, only 18% say that they limit what certain friends can see on their profile. The vast majority (81%) say that all of their friends see the same thing on their profile. 5 This approach also extends to parents; only 5% of teen Facebook users say they limit what their parents can see.

Teens are cognizant of their online reputations, and take steps to curate the content and appearance of their social media presence. For many teens who were interviewed in focus groups for this report, Facebook was seen as an extension of offline interactions and the social negotiation and maneuvering inherent to teenage life. “Likes” specifically seem to be a strong proxy for social status, such that teen Facebook users will manipulate their profile and timeline content in order to garner the maximum number of “likes,” and remove photos with too few “likes.”

Pruning and revising profile content is an important part of teens’ online identity management.

Teen management of their profiles can take a variety of forms – we asked teen social media users about five specific activities that relate to the content they post and found that:

• 59% have deleted or edited something that they posted in the past.
• 53% have deleted comments from others on their profile or account.
• 45% have removed their name from photos that have been tagged to identify them.
• 31% have deleted or deactivated an entire profile or account.
• 19% have posted updates, comments, photos, or videos that they later regretted sharing.

74% of teen social media users have deleted people from their network or friends’ list; 58% have blocked people on social media sites.

Given the size and composition of teens’ networks, friend curation is also an integral part of privacy and reputation management for social media-using teens. The practice of friending, unfriending, and blocking serve as privacy management techniques for controlling who sees what and when. Among teen social media users:

• Girls are more likely than boys to delete friends from their network (82% vs. 66%) and block people (67% vs. 48%).
• Unfriending and blocking are equally common among teens of all ages and across all socioeconomic groups.
• 58% of teen social media users say they share inside jokes or cloak their messages in some way.

As a way of creating a different sort of privacy, many teen social media users will obscure some of their updates and posts, sharing inside jokes and other coded messages that only certain friends will understand:

• Older teens are considerably more likely than younger teens to say that they share inside jokes and coded messages that only some of their friends understand (62% vs. 46%).

26% say that they post false information like a fake name, age, or location to help protect their privacy.

One in four (26%) teen social media users say that they post fake information like a fake name, age or location to help protect their privacy.

• African-American teens who use social media are more likely than white teens to say that they post fake information to their profiles (39% vs. 21%).

Overall, 40% of teen social media users say they are “very” or “somewhat” concerned that some of the information they share on social networking sites might be accessed by third parties like advertisers or businesses without their knowledge. However, few report a high level of concern; 31% say that they are “somewhat” concerned, while just 9% say that they are “very” concerned. 6 Another 60% in total report that they are “not too” concerned (38%) or “not at all” concerned (22%).

• Younger teen social media users (12-13) are considerably more likely than older teens (14-17) to say that they are “very concerned” about third party access to the information they share (17% vs. 6%).

Insights from our focus groups suggest that some teens may not have a good sense of whether the information they share on a social media site is being used by third parties.

Parents, by contrast, express high levels of concern about how much information advertisers can learn about their children’s behavior online..

Parents of the surveyed teens were asked a related question: “How concerned are you about how much information advertisers can learn about your child’s online behavior?” A full 81% of parents report being “very” or “somewhat” concerned, with 46% reporting they are “very concerned.”  Just 19% report that they are not too concerned or not at all concerned about how much advertisers could learn about their child’s online activities.

Teens who are concerned about third party access to their personal information are also more likely to engage in online reputation management.

Teens who are somewhat or very concerned that some of the information they share on social network sites might be accessed by third parties like advertisers or businesses without their knowledge more frequently delete comments, untag themselves from photos or content, and deactivate or delete their entire account.  Among teen social media users, those who are “very” or “somewhat” concerned about third party access are more likely than less concerned teens to:

• Delete comments that others have made on their profile (61% vs. 49%).
• Untag themselves in photos (52% vs. 41%).
• Delete or deactivate their profile or account (38% vs. 25%).
• Post updates, comments, photos or videos that they later regret (26% vs. 14%).

Teens with larger Facebook networks are more frequent users of social networking sites and tend to have a greater variety of people in their friend networks. They also share a wider range of information on their profile when compared with those who have a smaller number of friends on the site. Yet even as they share more information with a wider range of people, they are also more actively engaged in maintaining their online profile or persona.

Teens with large Facebook friend networks are more frequent social media users and participate on a wider diversity of platforms in addition to Facebook.

Teens with larger Facebook networks are fervent social media users who exhibit a greater tendency to “diversify” their platform portfolio:

• 65% of teens with more than 600 friends on Facebook say that they visit social networking sites several times a day, compared with 27% of teens with 150 or fewer Facebook friends.
• Teens with more than 600 Facebook friends are more than three times as likely to also have a Twitter account when compared with those who have 150 or fewer Facebook friends (46% vs. 13%). They are six times as likely to use Instagram (12% vs. 2%).

Teens with larger Facebook networks tend to have more variety within those networks.

Almost all Facebook users (regardless of network size) are friends with their schoolmates and extended family members. However, other types of people begin to appear as the size of teens’ Facebook networks expand:

• Teen Facebook users with more than 600 friends in their network are much more likely than those with smaller networks to be Facebook friends with peers who don’t attend their own school, with people they have never met in person (not including celebrities and other “public figures”), as well as with teachers or coaches.
• On the other hand, teens with the largest friend networks are actually less likely to be friends with their parents on Facebook when compared with those with the smallest networks (79% vs. 60%).

Teens with large networks share a wider range of content, but are also more active in profile pruning and reputation management activities.

Teens with the largest networks (more than 600 friends) are more likely to include a photo of themselves, their school name, their relationship status, and their cell phone number on their profile when compared with teens who have a relatively small number of friends in their network (under 150 friends). However, teens with large friend networks are also more active reputation managers on social media.

• Teens with larger friend networks are more likely than those with smaller networks to block other users, to delete people from their friend network entirely, to untag photos of themselves, or to delete comments others have made on their profile.
• They are also substantially more likely to automatically include their location in updates and share inside jokes or coded messages with others.

In broad measures of online experience, teens are considerably more likely to report positive experiences than negative ones.

In the current survey, we wanted to understand the broader context of teens’ online lives beyond Facebook and Twitter. A majority of teens report positive experiences online, such as making friends and feeling closer to another person, but some do encounter unwanted content and contact from others.

• 52% of online teens say they have had an experience online that made them feel good about themselves. Among teen social media users, 57% said they had an experience online that made them feel good, compared with 30% of teen internet users who do not use social media.
• One in three online teens (33%) say they have had an experience online that made them feel closer to another person. Looking at teen social media users, 37% report having an experience somewhere online that made them feel closer to another person, compared with just 16% of online teens who do not use social media.

One in six online teens say they have been contacted online by someone they did not know in a way that made them feel scared or uncomfortable.

Unwanted contact from strangers is relatively uncommon, but 17% of online teens report some kind of contact that made them feel scared or uncomfortable. 7 Online girls are more than twice as likely as boys to report contact from someone they did not know that made them feel scared or uncomfortable (24% vs. 10%).

Few internet-using teens have posted something online that caused problems for them or a family member, or got them in trouble at school.

A small percentage of teens have engaged in online activities that had negative repercussions for them or their family; 4% of online teens say they have shared sensitive information online that later caused a problem for themselves or other members of their family. Another 4% have posted information online that got them in trouble at school.

More than half of internet-using teens have decided not to post content online over reputation concerns.

More than half of online teens (57%) say they have decided not to post something online because they were concerned it would reflect badly on them in the future. Teen social media users are more likely than other online teens who do not use social media to say they have refrained from sharing content due to reputation concerns (61% vs. 39%).

Large numbers of youth have lied about their age in order to gain access to websites and online accounts.

In 2011, we reported that close to half of online teens (44%) admitted to lying about their age at one time or another so they could access a website or sign up for an online account. In the latest survey, 39% of online teens admitted to falsifying their age in order gain access to a website or account, a finding that is not significantly different from the previous survey.

Close to one in three online teens say they have received online advertising that was clearly inappropriate for their age.

Exposure to inappropriate advertising online is one of the many risks that parents, youth advocates, and policy makers are concerned about. Yet, little has been known until now about how often teens encounter online ads that they feel are intended for more (or less) mature audiences. In the latest survey, 30% of online teens say they have received online advertising that is “clearly inappropriate” for their age.

About the survey and focus groups

These findings are based on a nationally representative phone survey run by the Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project of 802 parents and their 802 teens ages 12-17. It was conducted between July 26 and September 30, 2012. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish and on landline and cell phones. The margin of error for the full sample is ± 4.5 percentage points.

This report marries that data with insights and quotes from in-person focus groups conducted by the Youth and Media team at the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University beginning in February 2013. The focus groups focused on privacy and digital media, with special emphasis on social media sites. The team conducted 24 focus group interviews with 156 students across the greater Boston area, Los Angeles (California), Santa Barbara (California), and Greensboro (North Carolina). Each focus group lasted 90 minutes, including a 15-minute questionnaire completed prior to starting the interview, consisting of 20 multiple-choice questions and 1 open-ended response. Although the research sample was not designed to constitute representative cross-sections of particular population(s), the sample includes participants from diverse ethnic, racial, and economic backgrounds. Participants ranged in age from 11 to 19. The mean age of participants is 14.5.

In addition, two online focus groups of teenagers ages 12-17 were conducted by the Pew Internet Project from June 20-27, 2012 to help inform the survey design. The first focus group was with 11 middle schoolers ages 12-14, and the second group was with nine high schoolers ages 14-17. Each group was mixed gender, with some racial, socio-economic, and regional diversity. The groups were conducted as an asynchronous threaded discussion over three days using an online platform and the participants were asked to log in twice per day.

Throughout this report, this focus group material is highlighted in several ways. Pew’s online focus group quotes are interspersed with relevant statistics from the survey in order to illustrate findings that were echoed in the focus groups or to provide additional context to the data. In addition, at several points, there are extensive excerpts boxed off as standalone text boxes that elaborate on a number of important themes that emerged from the in-person focus groups conducted by the Berkman Center.

• We use “social media site” as the umbrella term that refers to social networking sites (like Facebook, LinkedIn, and Google Plus) as well as to information- and media-sharing sites that users may not think of in terms of networking such as Twitter, Instagram, and Tumblr. “Teen social media users” are teens who use any social media site(s). When we use “social networking sites” or “social networking sites and Twitter,” it will be to maintain the original wording when reporting survey results. ↩
• Given that Facebook is now the dominant platform for teens, and a first and last name is required when creating an account, this is undoubtedly driving the nearly universal trend among teen social media users to say they post their real name to the profile they use most often. Fake accounts with fake names can still be created on Facebook, but the practice is explicitly forbidden in Facebook’s Terms of Service. ↩
• The sample size for African-American teens who use social media is relatively small (n=95), but all differences between white and African-American teen social media users noted throughout this section are statistically significant. ↩
• In 2011, the privacy settings question was asked of all teen SNS or Twitter users, prompting them to think about the “profile they use most often.” Among this group 62% reported having a private profile, 19% said their profile was partially private, and 17% said their profile was public. At the time, almost all of these teen social media users (93%) said they had a Facebook account, but some respondents could have been reporting settings for other platforms. ↩
• This behavior is consistent, regardless of the general privacy settings on a teen’s profile. ↩
• Recent research has described a “control paradox” that may influence user behavior and attitudes toward information disclosures online. In spaces where users feel they have control over the publication of their private information, they may “give less importance to control (or lack thereof) of the accessibility and use of that information by others.” See, Laura Brandimarte, et al.: “Misplaced Confidences: Privacy and the Control Paradox.” ↩
• This question does not reference sexual solicitations and could include an array of contact that made the teen feel scared or uncomfortable. ↩

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Online Privacy & Security
• Platforms & Services
• Privacy Rights
• Social Media
• Teens & Tech
• Teens & Youth

How Americans Navigate Politics on TikTok, X, Facebook and Instagram

How americans get news on tiktok, x, facebook and instagram, whatsapp and facebook dominate the social media landscape in middle-income nations, 5 facts about how americans use facebook, two decades after its launch, americans’ social media use, most popular, report materials.

• Interactive : How Teens Share Information on Social Media
• Interactive : Teens on Facebook: What They Share with Friends
• Infographic : Teens, Social Media, and Privacy
• Infographic : What Teens Share on Social Media
• Focus group highlights : What teens said about social media, privacy, and online identity
• July 26-Sept. 30, 2012 – Teens and Online Privacy

901 E St. NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20004 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

© 2024 Pew Research Center

• Undergraduate
• High School
• Architecture
• American History
• Asian History
• Antique Literature
• American Literature
• Asian Literature
• Classic English Literature
• World Literature
• Creative Writing
• Linguistics
• Criminal Justice
• Legal Issues
• Anthropology
• Archaeology
• Political Science
• World Affairs
• African-American Studies
• East European Studies
• Latin-American Studies
• Native-American Studies
• West European Studies
• Family and Consumer Science
• Social Issues
• Women and Gender Studies
• Social Work
• Natural Sciences
• Pharmacology
• Earth science
• Agriculture
• Agricultural Studies
• Computer Science
• IT Management
• Mathematics
• Investments
• Engineering and Technology
• Engineering
• Aeronautics
• Medicine and Health
• Alternative Medicine
• Communications and Media
• Advertising
• Communication Strategies
• Public Relations
• Educational Theories
• Teacher's Career
• Chicago/Turabian
• Company Analysis
• Education Theories
• Shakespeare
• Canadian Studies
• Food Safety
• Relation of Global Warming and Extreme Weather Condition
• Movie Review
• Admission Essay
• Annotated Bibliography
• Application Essay
• Article Critique
• Article Review
• Article Writing
• Book Review
• Business Plan
• Business Proposal
• Capstone Project
• Cover Letter
• Creative Essay
• Dissertation
• Dissertation - Abstract
• Dissertation - Conclusion
• Dissertation - Discussion
• Dissertation - Hypothesis
• Dissertation - Introduction
• Dissertation - Literature
• Dissertation - Methodology
• Dissertation - Results
• GCSE Coursework
• Grant Proposal
• Marketing Plan
• Multiple Choice Quiz
• Personal Statement
• Power Point Presentation
• Power Point Presentation With Speaker Notes
• Questionnaire
• Reaction Paper
• Research Paper
• Research Proposal
• SWOT analysis
• Thesis Paper
• Online Quiz
• Literature Review
• Movie Analysis
• Statistics problem
• Math Problem
• All papers examples
• How It Works
• Money Back Policy
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• We Are Hiring

Social Media Is a Threat to Privacy, Essay Example

Pages: 3

Words: 860

Hire a Writer for Custom Essay

Use 10% Off Discount: "custom10" in 1 Click 👇

You are free to use it as an inspiration or a source for your own work.

Introduction

Social networking has been a global phenomenon with the proliferation of various social networking platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. In many ways, social media has replaced conventional modes of communication such as the telephone and email. People can keep in touch with others by sharing experiences and photographs, and most cases exchange personal information. Social media users usually post private information as part of the process of knowing one another. Since social media is associated with having a large number of users unknown to the client, there is an increased risk of exposing personal details to cybercriminals.

Social media is a threat to privacy

Social media has increased privacy concerns with online platforms. Although they are effective in connecting with family and friend, social media can also endanger private information. Individuals create social media profiles that may expose their private information. According to research conducted by Carnegie Mellon University, information found in social media is sufficient to guess one’s social security number, which can lead to identity theft. With the advent of mobile banking applications, more people are login their sensitive data to smartphones, which can endanger their privacy.

Another group whose privacy is in danger is teenagers. Teenagers post a significant amount of information online, which makes it vitally for them to understand the people they share information with or use privacy settings. However, most teenagers are interested with capturing the attention of their peers and in the process posting information that may enhance their status. This information may not seem harmful, but it can be exploited by cyber criminals to get access to the parents.

Several articles have argued about the threat of privacy in online platforms such as social media. In “online privacy: current health 2 by given (2009),” the author argues that online predators can figure out information posted in online platforms, which can be used against the user. Additionally, employers can use the online platform to check out their employees. With the proliferation of electronic health registers, cyber criminals can access an individual’s health information. It presents a significant danger to the individuals concerned because such registers contain vital information such as social security number and insurance details.

In her article titled” should you panic about online privacy?” Palmer (2010) notes that online platforms are a threat to privacy and individual must take measures to protect their personal data. Due to the threat posed by online environments to privacy, Palmer suggests various strategies that user can use to safeguard their privacy. One way of doing this is by removing the birth year from a personal profile in social media networks because the full birth year is often used by banks to categorize their clients. Cyber criminals can use such information to access online banking systems that can compromise user’s safety. Another suggestion given by Palmer is to use antivirus and anti-spyware. These techniques will prevent criminals from exploiting them to access confidential information.

In the piece carried by the New Yorker tiled “the face of Facebook” by José Vargas may present information about Mark Zuckerberg that is public domain, it illustrates how Facebook profiles reveal private and confidential information to virtually anyone on the site. FACEBOOK is a directory of global citizens that affords people the chance to create public identities. Friends can access this information; friends of friends can also access some while some information is also available to anyone interested in them. Although the company has changed it privacy policies severally, it still exposes private information in several ways. From Zuckerberg’s profile, it is possible to know that he has three sisters, where he schooled in, he favorite comedian and musicians, and his interests. His friends can also access his cell-phone number and email address. Additionally, the addition of a feature known as Places, which allows users to mark their location means that someone interested in Zuckerberg’s location can know it anytime. The article by Vargas reveals how easy it is to access one’s private information in Facebook.

Plagiarism, which is using another person’s ideas or creations without giving credit to that person, is another concern in social media. Individuals take information from other sources or individuals and use them as their own, which a common practice in social media. The lack of attribution and fabrication of content are the real issues because users seldom give credit to the source of the content. Despite the fact that social media is for connecting with friends and family, it has been used as social aggregators, which makes it important to give links to the sources of the content.

Social media platforms raise concerns over privacy issues because others can exploit information that is innocently posted on these sites. Cyber criminals can exploit the information to harm the user. It is important to note that different people can access information posted online. Users must take significant steps to protect their information by using anti-spyware software and emitting sensitive information in their profiles.

Given M. (2008). online privacy. Current health 2 . Retrieved from academic search complete.

Palmer L. (2010, 08) should you panic about online privacy? Redbook , Vol. 215 Issue 2, p130

Vargas,J.A. ( 2010, sep20).  The face of Facebook. The New Yorker. Retrieved from http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/09/20/the-face-of-facebook

Stuck with your Essay?

Get in touch with one of our experts for instant help!

Vitamin C Experiment, Essay Example

The Professionalization of Ujwai Bharati, Essay Example

Time is precious

don’t waste it!

Plagiarism-free guarantee

Privacy guarantee

Secure checkout

Money back guarantee

Related Essay Samples & Examples

Voting as a civic responsibility, essay example.

Pages: 1

Words: 287

Utilitarianism and Its Applications, Essay Example

Words: 356

The Age-Related Changes of the Older Person, Essay Example

Pages: 2

Words: 448

The Problems ESOL Teachers Face, Essay Example

Pages: 8

Words: 2293

Should English Be the Primary Language? Essay Example

Pages: 4

Words: 999

The Term “Social Construction of Reality”, Essay Example

Words: 371

Home — Essay Samples — Life — Freedom — The Right to Privacy: Personal Freedom in the Digital Age

The Right to Privacy: Personal Freedom in The Digital Age

• Categories: Digital Era Freedom

About this sample

Words: 691 |

Published: Sep 16, 2023

Words: 691 | Pages: 2 | 4 min read

Table of contents

The significance of the right to privacy, historical development of the right to privacy, contemporary challenges, protecting the right to privacy, 1. individual autonomy:, 2. human dignity:, 3. democracy and free expression:, 1. data privacy:, 2. government surveillance:, 3. social media and cybersecurity:, 1. legal protections:, 2. technological solutions:, 3. digital literacy:, 4. ethical considerations:.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Karlyna PhD

Verified writer

• Expert in: Information Science and Technology Life

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 392 words

3 pages / 1295 words

4.5 pages / 1968 words

1 pages / 647 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Freedom

Freedom, often regarded as the cornerstone of human existence, is a profound and multifaceted concept that shapes the course of our lives, societies, and the world at large. In this essay, we explore the intrinsic value of [...]

The Concept of Freedom: A Comprehensive Analysis Freedom is a concept that has been debated and discussed for centuries. It is a fundamental aspect of human existence and has been a driving force behind many social and [...]

In conclusion, America's gift to my generation is multi-faceted and complex. The education, diversity, and freedom that this nation provides have shaped me and my peers in profound ways. As a college student, I am grateful for [...]

Freedom, Independence, Emancipation, and Happiness are concepts that have long captivated the human imagination. They are ideals that societies strive for, and individuals yearn to experience. In this essay, we will explore the [...]

I am here to discuss the major contributors to the abolishment of slavery. Definition of slavery varies from time t time which may include: a person who is the property of and wholly subject to another; a bond servant. a [...]

The epithet “the Land of the Free” is a distinctive phrase commonly associated with America, a country that prides itself for awarding its people with equal opportunity and the freedom to pursue their dreams. Yet, American [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Writing a Social Media Essay: Tips and Examples

In an era where a single tweet can spark a global conversation and an Instagram post can redefine trends, it's fascinating to note that the average person spends approximately 2 hours and 31 minutes per day on social media platforms. That's more than 900 hours a year devoted to scrolling, liking, and sharing in the vast digital landscape. As we find ourselves deeply intertwined in the fabric of online communities, the significance of understanding and articulating the dynamics of social media through the written word, particularly in an essay on social media, becomes increasingly apparent. So, why embark on the journey of crafting an essay on this ubiquitous aspect of modern life? Join us as we unravel the layers of social media's impact, explore its nuances, and discover the art of conveying these insights through the written form.

Short Description

In this article, we'll explore how to write an essay on social media and the purpose behind these narratives while also delving into a myriad of engaging topics. From the heartbeat of online connections to the rhythm of effective storytelling, we'll guide you organically through the process, sharing insights on structure, approach, and the creative essence that makes each essay unique. And if you're seeking assistance, pondering - ' I wish I could find someone to write my essay ,' we'll also furnish example essays to empower you to tackle such tasks independently.

Why Write a Social Media Essay

In a world buzzing with hashtags, filters, and the constant hum of notifications, the idea of sitting down to craft an essay about social media might seem as out of place as a cassette tape in a streaming era. Yet, there's something oddly therapeutic, almost rebellious, about pausing in the midst of 280-character wisdom to delve deeper into the why behind our digital existence.

So, what is social media essay, and what's the purpose of writing it? Well, it's more than just an exercise in intellectual curiosity. It's a personal journey, a reflective pause in the ceaseless scroll. While writing the essay, we gain the power to articulate the intangible, to breathe life into the pixels that dance across our screens. It's an opportunity to make sense of the chaos, to find meaning in the memes, and perhaps, in the process, to uncover a bit more about ourselves in this digital wilderness.

Let's face it - our online lives are a fast-paced carousel of memes, viral challenges, and carefully curated selfies. So, why bother wrestling with words and paragraphs in a world where brevity is king? The answer lies in the art of unraveling the digital tapestry that envelops us.

There's a magic in articulating the dance between the profound and the mundane that occurs within the confines of our screens. An essay becomes a lens, focusing our attention on the subtleties of social media dynamics – the inside jokes that become global phenomena, the ripple effect of a well-timed retweet, and the silent conversations unfolding in the comment sections.

6 Key Tips for Crafting a Social Media Essay

Now that we've set sail into the realm of essays on the digital landscape, it's only fair to equip ourselves with a few trusty tools for the journey. Think of these tips as your compass, helping you navigate the sometimes choppy, often unpredictable waters of crafting an essay on social media.

• Embrace Your Authentic Voice: Just like your favorite Instagram filter can't hide the real you, your essay should reflect your genuine thoughts and feelings. Don't be afraid to let your unique voice shine through – whether it's witty, contemplative, or a delightful blend of both.
• Dive into the Details: Social media isn't just about the grand gestures; it's the small, often unnoticed details that weave the most compelling narratives. Explore the minutiae of your online experiences – the peculiar hashtags, the quirky bios, and the unexpected connections that leave a lasting imprint.
• Craft Your Hashtag Haiku: Much like poetry, brevity can be your ally in social media essays. Think of hashtags as haikus – succinct, impactful, and capable of conveying a universe of meaning in just a few characters. Choose them wisely.
• Engage with the Comments Section: The comments section is the lively pub where digital conversations unfold. Dive in, clink glasses, and engage with the diverse perspectives swirling around. It's in these interactions that the real magic happens – where ideas collide, evolve, and sometimes, transform.
• Navigate the Memescape: Memes are the folklore of the digital age, carrying tales of humor, irony, and cultural resonance. Don't shy away from exploring the memescape in your essay. Unravel the layers, decipher the symbolism, and appreciate the humor that often holds up a mirror to society.
• Be Mindful of the Clickbait Pitfalls: While clickbait might be the flashy neon sign on the digital highway, it's essential to tread carefully. Ensure your essay isn't just a sensational headline but a thoughtful exploration that goes beyond the surface.

Want to Watch Your Academic Goals Take Flight?

Let us take the reins and help you soar to academic excellence!

Social Media Essay Structure

In the age of viral tweets and digital conversations, tackling the essay format is more than just stringing words together—it's about creating a roadmap. As we navigate this landscape of likes and retweets, understanding the structural foundations becomes key. So, let's cut through the noise and explore the practical aspects of how to write a social media essay that mirrors the rhythm of our online experiences.

Form an Outline

Now that we've acknowledged the importance of structure in your essay, the next step is to build a solid roadmap. Think of it like planning a road trip; you wouldn't hit the highway without a map or GPS, right? Similarly, creating an outline for your essay gives you a clear direction and ensures your thoughts flow smoothly.

So, whether you decide to order an essay online or tackle it yourself, here's a simple way to go about it:

Introduction (Where You Start):

• Briefly introduce the topic.
• State your social media essay thesis or main idea.
• Example: 'Let's begin by introducing the impact of social media on modern communication, focusing on its role in shaping opinions and fostering connections.'

Body Paragraphs (The Journey):

• Each paragraph should cover a specific social media essay argument and point.
• Use examples or evidence to support your ideas.
• Example: 'The first aspect we'll explore is how social media amplifies voices. For instance, hashtags like #ClimateAction mobilize a global audience around environmental issues.'

Transitions (Smooth Turns):

• Guide your readers from one point to the next.
• Ensure a logical flow between paragraphs.
• Example: 'Having discussed the amplification of voices, let's now shift our focus to the influence of social media in spreading information.'

Counter Arguments (Addressing Detours):

• Acknowledge different perspectives.
• Counter Arguments with evidence or reasoning.
• Example: 'While social media can be a powerful tool for connectivity, critics argue that it also contributes to the spread of misinformation. Let's explore this counterargument and analyze its validity.'

Conclusion (The Destination):

• Summarize your main points.
• Restate your thesis and leave a lasting impression.
• Example: 'In conclusion, social media serves as both a bridge and a battleground of ideas. Understanding its nuances is crucial in navigating this digital landscape.'

Creating an outline for your essay not only streamlines the writing process but also ensures your readers embark on a clear and organized journey through your insights on social media. If you're exploring more options, you might even want to buy thesis for more convenience.

Make a Social Media Essay Introduction

Begin your introduction by presenting a concise overview of the key theme or topic you're addressing. Clearly state the main purpose or argument of your essay, giving readers a roadmap for what to expect. Integrate social media essay hooks like a relevant statistic, quote, or provocative question to capture attention.

For instance, if your essay is about the impact of social media on personal relationships, you might start by mentioning a statistic on the percentage of couples who met online.

Social Media Essay Body Paragraph

Structure each social media essay body paragraph around a specific aspect of your chosen topic. Start with a clear topic sentence that encapsulates the main idea of the paragraph. Provide concrete examples, data, or case studies to support your points and strengthen your argument. Maintain a logical flow between paragraphs by using effective transitions.

If your essay focuses on the positive effects of social media on business marketing, dedicate a paragraph to showcasing successful campaigns and how they leveraged different platforms.

Social Media Essay Conclusion

In your conclusion, succinctly recap the main points discussed in the body paragraphs. Reinforce your thesis statement and emphasize its broader implications. Rather than introducing new information, use the conclusion to leave a lasting impression on your readers. Consider prompting further thought or suggesting practical applications of your findings.

For instance, if your essay examined the impact of social media on political discourse, conclude by encouraging readers to critically evaluate the information they encounter online and actively engage in constructive conversations.

Proofread and Revise

In the process of writing social media essay, proofreading and revising are indispensable steps that can significantly enhance the overall quality of your work. Begin by meticulously checking for grammatical errors, ensuring that your sentences are clear and concise. Pay attention to the flow of your ideas, confirming that each paragraph seamlessly transitions into the next.

During the proofreading phase, keep an eye out for any inconsistencies in tone or style. This is an opportunity to refine your language and ensure that it aligns with the intended voice of your essay. Look for repetitive phrases or unnecessary words that might detract from the clarity of your message.

As you revise, consider the effectiveness of your hook. Does it still resonate as strongly as you intended? Can it be tweaked to better captivate your audience? A compelling hook sets the tone for your entire essay, so invest time in perfecting this crucial element.

Furthermore, don't hesitate to seek feedback from peers or mentors. Another perspective can provide valuable insights into areas that may need improvement. Fresh eyes often catch nuances that the writer might overlook. Alternatively, you might also explore the option to buy coursework for additional support.

Social Media Essay Topics

In the vast realm of social media, where every like and share contributes to the digital narrative, choosing the right essay topic becomes a crucial compass for exploration. Let's explore thought-provoking topics that not only capture attention but also invite insightful discussions on the intricacies of our interconnected world.

Impact on Society:

• The Role of Social Media in Redefining Friendship and Social Bonds
• How Has TikTok Influenced Global Pop Culture Trends?
• The Impact of Social Media on Political Polarization
• Social Media and Mental Health: Exploring the Connection
• The Evolution of Language on Social Media Platforms
• Examining the Influence of Social Media on Body Image
• Fake News and Its Proliferation on Social Media
• Social Media and the Rise of Influencer Marketing
• The Intersection of Social Media and Dating Apps
• Has Social Media Narrowed or Expanded Cultural Perspectives?
• The Role of Social Media in Fostering Global Communities
• The Influence of Social Media on Consumer Behavior
• Analyzing the Impact of Social Media on News Consumption
• The Rise of 'Cancel Culture' on Social Media Platforms
• Social Media and Its Role in Spreading Disinformation
• The Impact of Social Media on Language and Communication Skills
• Social Media and its Influence on Political Movements
• The Relationship Between Social Media Use and Sleep Patterns
• Social Media and the Accessibility of Educational Resources
• The Cultural Significance of Memes on Social Media

Individual and Identity:

• The Impact of Social Media Addiction on Personal Relationships and Intimacy
• Self-Expression and Authenticity on Social Networking Sites
• Social Media and Its Influence on Teenage Identity Formation
• The Role of Social Media in Shaping Beauty Standards
• Navigating Online Dating and Relationships in the Social Media Age
• The Impact of Social Media on Parenting Styles
• Social Media and Its Influence on Body Positivity Movements
• The Perception of Success: Social Media's Role in Achievement Culture
• Social Media and the Construction of Online Persona vs. Real Self
• Social Media and Its Influence on Lifestyle Choices
• The Role of Social Media in Shaping Career Aspirations
• The Intersection of Mental Health Narratives and Social Media
• The Impact of Social Media on Self-Esteem and Well-Being
• How Social Media Influences Gender Identity and Expression
• Exploring the Concept of Digital Detox in the Social Media Era
• The Role of Social Media in Shaping Cultural Identity
• The Connection Between Social Media and Impulse Buying
• Social Media and Its Influence on Dietary Choices
• Balancing Privacy and Self-Disclosure on Social Media
• The Impact of Social Media on Friendships Over Time

Digital Activism and Advocacy:

• The Effectiveness of Hashtag Movements in Promoting Social Change
• Social Media and Its Role in Amplifying Underrepresented Voices
• The Impact of Social Media on Global Environmental Activism
• Online Activism: The Evolution from Clicktivism to Concrete Action
• The Role of Social Media in Advancing LGBTQ+ Rights
• Social Media and Its Impact on Anti-Racism Movements
• Analyzing the Challenges of Digital Advocacy in Authoritarian Regimes
• Social Media and the Global Fight Against Cyberbullying
• The Intersection of Social Media and Mental Health Advocacy
• Examining the Role of Social Media in Humanitarian Campaigns
• Crowdsourcing for Change: How Social Media Fuels Fundraising
• The Challenges of Digital Activism in the Age of Information Overload
• Social Media and Its Impact on Disability Advocacy
• The Role of Social Media in Combating Gender-Based Violence
• Online Petitions and Their Influence on Policy Change
• Exploring the Intersection of Social Media and Animal Rights Activism
• The Impact of Social Media on Indigenous Rights Advocacy
• Digital Advocacy and Its Role in Healthcare Reform
• Social Media's Influence on Youth Activism
• Navigating Challenges in Allyship on Social Media Platforms

Privacy and Ethics:

• The Implications of Facial Recognition Technology on Social Media
• Social Media Platforms and the Ethics of User Data Collection
• The Role of Social Media in Combating Deepfakes
• Balancing Freedom of Speech and Moderation on Social Media
• Social Media and the Challenges of Regulating Disinformation
• Ethical Considerations in Targeted Advertising on Social Media
• The Impact of Social Media Algorithms on User Behavior
• Social Media and the Right to Privacy: Where to Draw the Line?
• The Influence of Social Media on Political Manipulation and Propaganda
• Data Security Concerns in the Era of Social Media
• The Ethics of Social Media Influencer Marketing
• Social Media and Its Role in Combating Cyberbullying
• The Impact of Social Media on Juror Bias in Legal Cases
• Exploring the Ethics of Incorporating Social Media Usage in Hiring Decisions by Employers
• Social Media and Its Role in Combating Hate Speech
• Balancing Personalization with Privacy in Social Media Websites
• The Influence of Social Media on Public Perceptions of Law Enforcement
• Social Media and the Challenges of Content Moderation
• Addressing Online Harassment: Ethical Considerations for Platforms
• The Responsibility of Social Media Platforms in Protecting User Privacy

Future Trends and Innovations:

• The Future of Social Media: Emerging Platforms and Trends
• The Role of Augmented Reality (AR) in Shaping the Future of Social Media
• Virtual Reality (VR) and Its Potential Impact on Social Media Engagement
• The Rise of NFTs (Non-Fungible Tokens) and Social Media
• Social Media and the Evolution of Live Streaming Culture
• The Impact of Voice Search and Voice Assistants on Social Media
• Social Commerce: The Future of E-Commerce Through Social Media
• Exploring the Influence of Artificial Intelligence (AI) on Social Media
• The Role of Blockchain Technology in Enhancing Social Media Security
• Social Media and the Integration of Virtual Influencers
• The Future of Social Media Content: Short-Form vs. Long-Form
• The Influence of User-Generated Content on Future Social Media Trends
• Social Media and the Adoption of 5G Technology
• The Potential of Gamification in Shaping Social Media Engagement
• The Impact of Social Media on the Future of Work and Remote Collaboration
• Exploring the Relationship Between Social Media and Mental Health Apps
• The Influence of User Privacy Concerns on Future Social Media Developments
• Social Media and the Role of Ephemeral Content in Communication
• The Intersection of Social Media and Virtual Events
• Predicting the Next Wave of Social Media Influencer Trends

If these topics piqued your interest, you'll likely find persuasive essay topics equally fascinating! Dive into our article for a variety of options that might just spark your curiosity and inspire your next writing venture.

Social Media Essay Example

Crafting a standout essay isn't just about the words; it's about weaving a narrative that grabs your reader's attention. Before we say our goodbyes, why not take a peek at our sample essays? Our seasoned writers poured their expertise into creating persuasive pieces, offering you insights into both how to write an essay on social media and the kind of polished language that can elevate your own writing.

Wrapping Up

As our college essay service experts conclude this article, we've journeyed through the emotional complexities, societal reflections, and transformative potentials embedded in our digital narratives. An essay on social media is a portal into the intricate dance of our online lives, urging introspection, empathy, and an awareness of diverse stories. Let your essays authentically reflect, sparking conversations that enrich our collective experience in this ever-evolving digital realm.

Ready to Take Your Writing Skills to the Next Level?

Our expert writers can help you create something truly unique

Daniel Parker

is a seasoned educational writer focusing on scholarship guidance, research papers, and various forms of academic essays including reflective and narrative essays. His expertise also extends to detailed case studies. A scholar with a background in English Literature and Education, Daniel’s work on EssayPro blog aims to support students in achieving academic excellence and securing scholarships. His hobbies include reading classic literature and participating in academic forums.

is an expert in nursing and healthcare, with a strong background in history, law, and literature. Holding advanced degrees in nursing and public health, his analytical approach and comprehensive knowledge help students navigate complex topics. On EssayPro blog, Adam provides insightful articles on everything from historical analysis to the intricacies of healthcare policies. In his downtime, he enjoys historical documentaries and volunteering at local clinics.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

The Battle for Digital Privacy Is Reshaping the Internet

As Apple and Google enact privacy changes, businesses are grappling with the fallout, Madison Avenue is fighting back and Facebook has cried foul.

By Brian X. Chen

Listen to This Article

SAN FRANCISCO — Apple introduced a pop-up window for iPhones in April that asks people for their permission to be tracked by different apps.

Google recently outlined plans to disable a tracking technology in its Chrome web browser.

And Facebook said last month that hundreds of its engineers were working on a new method of showing ads without relying on people’s personal data.

The developments may seem like technical tinkering, but they were connected to something bigger: an intensifying battle over the future of the internet. The struggle has entangled tech titans, upended Madison Avenue and disrupted small businesses. And it heralds a profound shift in how people’s personal information may be used online, with sweeping implications for the ways that businesses make money digitally.

At the center of the tussle is what has been the internet’s lifeblood: advertising .

More than 20 years ago, the internet drove an upheaval in the advertising industry. It eviscerated newspapers and magazines that had relied on selling classified and print ads, and threatened to dethrone television advertising as the prime way for marketers to reach large audiences.

Instead, brands splashed their ads across websites, with their promotions often tailored to people’s specific interests. Those digital ads powered the growth of Facebook, Google and Twitter, which offered their search and social networking services to people without charge. But in exchange, people were tracked from site to site by technologies such as “ cookies, ” and their personal data was used to target them with relevant marketing.

Now that system, which ballooned into a $350 billion digital ad industry, is being dismantled. Driven by online privacy fears, Apple and Google have started revamping the rules around online data collection. Apple, citing the mantra of privacy, has rolled out tools that block marketers from tracking people. Google, which depends on digital ads, is trying to have it both ways by reinventing the system so it can continue aiming ads at people without exploiting access to their personal data.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

Social Media and Privacy

• Open Access
• First Online: 09 February 2022

Cite this chapter

You have full access to this open access chapter

• Xinru Page 7 ,
• Sara Berrios 7 ,
• Daricia Wilkinson 8 &
• Pamela J. Wisniewski 9  

19k Accesses

4 Citations

4 Altmetric

With the popularity of social media, researchers and designers must consider a wide variety of privacy concerns while optimizing for meaningful social interactions and connection. While much of the privacy literature has focused on information disclosures, the interpersonal dynamics associated with being on social media make it important for us to look beyond informational privacy concerns to view privacy as a form of interpersonal boundary regulation. In other words, attaining the right level of privacy on social media is a process of negotiating how much, how little, or when we desire to interact with others, as well as the types of information we choose to share with them or allow them to share about us. We propose a framework for how researchers and practitioners can think about privacy as a form of interpersonal boundary regulation on social media by introducing five boundary types (i.e., relational, network, territorial, disclosure, and interactional) social media users manage. We conclude by providing tools for assessing privacy concerns in social media, as well as noting several challenges that must be overcome to help people to engage more fully and stay on social media.

You have full access to this open access chapter,  Download chapter PDF

Similar content being viewed by others

Privacy and Empowerment in Connective Media

Privacy in Social Information Access

Data Protection, Social Networks and Online Mass Media

1 introduction.

The way people communicate with one another in the twenty-first century has evolved rapidly. In the 1990s, if someone wanted to share a “how-to” video tutorial within their social networks, the dissemination options would be limited (e.g., email, floppy disk, or possibly a writeable compact disc). Now, social media platforms, such as TikTok, provide professional grade video editing and sharing capabilities that give users the potential to both create and disseminate such content to thousands of viewers within a matter of minutes. As such, social media has steadily become an integral component for how people capture aspects of their physical lives and share them with others. Social media platforms have gradually altered the way many people live [ 1 ], learn [ 2 , 3 ], and maintain relationships with others [ 4 ].

Carr and Hayes define social media as “Internet-based channels that allow users to opportunistically interact and selectively self-present, either in real time or asynchronously, with both broad and narrow audiences who derive value from user-generated content and the perception of interaction with others” [ 5 ]. Social media platforms offer new avenues for expressing oneself, experiences, and emotions with broader online communities via posts, tweets, shares, likes, and reviews. People use these platforms to talk about major milestones that bring happiness (e.g., graduation, marriage, pregnancy announcements), but they also use social media as an outlet to express grief and challenges, and to cope with crises [ 6 , 7 , 8 ]. Many scholars have highlighted the host of positive outcomes from interpersonal interactions on social media including social capital, self-esteem, and personal well-being [ 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 ]. Likewise, researchers have also shed light on the increased concerns over unethical data collection and privacy abuses [ 13 , 14 ].

This chapter highlights the privacy issues that must be addressed in the context of social media and provides guidance on how to study and design for social media privacy. We first provide an overview of the history of social media and its usage. Next, we highlight common social media privacy concerns that have arisen over the years. We also point out how scholars have identified and sought to predict privacy behavior, but many efforts have failed to adequately account for individual differences. By reconceptualizing privacy in social media as a boundary regulation, we can explain these gaps from previous one-size-fits-all approaches and provide tools for measuring and studying privacy violations. Finally, we conclude with a word of caution about the consequences of ignoring privacy concerns on social media.

2 A Brief History of Social Media

Section highlights.

Social media use has quickly increased over the past decade and plays a key role in social, professional, and even civic realms. The rise of social media has led to “networked individualism.”

This enables people to access a wider variety of specialized relationships , making it more likely they can meet a variety of needs. It also allows people to project their voice to a wider audience.

However, people have more frequent turnover in their social networks , and it takes much more effort to maintain social relations and discern (mis)information and intention behind communication.

The initial popularity of social media harkened back to the historical rise of social network sites (SNSs). The canonical definition of SNSs is attributed to Boyd and Ellison [ 15 ] who differentiate SNSs from other forms of computer-mediated communication. According to Boyd and Ellison, SNS consists of (1) profiles representing users and (2) explicit connections between these profiles that can be traversed and interacted with. A social networking profile is a self-constructed digital representation of oneself and one’s social relationships. The content of these profiles varies by platform from profile pictures to personal information such as interests, demographics, and contact information. Visibility also varies by platform and often users have some control over who can see their profile (e.g., everyone or “friends”). Most SNSs also provide a way to leave messages on another’s profile, such as posting to someone’s timeline on Facebook or sending a mention or direct message to someone on Twitter.

Public interest and research initially focused on a small subset of SNSs (e.g., Friendster [ 16 ] and MySpace [ 17 , 18 , 19 ]), but the past decade has seen the proliferation of a much broader range of social networking technologies, as well as an evolution of SNSs into what Kane et al. term social media networks [ 20 ]. This extended definition emphasizes the reach of social media content beyond a single platform. It acknowledges how the boundedness of SNSs has become blurred as platform functionality that was once contained in a single platform, such as “likes,” are now integrated across other websites, third parties, and mobile apps.

Over the past decade, SNSs and social media networks have quickly become embedded in many facets of personal, professional, and social life. In that time, these platforms became more commonly known as “social media.” In the USA, only 5% of adults used social media in 2005. By 2011, half of the US adult population was using social media, and 72% were social users by 2019 [ 21 ]. MySpace and Facebook dominated SNS research about a decade ago, but now other social media platforms, such as YouTube, Instagram, Snapchat, Twitter, Kik, TikTok, and others, are popular choices among social media users. The intensity of use also has drastically increased. For example, half of Facebook users log on several times a day, and three-quarters of Facebook users are active on the platform at least daily [ 21 ]. Worldwide, Facebook alone has 1.59 billion users who use it on a daily basis and 2.41 billion using it at least monthly [ 22 ]. About half of the users of other popular platforms such as Snapchat, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube also report visiting those sites daily. Around the world, there are 4.2 billion users who spend a cumulative 10 billion hours a day on social networking sites [ 23 ]. However, different social networking sites are dominant in different cultures. For example, the most popular social media in China, WeChat (inc. Wēixìn 微信), has 1.213 billion monthly users [ 23 ].

While SNS profiles started as a user-crafted representation of an individual user, these profiles now also often consist of information that is passively collected, aggregated, and filtered in ways that are ambiguous to the user. This passively collected information can include data accessed through other avenues (e.g., search engines, third-party apps) beyond the platform itself [ 24 ]. Many people fail to realize that their information is being stored and used elsewhere. Compared to tracking on the web, social media platforms have access to a plethora of rich data and fine-grained personally identifiable information (PII) which could be used to make inferences about users’ behavior, socioeconomic status, and even their political leanings [ 25 ]. While online tracking might be valuable for social media companies to better understand how to target their consumers and personalize social media features to users’ preferences, the lack of transparency regarding what and how data is collected has in more recent years led to heightened privacy concerns and skepticism around how social media platforms are using personal data [ 26 , 27 , 28 ]. This has, in turn, contributed to a loss of trust and changes in how people interact (or not) on social media, leading some users to abandon certain platforms altogether [ 26 , 29 ] or to seek alternative social media platforms that are more privacy focused.

For example, WhatsApp, a popular messaging app, updated its privacy policy to allow its parent company, Facebook, and its subsidiaries to collect WhatsApp data [ 30 ]. Users were given the option to accept the terms or lose access to the app. Shortly after, WhatsApp rival Signal reported 7.5 million installs globally over 4 days. Recent and multiple social media data breaches have heightened people’s awareness around potential inferences that could be made about them and the danger in sensitive privacy breaches. Considering the invasive nature of such practices, both consumers and companies are increasingly acknowledging the importance of privacy, control, and transparency in social media [ 31 ]. Similarly, as researchers and practitioners, we must acknowledge the importance of privacy on social media and design for the complex challenges associated with networked privacy. These types of intrusions and data privacy issues are akin to the informational privacy issues that have been investigated in the context of e-commerce, websites, and online tracking (see Chap. 9 ).

While early research into social media and privacy largely focused on these types of concerns, researchers have uncovered how the social dynamics surrounding social media have led to a broader array of social privacy issues that shape people’s adoption of platforms and their usage behaviors. Rainie and Wellman explain how the rise of social technologies, combined with ubiquitous Internet and mobile access, has led to the rise of “networked individualism” [ 32 ]. People have access to a wider variety of relationships than they previously did offline in a geographically and time-bound world. These new opportunities make it more likely that people can foster relationships that meet their individual needs for havens (support and belonging), bandages (coping), safety nets (protect from crisis), and social capital (ability to survive and thrive through situation changes). Additionally, social media users can project their voice to an extended audience, including many weak ties (e.g., acquaintances and strangers). This enables individuals to meet their social, emotional, and economic needs by drawing on a myriad of specialized relationships (different individuals each particularly knowledgeable in a specific domain such as economics, politics, sports, caretaking). In this way, individuals are increasingly networked or embedded within multiple communities that serve their interests and needs.

Inversely, networked individualism has also made people less likely to have a single “home” community, dealing with more frequent turnover and change in their social networks. Rainie and Wellman describe how people’s social routines are different from previous generations that were more geographically bound – today, only 10% of people’s significant ties are their neighbors [ 32 ]. As such, researchers have questioned and studied the extent to which people can meaningfully maintain interpersonal relationships on social media. The upper limit for doing so has been estimated at 150 connections or “friends” [ 33 ], but social media connections often well exceed this number. With such large networks, it also takes users much more effort to distinguish (mis)information, when communication is intended for the user, and the intent behind that communication. The technical affordances of social media can also help or hinder their (in)ability to capture the nuances of the various relationships in their social network. On many social media platforms, relationships are flattened into friends and followers, making them homogenous and lacking differentiation between, for instance, casual acquaintance and trusted confidant [ 16 , 34 ]. These characteristics of social media lead to a host of social privacy issues which are crucial to address. In the next section, we summarize some of the key privacy challenges that arise due to the unique characteristics of social media.

3 Privacy Challenges in Social Media

Information disclosure privacy issues have been a dominant focus in online technologies and the primary focus for social media. It focuses on access to data and defining public vs. private disclosures . It emphasizes user control over who sees what.

With so many people from different social circles able to access a user’s social media content, the issues of context collapse occur. Users may post to an imagined audience rather than realizing that people from multiple social contexts are privy to the same information.

The issues of self-presentation jump to the foreground in social media. Being able to manage impressions is a part of privacy management.

The social nature of social media also introduces the issues of controlling access to oneself , both in terms of availability and physical access.

Despite all of these privacy concerns, there is a noted privacy paradox between what people say they are concerned about and their resulting behaviors online.

Early focus of social media privacy research was focused on helping individuals meet their privacy needs in light of four key challenges: (1) information disclosure, (2) context collapse, (3) reputation management, and (4) access to oneself. This section gives an overview of these privacy challenges and how research sought to overcome them. The remainder of this chapter shows how the research has moved beyond focusing on the individual when it comes to social media and privacy; rather, social media privacy has been reconceptualized as a dynamic process of interpersonal boundary regulation between individuals and groups.

3.1 Information Disclosure/Control over Who Sees What

A commonality among early social media privacy research is that the focus has been on information privacy and self-disclosure [ 35 ]. Self-disclosure is the information a person chooses to share with other people or websites, such as posting a status update on social media. Information privacy breaches occur when a website and/or person leaks private information about a user, sometimes unintentionally. Many studies have focused on informational privacy and on sharing information with, or withholding it from, the appropriate people [ 36 , 37 , 38 ] on social media. Privacy settings related to self-disclosure have also been studied in detail [ 39 , 40 , 41 ]. Generally, social media platforms help users control self-disclosure in two ways. First is the level of granularity or type of information that one can share with others. Facebook is the most complex, allowing users to disclose and control more granular information for profile categories such as bio, website, email addresses, and at least eight other categories at the time of writing this chapter. Others have fewer information groupings, which make user profiles chunkier, and thus self-disclosure boundaries less granular. The second dimension is one’s access level permissions, or with whom one can share personal information. The most popular social media platforms err on the side of sharing more information to more people by allowing users to give access to categories such as “Everyone,” “All Users,” or “Public.” Similarly, many social media platforms give the option for access for “friends” or “followers” only.

Many researchers have highlighted how disclosures can be shared more widely than intended. Tufekci examined disclosure mechanisms used by college students on MySpace and Facebook to manage the boundary between private and public. Findings suggest that students are more likely to adjust profile visibility rather than limiting their disclosures [ 42 ]. Other research points out how users may not want their posts to remain online indefinitely, but most social media platforms default to keeping past posts visible unless the user specifies otherwise [ 43 ]. Even when the platform offers ways to limit post sharing, there are often intentional and unintentional ways this content is shared that negates the users’ wishes. For example, Twitter is a popular social media platform where users can choose to have their tweets available only to their followers. However, millions of private tweets have been retweeted, exposing private information to the public [ 44 ]. Even platforms like Snapchat, which make posts ephemeral by default, are susceptible to people taking screenshots of a snap and distributing through other channels. Thus, as social media companies continue to develop social media platforms, they should consider how to protect users from information disclosure and teach people to practice privacy protective habits.

Although some users adjust their privacy settings to limit information disclosures, they may be unaware of third-party sites that can still access their information. Scholars have emphasized the importance of educating users on the secondary use of their data, such as when third-party software takes information from their profiles [ 45 ]. Data surveillance continues to expand, and the business model of social media corporations tends to favor getting more information about users, which makes it difficult for users that want to control their disclosure [ 46 ]. Third-party apps can also access information about social media users’ connections without consent of the person whose information is being stored [ 47 ].

3.2 Unique Considerations for Managing Disclosures Within Social Media

As mentioned earlier, social media can expand a person’s network, but as that network expands and diversifies, users have less control over how their personal information is shared with others. Two unique privacy considerations for social media that arise from this tension are context collapse and imagined audiences, which we describe in more detail in the subsections below. For example, as Facebook has become a social gathering place for adults, one’s “friends” may include family members, coworkers, colleagues, and acquaintances all in one virtual social sphere. Social media users may want to share information with these groups but are concerned about which audiences are appropriate for sharing what types of information. This is because these various social spheres that intersect on Facebook may not intersect as readily in the physical world (e.g., college buddies versus coworkers) [ 48 ]. These distinct social circles are brought together into one space due to social media. This concept is referred to as “context collapse” since a user’s audience is no longer limited to one context (e.g., home, work, school) [ 15 , 49 , 50 ]. We highlight research on the phenomenon of the privacy paradox and explain how context collapse and imagined audiences may help explain the apparent disconnect between users’ stated privacy concerns and their actual privacy behavior.

Context Collapse

Nuanced differences between one’s relationships are not fully represented on social media. While real-life relationships are notorious for being complex, one of the biggest criticisms of social media platforms is that they often simplify relationships to a “binary” [ 51 ] or “monolithic” [ 52 ] dimension of either friend or not friend. Many platforms just have one type of relationship such as a “friend,” and all relationships are treated the same. Once a “friend” has been added to one’s network, maintaining appropriate levels of social interactions in light of one’s relationship context with this individual (and the many others within one’s network) becomes even more problematic [ 53 ]. Since each friend may have different and, at times, mutually exclusive expectations, acting accordingly within a single space has become a challenge. As Boyd points out, for instance, teenagers cannot be simultaneously cool to their friends and to their parents [ 53 ]. Due to this collapsed context of relationships within social media, acquaintances, family, friends, coworkers, and significant others all have the same level of access to a social media user once added to one’s network – unless appropriately managed.

Research reveals that the way people manage context collapses varies. Working professionals might deal with context collapse by limiting posts containing personal information, creating different accounts, and avoiding friending those they worked with [ 54 ]. As another example, many adolescents manage context collapse by keeping their family members separate from their personal accounts [ 55 ]. Other mechanisms for managing context collapse include access-level permission to request friendship, denying friend requests, and unfriending. While there is limited support for manually assigning different privileges to each friend, the default is to start out the same and many users never change those defaults.

Privacy incidents resulting from mixing work and social media show the importance of why context collapse must be addressed. Context collapse has been shown to negatively affect those seeking employment [ 56 ], as well as endangering those who are employed. For example, a teacher in Massachusetts lost her job because she did not realize her Facebook posts were public to those who were not her friends; her complaints about parents of students getting her sick led to her getting fired from her job [ 57 ]. Many others have shared anecdotes about being fired after controversial Facebook and Twitter posts [ 58 , 59 ]. Even celebrities who live in the public eye can suffer from context collapse [ 60 , 61 ]. Kim Kardashian, for example, received intense criticism from Internet fans when she posted a photo on social media of her daughter using a cellphone and wearing makeup while Kim was getting ready for hair and wardrobe [ 62 ]. Many online users criticized her parenting style for not limiting screen time and Kim subsequently shared a photo of a stack of books that the kids have access to while she works.

Nevertheless, context collapse can also increase bridging social capital, which is the potential social benefit that can come through having ties to a wider audience. Context collapse enables this to occur by allowing people to increase their connections to weak ties and creating serendipitous situations by sharing with people beyond whom one would normally share [ 60 ]. For example, job hunters may increase their chances of finding a job by using social media to network and connect with those they would not normally be associated with on a daily basis. Getting out a message or spreading the word can also be accomplished more easily. For instance, finding people to contribute to natural disaster funds can be effective on social media because multiple contexts can be easily reached from one account [ 63 ]. In addition to managing context collapse, social media users also have to anticipate whether they are sharing disclosures with their intended audiences.

Imagined Audiences

The disconnect between the real audience and the imagined audience on social media poses privacy risks. Understanding who can see what content, how, when, and where is key to deciding what content to share and under what circumstances. Yet, research has consistently demonstrated how users do not accurately anticipate who can potentially see their posts. This manifests as wrongly anticipating that a certain person can see content (when they cannot), as well as not realizing when another person can access posted content. Users have an “imagined audience” [ 64 , 65 ] to whom they are posting their content, but it often does not match the actual audience viewing the user’s content. Social media users typically imagine that the audience for their social media posts are like-minded people, such as family or close friends [ 65 ]. Sometimes, online users think of specific people or groups when creating content such as a daughter, coworkers, people who need cleaning tips, or even one’s deceased father [ 65 ]. Despite these imagined audiences, privacy settings may be set so that many more people can see these posts (acquaintances, strangers, etc.). While users do tend to limit who sees their profile to a defined audience [ 44 , 66 , 67 ], they still tend to believe their posts are more private than they actually are [ 49 , 68 ].

Some users adopt privacy management strategies to counter potential mismatch in audience. Vitak identified several privacy management tactics users employ to disclose information to a limited audience [ 69 ]:

Network-based . Social media users decide who to friend or follow, therefore filtering their network of people. Some Facebook users avoid friending people they do not know. Others set friends’ profiles to “hidden,” so that they do not have to see their posts, but avoid the negative connotations associated with “unfriending.”

Platform-based . Some users choose to use the social media sites’ privacy settings to control who sees their posts. A common approach on Facebook is to change the setting to be “friends only,” so that only a user’s friends may see their posts.

Content-based . These users control their privacy by being careful about the information they post. If they knew that an employer could see their posts, then they would avoid posting when they were at work.

Profile-based . A less commonly used approach is to create multiple accounts (on a single platform or across platforms). For example, a professional, personal, and fun account.

As another example, teenagers often navigate public platforms by posting messages that parents or others would not understand their true meaning. For instance, by posting a song lyric or quote that is only recognized by specific individuals as a reference to a specific movie scene or ironic message, they therefore creatively limit their audience [ 49 , 70 ]. Others manage their audience by using more self-limiting privacy tactics like self-censorship [ 70 ], choosing just to not post something they were considering in the first place. These various tactics allow users to control who can see what on social media in different ways.

3.3 Reputation Management Through Self-Presentation

Technology-mediated interactions have led to new ways of managing how we present ourselves to different groups of friends (e.g., using different profiles on the same platform based on the audience) [ 71 ]. Being able to control the way we come across to others can be a challenging privacy problem that social media users must learn to navigate. Features to limit audience can also help with managing self-presentation. Nonetheless, reputation or impression management is not just about avoiding posts or limiting access to content. Posting more content, such as selfies, is another approach used to control the way others perceive a user [ 72 ]. In this case, it is important to present the content that helps convey a certain image of oneself. Research has revealed that those who engage more in impression management tend to have more online friends and disclose more personal information [ 73 ]. Those who feel online disclosures could leave them vulnerable to negativity, such as individuals who identify as LGBTQ+, have also been found to put an emphasis on impression management in order to navigate their online presence [ 74 ]. However, studies still show that users have anxieties around not having control over how they are presented [ 75 ]. Social media users worry not only about what they post, but are concerned about how others’ postings will reflect on them [ 42 ].

Another dimension that affects impression management attitudes is how social media platforms vary in their policies on whether user profiles must be consistent with their offline identities. Facebook’s real name policy, for instance, requires that people use their real name and represent themselves as one person, corresponding to their offline identities. Research confirms that online profiles actually do reflect users’ authentic personalities [ 76 ]. However, some platforms more easily facilitate identity exploration and have evolved norms encouraging it. For example, Finsta accounts popped up on Instagram a few years after the company started. These accounts are “Fake Instagram” accounts often sharing content that the user does not want to associate with their more public identity, allowing for more identity exploration. This may have arisen from the social norm that has evolved where Instagram users often feel like they need to present an ideal self. Scholars have observed such pressure on Instagram more than on other platforms like Snapchat [ 77 ]. While the ability to craft an online image separate from one’s offline identity may be more prevalent on platforms like Instagram, certain types of social media such as location-sharing social networks are deeply tied to one’s offline self, sharing actual physical location of its users. Users of Foursquare, a popular location-sharing app, have leveraged this tight coupling for impression management. Scholars have observed that users try to impress their friends or family members about the places they spend their time while skipping “check-in” at places like McDonald’s or work for fear of appearing boring or unimpressive [ 78 ].

Regardless of how tightly one’s online presence corresponds with their offline identity, concerns about self-presentation can arise. For example, users may lie about their location on location-sharing platforms as an impression management tactic and have concerns about harming their relationships with others [ 79 ]. On the other hand, Finstas are meant to help with self-presentation by hiding one’s true identity. Ironically, the content posted may be even more representative of the user’s attitudes and activities than the idealized images on one’s public-facing account. These contrasting examples illustrate how self-presentation concerns are complicated.

What further complicates reputation management is that social media content is shared and consumed by a group of people and not just individuals or dyads. Thus, self-presentation is not only controlled by the individual, but by others who might post pictures and/or tag that individual. Even when friends/followers do not directly post about the user, their actions can reflect on the user just by virtue of being connected with them. The issues of co-owned data and how to negotiate disclosure rules are a key area of privacy research on the rise. We refer you to Chap. 6 , which goes in-depth on this topic.

3.4 Access to Oneself

A final privacy challenge many social media users encounter is controlling accessibility others have to them. Some social media platforms automatically display when someone is online, which may invite interaction whether users want to be accessible or not. Controlling access to oneself is not as straightforward as limiting or blocking certain people’s access. For instance, studies have also shown that social pressures influence individuals to accept friend requests from “weak ties” as well as true friends [ 53 , 80 ]. As a result, the social dynamics on social media are becoming more complex, creating social anxiety and drama for many social media users [ 52 , 53 , 80 ]. Although a user may want to control who can interact with him or her, they may be worried about how using privacy features such as “blocking” other accounts may send the wrong signal to others and hurt their relationships [ 81 ]. In fact, an online social norm called “hyperfriending” [ 82 ] has developed where only 25% of a user’s online connections represent true friendship [ 83 ]. This may undermine the privacy individuals wished they had over who interacts with them on their various accounts. Due to social norms or etiquette, users may feel compelled to interact with others online [ 84 ]. Even if users do not feel like they need to interact, they can sometimes get annoyed or overwhelmed by seeing too much information from others [ 85 ]. Their mental state is being bombarded by an overload of information, and they may feel their attention is being captured.

Many social media sites now include location-sharing features to be able to tell people where they are by checking in to various locations, tag photos or posts, or even share location in real time. Therefore, privacy issues may also arise when sharing one’s location on social media and receiving undesirable attention. Studies point out user concerns about how others may use knowledge of that location to reach out and ask to meet up, or even to physically go find the person [ 86 ]. In fact, research has found that people may not be as concerned about the private nature of disclosing location as they are concerned for disturbing others or being disturbed oneself as a result of location sharing [ 87 ]. This makes sense given that analysis of mobile phone conversations reveals that describing one’s location plays a big role in signaling availability and creating social awareness [ 87 , 88 ].

Some scholars focus on the potential harm that may come because of sharing their location. Tsai et al. surveyed people about perceived risks and found that fear of potential stalkers is one of the biggest barriers to adopting location-sharing services [ 89 ]. Nevertheless, studies have also found that many individuals believe that the benefits of using location sharing outweigh the hypothetical costs. Foursquare users have expressed fears that strangers could use the application to stalk them [ 78 ]. These concerns may explain why users share their location more often with close relationships [ 37 ].

Geotagging is another area of privacy concern for online users. Geotagging is when media (photo, website, QR codes) contain metadata with geographical information. More often the information is longitudinal and latitudinal coordinates, but sometimes even time stamps are attached to photos people post. This poses a threat to individuals that post online without realizing that their photos can reveal sensitive information. For example, one study assessed Craigslist postings and demonstrated how they could extract location and hours a person would likely be home based on a photo the individual listed [ 90 ]. The study even pinpointed the exact home address of a celebrity TV host based on their posted Twitter photos. Researchers point out how many users are unaware that their physical safety is at risk when they post photos of themselves or indicate they are on vacation [ 22 , 90 , 91 ]. Doing so may make them easy targets for robbers or stalkers to know when and where to find them.

3.5 Privacy Paradox

While researchers have investigated these various privacy attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors, the privacy paradox (where behavior does not match with stated privacy concerns) has been especially salient on social media [ 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 , 96 , 97 ]. As a result, much research focuses on understanding the decision-making process behind self-disclosure [ 98 ]. Scholars that view disclosure as a result of weighing the costs and the benefits of disclosing information use the term “privacy calculus” to characterize this process [ 99 ]. Other research draws on the theory of bounded rationality to explain how people’s actions are not fully rational [ 100 ]. They are often guided by heuristic cues which do not necessarily lead them to make the best privacy decisions [ 101 ]. Indeed, a large body of literature has tried to dispel or explain the privacy paradox [ 94 , 102 , 103 ].

4 Reconceptualizing Social Media Privacy as Boundary Regulation

By reconceptualizing privacy in social media as a boundary regulation , we can see that the seeming paradox in privacy is actually a balance between being too open or disclosing too much and being too inaccessible or disclosing too little. The latter can result in social isolation which is privacy regulation gone wrong.

In the context of social media, there are five different types of privacy boundaries that should be considered.

People use various methods of coping with privacy violations , many not tied to disclosing less information.

Drawing from Altman’s theories of privacy in the offline world (see Chap. 2 ), Palen and Dourish describe how, just like in the real world, social media privacy is a boundary regulation process along various dimensions besides just disclosure [ 104 ]. Privacy can also involve regulating interactional boundaries with friends or followers online and the level of accessibility one desires to those people. For example, if a Facebook user wants to limit the people that can post on their wall, they can exclude certain people. Research has identified other threats to interpersonal boundary regulation that arise out of the unique nature of social media [ 42 ]. First, as mentioned previously, the threat to spatial boundaries occurs because our audiences are obscured so that we no longer have a good sense of whom we may be interacting with. Second, temporal boundaries are blurred because any interaction may now occur asynchronously at some time in the future due to the virtual persistence of data. Third, multiple interpersonal spaces are merging and overlapping in a way that has caused a “steady erosion of clearly situated action” [ 5 ]. Since each space may have different and, at times, mutually exclusive behavioral requirements, acting accordingly within those spaces has become more of a challenge to manage context collapses [ 42 ]. Along with these problems, a major interpersonal boundary regulation challenge is that social media environments often take control of boundary regulation away from the end users. For instance, Facebook’s popular “Timeline” automatically (based on an obscure algorithm) broadcasts an individual’s content and interactions to all of his or her friends [ 41 ]. Thus, Facebook users struggle to keep up to date on how to manage interactions within these spaces as Facebook, not the end user, controls what is shared with whom.

4.1 Boundary Regulation on Social Media

One conceptualization of privacy that has become popular in the recent literature is viewing privacy on social media as a form of interpersonal boundary regulation. These scholars have characterized privacy as finding the optimal or appropriate level of privacy rather than the act of withholding self-disclosures. That is, it is just as important to avoid over disclosing as it is to avoid under disclosing. Therefore, disclosure is considered a boundary that must be regulated so that it is not too much or too little. Petronio’s communication privacy management (CPM) theory emphasizes how disclosing information (see Chap. 2 ) is vital for building relationships, creating closeness, and creating intimacy [ 105 ]. Thus, social isolation and loneliness resulting from under disclosure can be outcomes of privacy regulation gone wrong just as much as social crowding can be an issue. Similarly, the framework of contextual integrity explains that context-relative informational norms define privacy expectations and appropriate information flows and so a disclosure in one context (such as your doctor asking you for your personal medical details) may be perfectly appropriate in that context but not in another (such as your employer asking you for your personal medical details) [ 106 ]. Here it is not just about an information disclosure boundary but about a relationship boundary where the appropriate disclosure depends on the relationship between the discloser and the recipient.

Drawing on Altman’s theory of boundary regulation, Wisniewski et al. created a useful taxonomy detailing the various types of privacy boundaries that are relevant for managing one’s privacy on social media [ 107 ]. They identified five distinct privacy boundaries relevant to social media:

Relationship . This involves regulating who is in one’s social network as well as appropriate interactions for each relationship type.

Network . This consists of regulating access to one’s social connections as well as interactions between those connections.

Territorial . This has to do with regulating what content comes in for personal consumption and what is available in interactional spaces.

Disclosure . The literature commonly focuses on this aspect which consists of regulating what personal and co-owned information is disclosed to one’s social network.

Interactional . This applies to regulating potential interaction with those within and outside of one’s social network.

Of these boundary types, Wisniewski et al. emphasize the most important is maintaining relationship boundaries between people. Similarly, Child and Petronio note that “one of the most obvious issues emerging from the impact of social network site use is the challenge of drawing boundary lines that denote where relationships begin and end” [ 108 ]. Making sure that social media facilitates behavior appropriate to each of the user’s relationships is a major challenge.

Each of these interpersonal boundaries can be further classified into regulation of more fine-grained dimensions. In Table 7.1 , we summarize the different ways that each of these five interpersonal boundaries can be regulated on social media.

Next, we describe each of these interpersonal boundaries in more detail.

Self- and Confidant Disclosures

The information disclosure concerns described in the previous “Privacy Challenges” section are the focus of privacy around disclosure boundaries. Posting norms on social media platforms often encourage the disclosure of one’s personal information (e.g., age, sexual orientation, location, personal images) [ 109 , 110 ]. Disclosing such information can leave one open to financial, personal, and professional risks such as identity theft [ 46 , 111 ]. However, there are motivations for disclosing personal information. For example, research suggests that posting behaviors on social media platforms have a significant relationship with a desire for positive self-presentation [ 112 , 113 ]. Privacy management is necessary for balancing the benefits of disclosure and its associated risks. This involves regulating both self-disclosure for information about one’s self and confidant-disclosure boundaries for information that is “co-owned” with others [ 105 ] (e.g., a photograph that includes other people, or information about oneself that is shared with another in confidence).

There are a variety of disclosure boundary regulation mechanisms on social media interfaces. Many platforms offer users the freedom to selectively share various types of information, create personal biographies, share links to their websites, or post their birthday. Self-disclosure can also be maintained through privacy settings such as granular control over who has access to specific posts. The level of information one wishes to disclose could be managed by various privacy settings. Many social media platforms encourage multiparty participation with features such as tagging, subtweeting, or replying to others’ posts. This level of engagement promotes the celebration of shared moments or co-owned information/content. At the same time, it increases possibilities for breaching confidentiality and can create unwanted situations such as posting congratulations to a pregnancy that has not yet been announced to most family members or friends. Some ways that people manage violations of disclosure boundaries are to reactively confront the violator in private or to stop using the platform after the unexpected disclosure [ 114 ].

Relationship Connection and Context

Relationship boundaries have to do with who the user accepts into his or her “friend group” and consequently shapes the nature of online interactions within a person’s social network. Social media platforms have embedded the idea of “friend-based privacy” where information and interactional access is primarily dependent on one’s connections. The structure of one’s network can affect the level of engagement and the types of disclosures made on a platform. Individuals with more open relationship boundaries may have higher instances of weak ties compared to others who may employ stricter rules for including people into their inner circles. For example, studies have found people who engage in “hyper-adding,” namely, adding a significant number of persons to their network which could result in a higher distribution of “weak ties” [ 53 , 82 ].

After users accept friends and make connections, they must manage overlapping contexts such as work, family, or acquaintances. This leads to the types of privacy issues discussed under “Context Collapse” in the previous “Privacy Challenges” section. Research shows that boundary violations are hardly remedied by blocking or unfriending unless in extreme cases [ 115 ]. Furthermore, users rarely organize their friends into groups (and some social media platforms do not offer that functionality) [ 114 ]. People are either unaware of the feature, think it takes too much time, or are concerned that the wrong person would still see their information. As a result, users often feel they have to sacrifice being authentic online to control their privacy.

Network Discovery and Interaction

An individual’s social media network is often public knowledge, and there are advantages and disadvantages of having friends being aware of one’s social connections (aka friends list or followers). Network boundary mechanisms enable people to identify groups of people and manage interactions between the various groups. We highlight two types of network boundaries, namely, network discovery and network intersection boundaries. First, network discovery boundaries are primarily centered around the act of regulating the type of access others have to one’s network connections. Implementing an open approach to network discovery boundaries may create problems that may arise including competition as competitors within the same industry could steal clients by carefully selecting from a publicly facing friend list. Another issue arises when a person’s friend does not have a good reputation and that connection is negatively received by others within that social group. Sometimes the result is positive, for example, when friends or family find they have mutual connections, thus building social capital. Some social media platforms offer the ability to hide friend groups from everyone.

Network intersection boundaries involve the regulation of the interactions among different friend groups within one’s social network. Social media users have expressed the benefits of engaging in discourse online with people who they may not personally know offline [ 116 ]. In contrast, clashes within one’s friend list due to opposing political views or personal stances could create tensions that would make moderating a post difficult. These boundaries could be harder to control and sometimes lead to conflict if one is forced to choose which friends can participate in discussions.

Inward- and Outward-Facing Territories

Territorial boundaries include “places and objects in the environment” to indicate “ownership, possession, and occasional active defense” [ 117 ]. Within social media, there are features that are either inward-facing territories or outward-facing territories. Inward-facing territories are commonly characterized as spaces where users could find updates on their friends and see the content their connections were posting (such as the “news feed” on Facebook or “updates” on LinkedIn). To control their inward-facing territories, individuals could hide posts from specific people, adjust their privacy settings, and use filters to find specific information.

These territories are constantly being updated with photos, videos, and news articles that are personalized and not public facing which contributes to an overall low priority for territorial management [ 114 ]. Most choose to ignore content that is irrelevant to them rather than employing privacy features. In addition, once privacy features are used to hide content from particular friends, users rarely revisit that decision to reconsider including content within that territory from that person.

It is important to note that the key characteristic of outward-facing territory management is the regulation of potentially unsatisfactory interactions rather than a fear of information exposure. One example of an outward-facing territory is Facebook’s wall/timeline, where a person’s friend may contribute to your social media presence. Outward-facing territories fall between a public and private place, which creates more risk of unintended boundary violations. Altman argues that “because of their semipublic quality [outward-facing territories] often have unclear rules regarding their use and are susceptible to encroachment by a variety of users, sometimes inappropriately and sometimes predisposing to social conflict” [ 117 ]. Similar to confidant disclosure described above, connections may post (unwanted) content on a user’s wall that could lead to turbulence if that content is later deleted.

Interactional Disabling and Blocking

Interactional boundaries limit the need for other boundary regulations discussed because a person reduces access to oneself by disabling features [ 114 ]. For example, a user may deactivate Facebook Messenger to avoid receiving messages but reactivate the app when they deem that interaction to be welcomed. In a similar regard, disabling semipublic features of the interface (such as the wall on Facebook) could assist users in having a greater sense of control. This manifestation of interaction withdrawal is typically not directed at reducing interaction with a specific person; rather, it may be motivated by a high desire to control one’s online spaces. As such, disabling features are associated with perceptions of mistrust within one’s network and a desire to limit interruptions [ 115 ]. On the more extreme end, blocking could also be employed to regulate interactional boundaries. Unlike other withdrawal mechanisms such as disabling your wall, picture tagging, or chat, blocking is inherently targeted. The act represents the rejection and revocation of access to oneself from a particular party. Some social media platforms allow users to block other people or pages, meaning that the blocked person may not contact or interact with the user in any form. Generally, blocking a person results from a negative experience such as stalking or being bombarded with unwanted content [ 118 ].

4.2 Coping with Social Media Privacy Violations

Overtime, many social media platforms have implemented new privacy features that attempt to address evolving privacy risks and users’ need for more granular control online. While this effort is commendable, Ellison et al. argue that “privacy behaviors on social networking sites are not limited to privacy settings” [ 41 ]. Thus, social media users still venture outside the realm of privacy settings to achieve appropriate levels of social interactions. Coping mechanisms can be viewed as behaviors utilized to maintain or regain interpersonal boundaries [ 107 ]. Although these coping approaches may often be suboptimal, Wisniewski et al.’s framework of coping strategies for maintaining one’s privacy provides insight into the struggles many social media users face in maintaining these boundaries.

This approach is often defined as the “reduction of intensity of inputs” [ 117 ]. Filtering includes selecting whom one will accept into their online social circle and is often used in the management of relational boundaries. Filtering techniques may include relying on social cues (e.g., viewing the profile picture or examining mutual friends) before confirming the addition of a new connection. Other methods leverage non-privacy-related features that are repurposed to manage interactions based on relation context, for example, creating multiple accounts on the same platform to separate professional connections from personal friends.

The vast amount of information on social media could easily become overwhelming and difficult to consume. Therefore, social media users may opt to ignore posts or skim through information to decide which ones should receive priority for engagement. Ignoring is most common for inward-facing territories such as your “Feed” page. The overreliance on this approach might increase the chances of missing critical moments that connections shared.

Blocking is a more extreme approach to interactional boundary management compared to filtering and ignoring, which contributes to lower levels of reported usage [ 119 ]. As an alternative, users have developed other technology-supported mechanisms that would allow them to avoid unwanted interactions. As an example, Wisniewski et al. describe using pseudonyms on Facebook to make it more difficult to find a user on the platform [ 107 ]. Another method for blocking unwanted interactions is to use the account of a close friend or loved one to enjoy the benefits of the content on the platform without the hassle of expected interactions. Page et al. highlight this type of secondary use for those who avoid social media because of social anxieties, harassment, and other social barriers [ 120 ].

When some users feel they are losing control, they withdraw from social media by doing one of the following: deleting their account, censoring their posts, or avoiding confrontation. As a result, a common technique is limiting or adjusting the information shared (even avoiding posts that may be received negatively) [ 121 ]. Das and Kramer found that “people with more boundaries to regulate censor more; people who exercise more control over their audience censor more content; and, users with more politically and age diverse friends censor less, in general” [ 122 ]. Withdrawal suggests that some users think the risks outweigh the benefits of social media.

Unlike offensive coping mechanisms such as filtering, blocking, or withdrawal, social media users resort to more defensive mechanisms when the intention is to create interactions that may be confrontational. Aggressive behavior is displayed when the goal is to seek revenge or garner attention from specific people or groups. Some users may choose to exploit subliminal references in their posts to indirectly address or offend specific persons (e.g., an ex-partner, coworker, family member).

Compliance is giving in to pressures (external or internal) and adjusting one’s interpersonal boundary preferences for others. Altman describes this as “repeated failures to achieve a balance between achieved and desired levels of privacy” [ 117 ]. Relinquishing one’s interactional privacy needs to accommodate pressures of disclosure, nondisclosure, or friending preferences could result in a perceived loss of control over social interactions.

A healthy strategy for managing social media boundary violations is communicating with the other person involved and finding a resolution. Prior work indicates that most users that compromise do so offline [ 107 ]. These compromises are mostly with closer friends who the user can contact through email, phone call, or messaging. These more private scenarios avoid other people becoming involved online. Also, many compromises are about tagging someone in photos or sharing personal information about another user (i.e., confidant disclosure).

In addition to this coping framework for social media privacy, Stutzman examined the creation of multiple profiles on social media websites, primarily Facebook, as an information regulation mechanism. Through grounded theory, he identified three types of information boundary regulation within this context (pseudonymity, practical obscurity, and transparent separations) and four overarching motives for these mechanisms (privacy, identity, utility, and propriety) [ 71 ]. Lampinen et al. created a framework of strategies for managing private versus public disclosures. It defined three dimensions by which strategies differed: behavioral vs. mental, individual vs. collaborative, and preventative vs. corrective [ 71 , 123 ]. The various coping frameworks conceptualize privacy as a process of interpersonal boundary regulation. However, they do not solve the problem of managing privacy on these platforms. They do attempt to model the complexity of privacy management in a way that better reflects the complex nature of interpersonal relationships rather than as a matter of withholding versus disclosing private information.

5 Addressing Privacy Challenges

Rather than just measuring privacy concerns, researchers and designers should focus on understanding attitudes towards boundary regulation. Validated tools for measuring boundary preservation concern and boundary enhancement expectations are provided in this chapter.

Privacy features need to be designed to account for individual differences in how they are perceived and used. While some feel features like untag, unfriend, and delete are useful, others are worried about how using such features will impact their relationships.

Unaddressed privacy concerns can serve as a barrier to using social media. It is crucial to design for not only functional privacy concerns (e.g., being overloaded by information, guarding from inappropriate data access) but social privacy concerns as well (e.g., unwelcome interactions, pressures surrounding appropriate self-presentation).

This section describes how to better identify privacy concerns by measuring them from a boundary regulation perspective. We also emphasize the importance of individual differences when designing privacy features. Finally, we elaborate on a crucial set of social privacy issues that we feel are a priority to address. While many social media users may feel these types of social pressures to some degree, these problems have pushed some of society’s most vulnerable to complete abandonment of social media despite their desire for social connection. We call on social media designers and researchers to focus on these problems which are a side effect of the technologies we have created.

5.1 Understanding People and Their Privacy Concerns

Understanding social media privacy as a boundary regulation allows us to better conceptualize people’s attitudes and behaviors. It helps us anticipate their concerns and balance between too little or too much privacy. However, many existing tools for measuring privacy come from the information privacy perspective [ 124 , 125 , 126 ] and focus on data collection by organizations, errors, secondary use, or technical control of data. In detailing the various types of privacy boundaries that are relevant for managing one’s privacy on social media, Wisniewski et al. [ 114 ] emphasized that the most important is maintaining relationship boundaries between people.

Page et al. [ 86 , 127 ] similarly found that concerns about damaging relationship boundaries are actually at the root of low-level privacy concerns such as worrying about who sees what, being too accessible, or being bothered or bothering others by sharing too much information. For instance, a typically cited privacy concern such as being worried about a stranger knowing one’s current location turns out to be a privacy concern only if an individual expects that a stranger might violate typical relationship expectations. Their research revealed that many people were unconcerned about strangers knowing their location and explained that no one would care enough to use that information to come find them. They did not expect anyone to violate relationship boundaries and so were privacy unconcerned. On the other hand, those who felt there was a likelihood of someone using their location for nefarious purposes were privacy concerned. Social media enabling a negative change in relationship boundaries and the types of interactions that are now possible (such as strangers now being able to locate me) drives privacy concerns.

In fact, while scholars have used many lower-level privacy concerns such as being worried about sharing information to predict social media usage and adoption, they have met with mixed success leading to the commonly observed privacy paradox. However, research shows that preserving one’s relationship boundaries is at the root of these low-level online privacy concerns (e.g., informational, psychological, interactional, and physical privacy concerns) and is a significant predictor of social media usage [ 86 , 127 ]. In other words, concerns about social media damaging one’s relationships (aka relationship boundary regulation) are what drives privacy concerns.

5.2 Measuring Privacy Concerns

Boundary regulation plays a key role in maintaining the right level of privacy on social media, but how do we evaluate whether a platform is adequately supporting it? A popular scale for testing users’ awareness of secondary access is the Internet Users’ Information Privacy Concerns (IUIPC) scale, which measures their perceptions of collection, control, and awareness of user data [ 125 ]. An important finding is that users “want to know and have control over their information stored in marketers’ databases.” This indicates that social media should be designed such that people know where their data goes. However, throughout this chapter, it is evident that research on social media privacy has found concerns about social privacy more salient. In fact, the focus on relationship boundaries is a key privacy boundary to consider and measure in evaluating privacy concerns. Thus, having a scale to measure relationship boundary regulation would allow researchers and designers to better evaluate social media privacy.

Here we present validated relationship boundary regulation survey items developed by Page et al. which predict adoption and usage for various social media including Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram, and location-sharing social media [ 127 , 128 ]. These survey items can be used to evaluate privacy concerns for use of existing social media platforms, as well as capturing attitudes about new features or platforms. The survey items capture attitudes about one’s ability to regulate relationship boundaries when using a social media platform and are administered with a 7-point Likert scale (−3 = Disagree Completely, −2 = Disagree Mostly, −1 Disagree Slightly, 0 = Neither agree nor disagree, 1 = Agree Slightly, 2 = Agree Mostly, 3 = Agree Completely). These items measure both concerns and positive expectations.

When evaluating a new or existing social media platform, the relationship boundary preservation concern (BPC) items can be used to gauge user’s concerns about harming their relationships. A higher score would indicate that more support for privacy management is needed on a given platform. The relationship boundary enhancement expectation (BEE) items can also be used to evaluate whether users expect that using the platform will improve the user’s relationships. A high score is important to driving adoption and usage – having low concerns alone is not enough to drive usage. Along similar lines, even if users have high concerns, they may be counteracted by a perceived high level of benefits and so users remain frequent users of a platform. For instance, Facebook, one of the most widely used platforms, was shown to both invoke high levels of concern as well as high levels of enhancement expectation [ 127 ]. However, note that high frequency of use does not necessarily mean high levels of engagement (e.g., posting, commenting) or that users do not employ suboptimal workarounds (e.g., being vague in their posts) [ 81 ]. On the other hand, Twitter has a higher level of concerns compared to perceived enhancement and, accordingly, lower levels of usage [ 127 ].

In the validation studies, the set of survey items representing BPC were treated as a scale and factor analysis used to compute a single score. Similarly, the ones representing BEE were used to generate a single factor score to represent that construct. These could be used to evaluate new features or platforms in the lab or after deployment. For instance, after performing tasks on a new feature or platform, the user can answer these questions and the designer can compare the responses between different designs in A/B testing, or to predict usage frequency and adoption intentions (e.g., see [ 127 , 129 ] for detailed examples). Moreover, by correlating BPC or BEE with demographics or other customer segmentations (e.g., age, whether they are new customers, purpose for using the platform), product designers may be able to identify attitudes that are connected with certain segments of their customer base and address it directly.

5.3 Designing Privacy Features

When designing for privacy features, a crucial aspect to consider is individual differences. Privacy is not one-size-fits-all: there are many variations in how people feel, what they expect, and how they behave. Because social media connects individuals with diverse needs and expectations, and from a myriad of contexts, a necessity in addressing social media privacy is understanding individual differences in privacy attitudes and behaviors. Many individual differences have been identified that shape privacy needs and preferences [ 15 ] and behaviors [ 6 , 24 , 99 ].

Scholars have established that privacy as a construct is not limited to informational privacy (i.e., understanding the flow of data) but also includes social privacy concerns that may be more interactional (e.g., accessibility) or psychological in nature (e.g., self-presentation) [ 111 , 130 ]. Thus, a host of attitudes and experiences could shape an individual’s view on what it means to have privacy online. For example, people’s preferences for privacy tools could be heavily influenced by the type of data being shared or the recipient of that data [ 36 , 131 , 132 ]. Likewise, prior experiences (negative or positive) could shape how people interact online which could affect disclosure [ 133 ]. Context and relevance have also been found to significantly influence privacy behavior online. Drawing from the contextual integrity framework, many researchers argue that when people perceive data collection to be reasonable or appropriate, they are more likely to share information [ 134 ]. On the other hand, research has shown that when faced with uncomfortable scenarios, people employ privacy protective behaviors such as nondisclosure or falsifying information [ 135 ]. Research has also pointed to personal characteristics that could shape digital privacy behavior such as personality, culture, gender, age, and social norms [ 64 , 106 , 136 , 137 , 138 , 139 , 140 ].

While identifying concerns about damaging one’s relationships is important to measure, understanding the individual differences that can lead someone to be concerned can provide insight into addressing these concerns. For instance, through a series of investigations, Page et al. uncovered a communication style that predicts concerns about preserving relationship boundaries on many different social media platforms [ 127 , 128 , 129 ]. This communication style is characterized by wanting to put information out there so that the individual does not need to proactively inform others. Those who prefer an FYI (For Your Information) communication style are less concerned about relationship boundary preservation and, as a result, exhibit higher levels of engagement, interactions, and use of social media than low FYI communicators. For example, the survey items that capture an FYI communication style preference for location-sharing social media are: “I want the people I know to be aware of my location, without having to bother to tell them,” “I would prefer to make my location available to the people I know, so that they can see it whenever they need it,” and “The people I know should be able to get my location whenever they feel they need it.” Each item is administered with a 7-point Likert scale (Disagree strongly, Disagree moderately, Disagree slightly, Neutral, Agree slightly, Agree moderately, Agree strongly). For other social media platforms, the information type is adjusted (i.e., “what I’m up to” instead of “my location”).

Consequently, this raises concern over implications for non-FYI communicators since the design of major social media platforms is catered to FYI communicators [ 127 , 128 ]. Drawing on this insight, Page demonstrated how considering the user’s communication style when designing location-sharing social media interfaces can alleviate boundary preservation concerns [ 129 ]. Certain design choices such as choosing a request-based location-sharing interaction can lower concerns for non-FYI communicators, while continuous location-sharing and check-in type interactions that are typical in social media may be fine for FYI communicators.

This demonstrates that researchers should consider in the design of social media individual differences that affect privacy attitudes. Another individual difference in attitudes towards privacy features is a user’s apprehension that using common features such as untag, delete, or unfriend/unfollow can act as a hindrance in their relationships with others. Page et al. identified that while many use privacy features and perceive them as a tool useful for protecting their privacy, there are also many who are concerned about how using privacy features could hurt their relationships with others (e.g., being worried about offending others by untagging or unfriending) [ 81 ]. Instead, those individuals would use alternative privacy management tactics such as vaguebooking (not sharing specific details and using vague posts). Designers need to be aware that privacy features also need to be catered to individual variations in attitudes as well or else they may be ineffective and unused by certain segments of the user population.

5.4 Privacy Concerns and Social Disenfranchisement

A significant amount of research within the domain of social media nonuse has been focused on functional barriers that hinder adoption. In many cases, nonuse is traced to a lack of access (e.g., limited access to technology, financial resources, or the Internet). However, the push against adoption and subsequent usage can be voluntary [ 141 ] due to functional privacy concerns such as concerns about data breaches, information overload, or annoying posts [ 120 ]. Several social media companies have also implemented features such as time limits to help users counter overuse [ 142 ].

Likewise, it is equally important to consider social barriers that prevent social media engagement for people who really could use the social connection. Sharing about distressing experiences can be beneficial and reduce stigma, improve connection and interpersonal relationships with one’s network, and enhance well-being [ 6 , 7 , 143 , 144 ]. However, Page et al. identified a class of barriers that highlight social privacy concerns rooted in social anxiety or concerns about being overly influenced by others on social media. This is in contrast to the prior school of thought that focused primarily on functional motivations as barriers that influence nonuse (see Fig. 7.1 ) [ 120 ]. They point out that many who are already vulnerable avoid social media due to social barriers such as online harassment or paralysis over making decisions pertaining to online social interactions. Yet, they are also the ones who could benefit greatly from social connection and who end up losing touch with friends and social support by being off social media. They term this lose-lose situation of negative social consequences that arise when using social media as well as consequences from not using it, social disenfranchisement . They call on designers to address such social barriers and to realize that in designing the user experience to connect users so well, they are implicitly designing the nonuser experience of being left out. Given that social media usage may not always be a viable option, designers should design to alleviate the negative consequences of nonuse.

Extension of Wyatt’s frame that divided nonusers along the dimensions of whether someone has used the technology in the past and the motivation for adoption (extrinsic, e.g., organizationally imposed, versus intrinsic, e.g., desire to communicate through technology). Page et al. differentiate between functional motivations/barriers of use (which has been the focus of much research) versus social motivations/barriers to use. Other frameworks consider additional temporal states of adoption (whether they are currently using and whether they will in the future). See [ 120 ] for more detailed descriptions

5.5 Guidelines for Designing Privacy-Sensitive Social Media

Now that you have learned about various privacy problems related to social media use, how do you apply that to designing or studying social media? Here are some practical guidelines.

Identifying Privacy Attitudes

Measuring privacy attitudes is a tricky task. Using existing informational privacy scales, users often say they are concerned, but this does not end up matching their actual behavior. By approaching it from a boundary regulation perspective, it will be easier to identify the proper balance between sharing too much and sharing too little. The survey items described in this chapter offer a way to measure concerns about boundary regulation as well as positive expectations. Considering both are key to more accurately predicting user behaviors.

Understanding Your Target Population

Some key characteristics are described in this chapter. Identifying these in your target population can help you be aware of individual differences that might affect privacy preferences on social media. When you are measuring privacy concerns, matching the preferences of your audience makes it more likely that they will have a good user experience. Pay particular attention to traits that have been identified as being related to usage and adoption of social media platforms, such as the FYI communication style which can be measured using the survey items provided in this chapter.

Evaluating Privacy Features

Focus on understanding whether users perceive your privacy features as useful or perhaps as posing a relational hindrance. The survey items provided in this chapter can help you do so. When anticipating privacy needs of your social media users, make sure you identify features that may impact boundary regulation both positively and negatively. You can compare attitudes between the existing feature and the newer version of the feature that will/has been deployed. You can also correlate attitudes towards privacy features with individual characteristics – some subpopulation of users may see privacy features as useful, while others may consider them a relational hindrance.

6 Chapter Summary

Social media has been widely adopted and quickly become an integral part of social, personal, economic, political, professional, and instrumental welfare. Understanding how mediated social interactions change the assumptions around audience management, disclosure, and self-presentation is key to working towards reconciling offline privacy assumptions with new realities. Moreover, given the rapidly changing landscape of widely available social media platforms, researchers and designers need to continually re-evaluate the privacy implications of new services, features, and interaction modalities.

With the rise of networked individualism, an especially strong emphasis must be placed on understanding individual characteristics and traits that can shape a user’s privacy expectations and needs. Given the inherently social nature of social media, understanding social norms and the influence of larger cultural and structural factors is also important for interpreting expectations of privacy and the significance around various social media behaviors.

Privacy does not have a one-size-fits-all solution. It is a normative construct that is context dependent and can change over time, from culture to culture, and person to person. It needs to be weighed across different individuals and against other important goals and values of the larger group or society. Because people and their social interactions can be complex, designing for social media privacy is usually not a straightforward task. However, the consequences of not addressing privacy issues can range from irritating to devastating. Using this chapter as a guide and taking the steps to think through privacy needs and expectations of your social media users is an integral part of designing for social media.

Quan-Haase, Anabel, and Alyson L. Young. 2010. Uses and gratifications of social media: A comparison of Facebook and instant messaging. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 30 (5): 350–361.

Article   Google Scholar  

Gruzd, Anatoliy, Drew Paulin, and Caroline Haythornthwaite. 2016. Analyzing social media and learning through content and social network analysis: A faceted methodological approach. Journal of Learning Analytics 3 (3): 46–71.

Yang, Huining. 2020. Secondary-school Students’ Perspectives of Utilizing Tik Tok for English learning in and beyond the EFL classroom. In 2020 3rd International Conference on Education Technology and Social Science (ETSS 2020) , 163–183.

Google Scholar  

Van Dijck, José. 2012. Facebook as a tool for producing sociality and connectivity. Television & New Media 13 (2): 160–176.

Grudin, Jonathan. 2001. Desituating action: Digital representation of context. Human–Computer Interaction 16 (2–4): 269–286.

Andalibi, Nazanin, Oliver L. Haimson, Munmun De Choudhury, and Andrea Forte. 2016. Understanding social media disclosures of sexual abuse through the lenses of support seeking and anonymity. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems , 3906–3918.

Andalibi, Nazanin, Pinar Ozturk, and Andrea Forte. 2017. Sensitive self-disclosures, responses, and social support on Instagram: The case of #depression. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing , 1485–1500.

Lin, Han, William Tov, and Qiu Lin. 2014. Emotional disclosure on social networking sites: The role of network structure and psychological needs. Computers in Human Behavior 41: 342–350.

Burke, Moira, Cameron Marlow, and Thomas Lento. 2010. Social network activity and social well-being. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems , ACM, 1909–1912.

Ellison, Nicole B., Charles Steinfield, and Cliff Lampe. 2007. The benefits of Facebook “Friends:” Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (4): 1143–1168.

———. 2011. Connection strategies: social capital implications of Facebook-enabled communication practices. New Media & Society 13 (6): 873–892.

Koroleva, Ksenia, Hanna Krasnova, Natasha Veltri, and Oliver Günther. 2011. It’s all about networking! Empirical investigation of social capital formation on social network sites. In ICIS 2011 Proceedings .

Fischer-Hübner, Simone, Julio Angulo, Farzaneh Karegar, and Tobias Pulls. 2016. Transparency, privacy and trust–technology for tracking and controlling my data disclosures: Does this work? In IFIP International Conference on Trust Management , Springer, 3–14.

Xu, Heng, Hock-Hai Teo, Bernard C.Y. Tan, and Ritu Agarwal. 2012. Research note-effects of individual self-protection, industry self-regulation, and government regulation on privacy concerns: A study of location-based services. Information Systems Research 23 (4): 1342–1363.

Boyd, Danah. 2002. Faceted Id/Entity: Managing Representation in a Digital World . Retrieved August 14, 2020 from https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/39401 .

Boyd, Danah M., and Nicole B. Ellison. 2007. Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13 (1): 210–230.

Dwyer, C., S.R. Hiltz, M.S. Poole, et al. 2010. Developing reliable measures of privacy management within social networking sites. In System Sciences (HICSS), 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on , 1–10.

Hargittai, E. 2007. Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13: 1.

Tufekci, Zeynep. 2008. Grooming, Gossip, Facebook and Myspace. Information, Communication & Society 11 (4): 544–564.

Kane, Gerald C., Maryam Alavi, Giuseppe Joe Labianca, and Stephen P. Borgatti. 2014. What’s different about social media networks? A framework and research agenda. MIS Quarterly 38 (1): 275–304.

Pew Research Center. 2019. Social Media Fact Sheet . Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Technology. Retrieved November 27, 2020 from https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/social-media/ .

Fire, M., R. Goldschmidt, and Y. Elovici. 2014. Online social networks: Threats and solutions. IEEE Communications Surveys Tutorials 16 (4): 2019–2036.

Social Media Users. DataReportal – Global Digital Insights . Retrieved March 16, 2021 from https://datareportal.com/social-media-users .

Alalwan, Ali Abdallah, Nripendra P. Rana, Yogesh K. Dwivedi, and Raed Algharabat. 2017. Social media in marketing: A review and analysis of the existing literature. Telematics and Informatics 34 (7): 1177–1190.

Binns, Reuben, Jun Zhao, Max Van Kleek, and Nigel Shadbolt. 2018. Measuring third-party tracker power across web and mobile. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology 18 (4): 52:1–52:22.

Barnard, Lisa. 2014. The cost of creepiness: How online behavioral advertising affects consumer purchase intention.

Dolin, Claire, Ben Weinshel, Shawn Shan, et al. 2018. Unpacking perceptions of data-driven inferences underlying online targeting and personalization. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems , ACM, 493.

Ur, Blase, Pedro Giovanni Leon, Lorrie Faith Cranor, Richard Shay, and Yang Wang. 2012. Smart, useful, scary, creepy: Perceptions of online behavioral advertising. In Proceedings of the eighth symposium on usable privacy and security , ACM, 4.

Dogruel, Leyla. 2019. Too much information!? Examining the impact of different levels of transparency on consumers’ evaluations of targeted advertising. Communication Research Reports 36 (5): 383–392.

Hamilton, Isobel Asher, and Dean Grace. Signal downloads skyrocketed 4,200% after WhatsApp announced it would force users to share personal data with Facebook. It’s top of both Google and Apple’s app stores. Business Insider . Retrieved February 1, 2021 from https://www.businessinsider.com/whatsapp-facebook-data-signal-download-telegram-encrypted-messaging-2021-1 .

Wilkinson, Daricia, Moses Namara, Karishma Patil, Lijie Guo, Apoorva Manda, and Bart Knijnenburg. 2021. The Pursuit of Transparency and Control: A Classification of Ad Explanations in Social Media .

Lee, Rainie, and Barry Wellman. 2012. Networked . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Dunbar, Robin. 2011. How many" friends" can you really have? IEEE Spectrum 48 (6): 81–83.

Carr, Caleb T., and Rebecca A. Hayes. 2015. Social media: Defining, developing, and divining. Atlantic Journal of Communication 23 (1): 46–65.

Xu, Heng, Tamara Dinev, H. Smith, and Paul Hart. 2008. Examining the Formation of Individual’s Privacy Concerns: Toward an Integrative View.

Consolvo, Sunny, Ian E Smith, Tara Matthews, Anthony LaMarca, Jason Tabert, and Pauline Powledge. 2005. Location disclosure to social relations: Why, when, & what people want to share. 10.

Wiese, Jason, Patrick Gage Kelley, Lorrie Faith Cranor, Laura Dabbish, Jason I. Hong, and John Zimmerman. 2011. Are you close with me? Are you nearby?: Investigating social groups, closeness, and willingness to share. UbiComp 10.

Xu, Heng, and Sumeet Gupta. 2009. The effects of privacy concerns and personal innovativeness on potential and experienced customers’ adoption of location-based services. Electronic Markets 19 (2–3): 137–149.

Acquisti, A., and R. Gross. 2006. Imagined communities: Awareness, information sharing, and privacy on the Facebook. Privacy Enhancing Technologies : 36–58.

Debatin, Bernhard, Jennette P. Lovejoy, Ann-Kathrin Horn, and Brittany N. Hughes. 2009. Facebook and online privacy: Attitudes, behaviors, and unintended consequences. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 15 (1): 83–108.

Ellison, Nicole B., Jessica Vitak, Charles Steinfield, Rebecca Gray, and Cliff Lampe. 2011. Negotiating privacy concerns and social capital needs in a social media environment. In Privacy Online: Perspectives on Privacy and Self-Disclosure in the Social Web , ed. S. Trepte and L. Reinecke, 19–32. Berlin: Springer.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Tufekci, Z. 2008. Can You See Me Now? Audience and Disclosure Regulation in Online Social Network Sites . Retrieved January 29, 2021 from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0270467607311484 .

Ayalon, Oshrat and Eran Toch. 2013. Retrospective privacy: Managing longitudinal privacy in online social networks. In Proceedings of the Ninth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security – SOUPS ’13 , ACM Press, 1.

Meeder, Brendan, Jennifer Tam, Patrick Gage Kelley, and Lorrie Faith Cranor. 2010. RT @IWantPrivacy: Widespread Violation of Privacy Settings in the Twitter Social Network . 12.

Padyab, Ali, and Tero Pã. Facebook Users Attitudes towards Secondary Use of Personal Information . 20.

van der Schyff, Karl, Stephen Flowerday, and Steven Furnell. 2020. Duplicitous social media and data surveillance: An evaluation of privacy risk. Computers & Security 94: 101822.

Symeonidis, Iraklis, Gergely Biczók, Fatemeh Shirazi, Cristina Pérez-Solà, Jessica Schroers, and Bart Preneel. 2018. Collateral damage of Facebook third-party applications: A comprehensive study. Computers & Security 77: 179–208.

Binder, Jens, Andrew Howes, and Alistair Sutcliffe. 2009. The problem of conflicting social spheres: Effects of network structure on experienced tension in social network sites. In Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Human factors in computing systems – CHI 09 , ACM Press, 965.

Marwick, Alice E., and Danah Boyd. 2011. I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society 13 (1): 114–133.

Sibona, Christopher. 2014. Unfriending on Facebook: Context collapse and unfriending behaviors. In 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences , 1676–1685.

Boyd, Danah Michele. 2004. Friendster and publicly articulated social networking. In Extended Abstracts of the 2004 Conference on Human Factors and Computing Systems – CHI ’04 , ACM Press, 1279.

Brzozowski, Michael J., Tad Hogg, and Gabor Szabo. 2008. Friends and foes: Ideological social networking. In Proceeding of the Twenty-Sixth Annual CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – CHI ’08 , ACM Press, 817.

Boyd, Danah. 2006. Friends, Friendsters, and MySpace Top 8: Writing community into being on social network sites. First Monday .

Vitak, Jessica, Cliff Lampe, Rebecca Gray, and Nicole B Ellison. “Why won’t you be my Facebook friend?”: Strategies for Managing Context Collapse in the Workplace . 3.

Dennen, Vanessa P., Stacey A. Rutledge, Lauren M. Bagdy, Jerrica T. Rowlett, Shannon Burnick, and Sarah Joyce. 2017. Context collapse and student social media networks: Where life and high school collide. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Social Media & Society - #SMSociety17 , ACM Press, 1–5.

Pike, Jacqueline C., Patrick J. Bateman, and Brian S. Butler. 2018. Information from social networking sites: Context collapse and ambiguity in the hiring process. Information Systems Journal 28 (4): 729–758.

Heussner, Ki Mae and Dalia Fahmy. Teacher loses job after commenting about students, parents on Facebook. ABC News . Retrieved November 19, 2020 from https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/facebook-firing-teacher-loses-job-commenting-students-parents/story?id=11437248 .

Torba, Andrew. 2019. High school teacher fired for tweets criticizing illegal immigration. Gab News . Retrieved November 19, 2020 from https://news.gab.com/2019/09/16/high-school-teacher-fired-for-tweets-criticizing-illegal-immigration/ .

Hall, Gaynor, and Courtney Gousman. 2020. Suburban teacher’s social media post sparks outrage, internal investigation | WGN-TV. WGNTV . Retrieved November 19, 2020 from https://wgntv.com/news/chicago-news/suburban-teachers-social-media-post-sparks-outrage-internal-investigation/ .

Davis, Jenny L., and Nathan Jurgenson. 2014. Context collapse: Theorizing context collusions and collisions. Information, Communication & Society 17 (4): 476–485.

Kaul, Asha, and Vidhi Chaudhri. 2018. Do celebrities have it all? Context collapse and the networked publics. Journal of Human Values 24 (1): 1–10.

Donnelly, Erin. 2019. Kim Kardashian mom-shamed over photo of North staring at a phone: “Give her a book.” Yahoo! Entertainment . Retrieved April 11, 2021 from https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/kim-kardashian-mom-shamed-north-west-phone-book-151126429.html .

Sutton, Jeannette, Leysia Palen, and Irina Shklovski. 2008. Backchannels on the Front Lines: Emergent Uses of Social Media in the 2007 Southern California Wildfires . 9.

Litt, Eden. 2012. Knock, knock. Who’s there? The imagined audience. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 56 (3): 330–345.

Litt, Eden, and Eszter Hargittai. 2016. The imagined audience on social network sites. Social Media + Society 2 (1): 2056305116633482.

Li, N., and G. Chen. 2010. Sharing location in online social networks. IEEE Network 24 (5): 20–25.

Stutzman, Fred, and Jacob Kramer-Duffield. 2010. Friends only: Examining a privacy-enhancing behavior in Facebook. In Proceedings of the 28th international conference on Human factors in computing systems – CHI ’10 , ACM Press, 1553.

Jung, Yumi, and Emilee Rader. 2016. The imagined audience and privacy concern on Facebook: Differences between producers and consumers. Social Media + Society 2 (2): 2056305116644615.

Vitak, Jessica. 2015. Balancing Audience and Privacy Tensions on Social Network Sites . 20.

Oolo, Egle, and Andra Siibak. 2013. Performing for one’s imagined audience: Social steganography and other privacy strategies of Estonian teens on networked publics. Institute of Journalism and Communication, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia 7: 1.

Stutzman, Fred, and Woodrow Hartzog. 2012. Boundary Regulation in Social Media . 10.

Pounders, Kathrynn, Christine M. Kowalczyk, and Kirsten Stowers. 2016. Insight into the motivation of selfie postings: Impression management and self-esteem. European Journal of Marketing 50 (9/10): 1879–1892.

Krämer, Nicole C., and Stephan Winter. 2008. Impression Management 2.0: The relationship of self-esteem, extraversion, self-efficacy, and self-presentation within social networking sites. Journal of Media Psychology 20 (3): 106–116.

Duguay, Stefanie. 2016. “He has a way gayer Facebook than I do”: Investigating sexual identity disclosure and context collapse on a social networking site. New Media & Society 18 (6): 891–907.

Tang, Karen P., Jialiu Lin, Jason I. Hong, Daniel P. Siewiorek, and Norman Sadeh. 2010. Rethinking location sharing: Exploring the implications of social-driven vs. purpose-driven location sharing. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing , ACM, 85–94.

Back, Mitja D., Juliane M. Stopfer, Simine Vazire, et al. 2010. Facebook profiles reflect actual personality, not self-idealization. Psychological Science 21 (3): 372–374.

Choi, Tae Rang, and Yongjun Sung. 2018. Instagram versus Snapchat: Self-expression and privacy concern on social media. Telematics and Informatics 35 (8): 2289–2298.

Lindqvist, Janne, Justin Cranshaw, Jason Wiese, Jason Hong, and John Zimmerman. 2011. I’m the mayor of my house: Examining why people use foursquare – a social-driven location sharing application. In Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – CHI ’11 , ACM Press, 2409.

Page, Xinru, Bart P. Knijnenburg, and Alfred Kobsa. 2013. What a tangled web we weave: Lying backfires in location-sharing social media. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work – CSCW ’13 , ACM Press, 273.

Hogg, Tad, and D Wilkinson. 2008. Multiple Relationship Types in Online Communities and Social Networks . 6.

Page, Xinru, Reza Ghaiumy Anaraky, Bart P. Knijnenburg, and Pamela J. Wisniewski. 2019. Pragmatic tool vs. relational hindrance: Exploring why some social media users avoid privacy features. In Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3, CSCW: 1–23.

Fono, D., and K. Raynes-Goldie. 2006. Hyperfriends and beyond: Friendship and social norms on Live Journal. Internet Research Annual .

Zinoviev, Dmitry, and Vy Duong. 2009. Toward understanding friendship in online social networks. arXiv:0902.4658 [cs] .

Smith, Hilary, Yvonne Rogers, and Mark Brady. 2003. Managing one’s social network: Does age make a difference. In Proceedings of the Interact 2003, IOS Press, 551–558.

Ehrlich, Kate, and N. Shami. 2010. Microblogging inside and outside the workplace. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media 4: 1.

Page, Xinru, Alfred Kobsa, and Bart P. Knijnenburg. 2012. Don’t disturb my circles! Boundary preservation is at the center of location-sharing concerns. In Proceedings of the Sixth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media , 266–273.

Iachello, Giovanni, and Jason Hong. 2007. End-user privacy in human-computer interaction. Foundations and Trends in Human-Computer Interaction 1 (1): 1–137.

Article   MATH   Google Scholar  

Bentley, Frank R., and Crysta J. Metcalf. 2008. Location and activity sharing in everyday mobile communication. In Proceeding of the Twenty-Sixth Annual CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems – CHI ’08 , ACM Press, 2453.

Tsai, Janice Y., Patrick Gage Kelley, Lorrie Faith Cranor, and Norman Sadeh. Location-Sharing Technologies: Privacy Risks and Controls . 34.

Friedland, Gerald, and Robin Sommer. 2010. Cybercasing the Joint: On the Privacy Implications of Geo-Tagging . 6.

Stefanidis, Anthony, Andrew Crooks, and Jacek Radzikowski. 2011. Harvesting ambient geospatial information from social media feeds.

Awad, Naveen Farag, and M.S. Krishnan. 2006. The personalization privacy paradox: An empirical evaluation of information transparency and the willingness to be profiled online for personalization. MIS Quarterly 30 (1): 13–28.

Chen, Xi, and Shuo Shi. 2009. A literature review of privacy research on social network sites. In 2009 International Conference on Multimedia Information Networking and Security , IEEE, 93–97.

Gerber, Nina, Paul Gerber, and Melanie Volkamer. 2018. Explaining the privacy paradox: A systematic review of literature investigating privacy attitude and behavior. Computers & Security 77: 226–261.

Houghton, David J., and Adam N. Joinson. 2010. Privacy, social network sites, and social relations. Journal of Technology in Human Services 28 (1–2): 74–94.

Pavlou, Paul A. 2011. State of the information privacy literature: Where are we now and where should we go. MIS Quarterly 35 (4): 977–988.

Xu, Feng, Katina Michael, and Xi Chen. 2013. Factors affecting privacy disclosure on social network sites: An integrated model. Electronic Commerce Research 13 (2): 151–168.

Xu, Heng, Rachida Parks, Chao-Hsien Chu, and Xiaolong Luke Zhang. 2010. Information disclosure and online social networks: From the case of Facebook news feed controversy to a theoretical understanding. AMCIS , Citeseer, 503.

Dinev, Tamara, Massimo Bellotto, Paul Hart, Vincenzo Russo, Ilaria Serra, and Christian Colautti. 2006. Privacy calculus model in e-commerce – a study of Italy and the United States. European Journal of Information Systems 15 (4): 389–402.

Selten, Reinhard. 1990. Bounded rationality. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE)/Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissenschaft 146 (4): 649–658.

Knijnenburg, Bart P., Elaine M. Raybourn, David Cherry, Daricia Wilkinson, Saadhika Sivakumar, and Henry Sloan. 2017. Death to the privacy calculus? In Proceedings of the 2017 Networked Privacy Workshop at CSCW , Social Science Research Network.

Dienlin, Tobias, and Sabine Trepte. Is the privacy paradox a relic of the past? An in-depth analysis of privacy attitudes and privacy behaviors. European Journal of Social Psychology 45 (3): 285–297.

Kokolakis, Spyros. 2017. Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour: A review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon. Computers & Security 64: 122–134.

Palen, Leysia, and Paul Dourish. 2003. Unpacking “Privacy” for a networked world. NEW HORIZONS 5: 8.

Petronio, Sandra. 1991. Communication boundary management: A theoretical model of managing disclosure of private information between marital couples. Communication Theory 1 (4): 311–335.

Nissenbaum, Helen. 2010. Privacy in Context . Stanford University Press.

Wisniewski, Pamela, Heather Lipford, and David Wilson. 2012. Fighting for my space: Coping mechanisms for SNS boundary regulation. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM annual conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – CHI ’12 , ACM Press, 609.

Petronio, S. 2010. Communication Privacy Management Theory: What Do We Know About Family Privacy Regulation? Journal of Family Theory & Review 2 (3): 175–196.

Clemens, Chris, David Atkin, and Archana Krishnan. 2015. The influence of biological and personality traits on gratifications obtained through online dating websites. Computers in Human Behavior 49: 120–129.

Vitak, Jessica, and Nicole B. Ellison. 2013. ‘There’s a network out there you might as well tap’: Exploring the benefits of and barriers to exchanging informational and support-based resources on Facebook. New Media & Society 15 (2): 243–259.

Fogel, Joshua, and Elham Nehmad. 2009. Internet social network communities: Risk taking, trust, and privacy concerns. Computers in Human Behavior 25 (1): 153–160.

Agger, Ben. 2015. Oversharing: Presentations of Self in the Internet Age . Routledge.

Book   Google Scholar  

Krämer, Nicole C., and Nina Haferkamp. 2011. Online self-presentation: Balancing privacy concerns and impression construction on social networking sites. In Privacy Online: Perspectives on Privacy and Self-Disclosure in the Social Web , ed. S. Trepte and L. Reinecke, 127–141. Berlin: Springer.

The University of Central Florida, Wisniewski Pamela, A.K.M. Najmul Islam, et al. 2016. Framing and measuring multi-dimensional interpersonal privacy preferences of social networking site users. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 38: 235–258.

Pamela Wisniewski, A.K.M. Najmul Islam, Bart P. Knijnenburg, and Sameer Patil. 2015. Give social network users the privacy they want. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing , ACM, 1427–1441.

Bouvier, Gwen. 2015. What is a discourse approach to Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and other social media: Connecting with other academic fields? Journal of Multicultural Discourses 10 (2): 149–162.

Altman, Irwin. 1975. The Environment and Social Behavior: Privacy, Personal Space, Territory, and Crowding . Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

Paasonen, Susanna, Ben Light, and Kylie Jarrett. 2019. The dick pic: Harassment, curation, and desire. Social Media + Society 5 (2): 2056305119826126.

Karr-Wisniewski, Pamela, David Wilson, and Heather Richter-Lipford. 2011. A new social order: Mechanisms for social network site boundary regulation. In Americas Conference on Information Systems, AMCIS .

Page, Xinru, Pamela Wisniewski, Bart P. Knijnenburg, and Moses Namara. 2018. Social media’s have-nots: An era of social disenfranchisement. Internet Research 28: 5.

Sleeper, Manya, Rebecca Balebako, Sauvik Das, Amber Lynn McConahy, Jason Wiese, and Lorrie Faith Cranor. 2013. The post that wasn’t: Exploring self-censorship on Facebook. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work , ACM, 793–802.

Das, Sauvik, and Adam Kramer. 2013. Self-censorship on Facebook. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media 7: 1.

Lampinen, Airi, Vilma Lehtinen, Asko Lehmuskallio, and Sakari Tamminen. 2011. We’re in it together: Interpersonal management of disclosure in social network services. In Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – CHI ’11 , ACM Press, 3217.

Buchanan, Tom, Carina Paine, Adam N. Joinson, and Ulf-Dietrich Reips. 2007. Development of measures of online privacy concern and protection for use on the internet. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology 58 (2): 157–165.

Malhotra, Naresh K., Sung S. Kim, and James Agarwal. 2004. Internet Users’ Information Privacy Concerns (IUIPC): The construct, the scale, and a causal model. Information Systems Research 15 (4): 336–355.

Westin, Alan. 1991. Harris-Equifax Consumer Privacy Survey . Atlanta, GA: Equifax Inc.

Page, Xinru, Reza Ghaiumy Anaraky, and Bart P. Knijnenburg. 2019. How communication style shapes relationship boundary regulation and social media adoption. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Social Media and Society , 126–135.

Page, Xinru, Bart P. Knijnenburg, and Alfred Kobsa. 2013. FYI: Communication style preferences underlie differences in location-sharing adoption and usage. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing , ACM, 153–162.

Page, Xinru Woo. 2014. Factors That Influence Adoption and Use of Location-Sharing Social Media . Irvine: University of California.

Solove, Daniel. 2008. Understanding Privacy . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Knijnenburg, B.P., Alfred Kobsa, and Hongxia Jin. 2013. Dimensionality of information disclosure behavior. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 71 (12): 1144–1162.

Wilkinson, Daricia, Paritosh Bahirat, Moses Namara, et al. 2019. Privacy at a glance: Exploring the effectiveness of screensavers to improve privacy awareness. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI). Under Review , ACM.

Joinson, Adam N., Ulf-Dietrich Reips, Tom Buchanan, and Carina B. Paine Schofield. 2010. Privacy, trust, and self-disclosure online. Human–Computer Interaction 25 (1): 1–24.

Nissenbaum, Helen. 2004. Privacy as contextual integrity. Washington Law Review 79: 119–157.

Ramokapane, Kopo M., Gaurav Misra, Jose M. Such, and Sören Preibusch. 2021. Truth or dare: Understanding and predicting how users lie and provide untruthful data online.

Barkhuus, Louise. 2012. The mismeasurement of privacy: Using contextual integrity to reconsider privacy in HCI. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems , ACM, 367–376.

Cho, Hichang, Bart Knijnenburg, Alfred Kobsa, and Yao Li. 2018. Collective privacy management in social media: A cross-cultural validation. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 25 (3): 17:1–17:33.

Hoy, Mariea Grubbs, and George Milne. 2010. Gender differences in privacy-related measures for young adult Facebook users. Journal of Interactive Advertising 10 (2): 28–45.

Li, Yao, Bart P. Knijnenburg, Alfred Kobsa, and M-H. Carolyn Nguyen. 2015. Cross-cultural privacy prediction. In Workshop “Privacy Personas and Segmentation”, 11th Symposium On Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS) .

Sheehan, Kim Bartel. 1999. An investigation of gender differences in on-line privacy concerns and resultant behaviors. Journal of Interactive Marketing 13 (4): 24–38.

Wyatt, Sally M.E. 2003. Non-users also matter: The construction of users and non-users of the Internet. Now Users Matter: The Co-construction of Users and Technology : 67–79.

2018. Facebook and Instagram introduce time limit tool. BBC News . Retrieved February 10, 2021 from https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-45030712 .

Andalibi, Nazanin. 2020. Disclosure, privacy, and stigma on social media: Examining non-disclosure of distressing experiences. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 27 (3): 1–43.

Gibbs, Martin, James Meese, Michael Arnold, Bjorn Nansen, and Marcus Carter. 2015. #Funeral and Instagram: Death, social media, and platform vernacular. Information, Communication & Society 18 (3): 255–268.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA

Xinru Page & Sara Berrios

Department of Computer Science, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, USA

Daricia Wilkinson

Department of Computer Science, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA

Pamela J. Wisniewski

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xinru Page .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Clemson University, Clemson, SC, USA

Bart P. Knijnenburg

University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA

Pamela Wisniewski

University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, USA

Heather Richter Lipford

School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA

Nicholas Proferes

Bridgewater Associates, Westport, CT, USA

Jennifer Romano

Rights and permissions

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Page, X., Berrios, S., Wilkinson, D., Wisniewski, P.J. (2022). Social Media and Privacy. In: Knijnenburg, B.P., Page, X., Wisniewski, P., Lipford, H.R., Proferes, N., Romano, J. (eds) Modern Socio-Technical Perspectives on Privacy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82786-1_7

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82786-1_7

Published : 09 February 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-82785-4

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-82786-1

eBook Packages : Computer Science Computer Science (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Privacy Issues with Social Media

This essay will examine the privacy concerns associated with social media use. It will discuss how personal information is collected, used, and potentially misused by social media platforms and third parties. The piece will explore the implications of data breaches, targeted advertising, and the erosion of privacy boundaries. Additionally, it will offer insights into how users can protect their privacy online and the ongoing debate over regulation and user rights in the digital age. Additionally, PapersOwl presents more free essays samples linked to Social Media.

How it works

In the 21st century, sharing posts and texting on social media such as Facebook and Instagram has become part of people’s daily life. However, when this personal information is continuously being uploaded on internet, not only can your personal circle see it, but so can everyone else in the world, such as criminals and intelligence agencies. Although some might believe that privacy settings can be controlled by the content creator, in recent events it is clear that privacy is no longer a choice of an individual.

Moreover, there are no existing laws that are able to effectively stop our private communication and information from being disclosed to the third party. For example, viral content, if unnoted by the owner, could potentially result in serious breaches of privacy and create in-person dilemmas unforeseen on an online platform.

People in the digital age must begin to advocate for a more sensitized environment concerning where the boundaries of privacy should be and be aware of how much is actually being controlled by the practical user. Should we have an expectation of privacy when we use social media? Ideally, we should. Privacy is a basic human right that everyone deserves, and it should not be restricted due to the progression of technology. However, the reality is that inhabitants in this complex digital ecosystem are gradually losing their privacy. Digital citizen’s not only have their personal information constantly stored, but their everyday movements are transparent to the public as well. Therefore, users on social networking sites reserve the right to be aware that everything posted on or passing through the internet is at high risks to be exposed to others, no matter what your privacy setting is.

Moreover, the government should take action to properly regulate privacy conditions on social media, preventing social media companies, law enforcement agencies, and criminals from illegally using and monitoring personal information. According to the official “Company Info” of Facebook, which has been deemed as one of the most popular social networking website worldwide, there are 2.23 billion users in 2018, and nearly half of them use Facebook every single day (2018). This also means there are 2.23 billion people in the world “agree” to Facebook’s privacy condition, though most of them might never actually fully read said terms and conditions. Therefore, those casual users may never know that users are actually responsible to take their own actions if they desire their own online privacy.

As stated in a news article exposing Facebook’s privacy settings, “to opt out of full disclosure of most information, it is necessary to click through more than 50 privacy buttons, which then require choosing among a total of more than 170 options” (Bilton, 2010). In other words, users have to spend a considerable amount of time to protect their privacy, their basic human rights, even though many of them are unaware that loopholes even exist. Nonetheless, even if a user changes all the privacy settings on the website, some pieces of information are still vulnerable to be stolen. For example, there is a function called “community pages”, which “automatically links personal data, like hometown or university, to topic pages for that town or university” (Bilton, 2010). Overall, if users are not aware of these details, their personal data can be easily accessed by anyone with greater knowledge of the computer system or database. However, what should be most importantly noted is that overall users are given a false sense of security.

Additionally, private policies are usually inscrutable for normal people. “Facebook’s privacy contract is 5830 words long,” written in incomprehensible legal language (Bilton, 2010). Any normal person would have difficulty to understand it. Even if some users could and would actually read it, they have no opportunity to negotiate with it. And even if they read it, most likely many only have the option to accept the sketchy terms that would violate their own rights in order to stay in touch with their friends. That is our current reality. In fact, according to Lee Rainie’s report, a 2014 survey from Pew research center found that “80% of social media users said they were concerned about advertisers and businesses accessing the data they share on social media platforms” (2018). This demonstrates that most social networking sites, including Facebook, tend to expose as much material as possible to attract a greater audience, as well as businesses, to maximize their profits and popularity.

Although it is natural for companies to be motivated by profit and boosting their marketing revenue, it is undeniable that human rights are unfortunately being swept under the rug as a result. Are there any existing laws that could protect us against these crises? Unfortunately, despite privacy issues having been constantly brought to public’s attention recently, the law is currently of little help to protect users’ privacy. Based on Semitsu’s research, a professor from University of San Diego School of Law, “a warrant is only necessary to compel disclosure of inbox and outbox messages less than 181 days old, based on Facebook’s own interpretation of federal privacy laws” (2011). Semitsu reveals that what we usually think is “personal” is not actually true because social media companies often benefit through the grey areas of law. However, even if Facebook adopted the clearest of policies, for now, user data is still at a high risk of being disclosed.

The first main reason is that federal courts have failed to properly adapt the Fourth Amendment law to the realities of digital culture. Second, is that Congress has failed to meaningfully revise the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) for over a quarter century (Semitsu, 2011). From these facts, it is reasonable to conclude there are no solidly existing law or laws that could regulate and control privacy issues on social networking sites. Hence, I assert that the government should take action to protect citizen’s privacy on social media as soon as possible because we are reaching a point in technology where the fine line between on-screen and off-screen are becoming meshed together. Social media surveillance from government agencies is another surrounding controversial issue. Some might think that it is legitimate protection mechanism for polices and intelligence agencies to trace our posts and online activities because that type of information is already somewhat public. For instance, Gillespie, a professor from Lancaster University Law School, states that “when postings are public and available for all to see it is unlikely that it could be concluded that the viewing of the information is covert in that there must be an awareness that those in authority could look at the postings” (Gillespie, 2009).

However, there might be more to consider than what we originally thought. First, information that the government can monitor might be far more than those that are considered “public” by a normal user. As I have described above, according to Semitsu’s report, except for inbox and outbox messages less than 181 days old, “everything else can be obtained with subpoenas that do not even require reasonable suspicion” (Semistsu, 2011). This could threaten people’s freedom of speech and other rights that are supposedly protected by the law, which is especially dangerous for those who hold unpopular perspectives and support minorities causes. Some might doubt the necessity and importance of privacy.

The common saying goes, “if you did not do anything wrong, then you have nothing to worry”. However, I question that statement with the rebuttal of who gets to define the boundary between “wrong” and “right”? What if your positions are against the government? A prime example is Edward Snowden. Snowden, a former employee of CIA who leaked government surveillance programs to the public, has asserted that “[a]rguing that you don’t care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say” (Snowden, 2015). In fact, Scott explains in his research that the Department of Homeland Security has actually began monitoring activities, even events expected to be peaceful, related to “Black Lives Matter” on social media accounts including Facebook, Twitter, and Vine since the protest started in Ferguson (Scott, 2017).

In fact, report also showed that “DHS previously contracted with General Dynamics to monitor, in general, the news, specifically social media, for any reports that reflected badly on DHS or the U.S. Government” (Scott, 2017). All in all, government surveillance could pose a profound impact on basic human rights. Collecting data and monitoring movements from any normal citizen was not an easy task in the past, at least not as simple as today, so there might be no policies to set an adequate boundary of government surveillances on internet. However, if we constantly lack new regulations to properly maintain our technological community, the freedom that we relish in person today may not have the same outcome online.

Though people’s privacy is supposed to be protected, some may argue that social media users should not expect privacy since they have disclosed their personal data and private life “voluntarily”. This might sound approvable at first glance, but this is actually not an excuse for social media companies, authorities and others to access and use people’s information in unwarranted situations. First, it is quite difficult for the majority of online citizens to completely opt out of social media and online communication in our modern society. Not only because of social interactions with friends and relatives, but also because of integral sites like LinkedIn and other imperative sites for job postings that normalize an individual in our society today. I personally have an experience of joining a new social media due to a course requirement in school. Second, even if one could avoid to use any social media, their data might still be disclosed due to posts created by other users.

For example, “[o]n closed Facebook profiles, a photo might be ‘tagged’ with the name of a person who might not even themselves have a Facebook account, and so have no access or notice to remove the tag” (Edwards & Urquhart, 2016). Therefore, information could still be collected from someone random on the internet, and there is no way to stop everyone that has your photo and data to upload it on social media. To sum up, contrary to common belief, whether someone chooses to join a certain social media platform or not and what to disclose on it, simply are not voluntary choices in our current day and age. It is not a valid argument to say that social media users do not deserve protection of privacy because they chose to share their own information with others. In conclusion, our lives today are written out in these thousands and millions of Facebook posts, Facebook Messenger texts and Instagram photos.

These social media platforms create an extraordinary networking for us to connect with others both on a different personal level, but also to connect with others in a different time zone or across the globe. Yet, at the same time of enjoying this glorious and complex internet ecosystem, we should also be aware of our privacy, especially those that are generally considered to be private by users such as inbox and outbox messages. Because social media content is controlled by the company of that platform, even if users restrict access to their materials, they are still disclosed to as least one third party.

However, to say that we give up our rights of privacy on social platforms because we are not experts in law and are not able to negotiate the terms and conditions with large companies seems surreal. To say that we should not expect privacy and allow companies, authorities and criminals access our data because we and our friends join social networking sites seems like an unreasonable bargaining tool, hijacking the common man. Putting all the points above together, we should keep fighting for the revision of laws that regulate information securities and privacy before we have to accept the Hobson’s choice: either break off all connections and benefits on social media or give up our rights of privacy.

• Bilton, N. (2010, May 12). The Price of Facebook Privacy? Start Clicking. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/technology/personaltech/13basics.html
• Company Info. (2018.). Retrieved from https://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/
• Edwards, L., & Urquhart, L. (2016, September 1). Privacy in public spaces: what expectations of privacy do we have in social media intelligence? International Journal of Law and Information Technology.
• Gillespie, A. (2009). Regulation of online surveillance. Rainie, L. (2018, March 27). How Americans feel about social media and privacy. Retrieved from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/03/27/americans-complicated-feelings-about-social-media-in-an-era-of-privacy-concerns/
• Semitsu, J. (2011.). From Facebook to Mug Shot: How the Dearth of Social Networking Privacy Rights Revolutionized Online Government Surveillance.
• Scott, J. (2017). Social Media and Government Surveillance: The Case for Better Privacy Protections for Our Newest Public Space.
• Snowden, E. (2015.). R/IAmA – Just days left to kill mass surveillance under Section 215 of the Patriot Act. We are Edward Snowden and the ACLU’s Jameel Jaffer. AUA. Retrieved from https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/36ru89/just_days_left_to_kill_mass_surveillance_under/crglgh2/   

Cite this page

Privacy Issues with Social Media. (2021, Apr 12). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/privacy-issues-with-social-media/

"Privacy Issues with Social Media." PapersOwl.com , 12 Apr 2021, https://papersowl.com/examples/privacy-issues-with-social-media/

PapersOwl.com. (2021). Privacy Issues with Social Media . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/privacy-issues-with-social-media/ [Accessed: 25 Aug. 2024]

"Privacy Issues with Social Media." PapersOwl.com, Apr 12, 2021. Accessed August 25, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/privacy-issues-with-social-media/

"Privacy Issues with Social Media," PapersOwl.com , 12-Apr-2021. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/privacy-issues-with-social-media/. [Accessed: 25-Aug-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2021). Privacy Issues with Social Media . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/privacy-issues-with-social-media/ [Accessed: 25-Aug-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

Essay on Social Media for School Students and Children

500+ words essay on social media.

Social media is a tool that is becoming quite popular these days because of its user-friendly features. Social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and more are giving people a chance to connect with each other across distances. In other words, the whole world is at our fingertips all thanks to social media. The youth is especially one of the most dominant users of social media. All this makes you wonder that something so powerful and with such a massive reach cannot be all good. Like how there are always two sides to a coin, the same goes for social media. Subsequently, different people have different opinions on this debatable topic. So, in this essay on Social Media, we will see the advantages and disadvantages of social media.

Advantages of Social Media

When we look at the positive aspect of social media, we find numerous advantages. The most important being a great device for education . All the information one requires is just a click away. Students can educate themselves on various topics using social media.

Moreover, live lectures are now possible because of social media. You can attend a lecture happening in America while sitting in India.

Furthermore, as more and more people are distancing themselves from newspapers, they are depending on social media for news. You are always updated on the latest happenings of the world through it. A person becomes more socially aware of the issues of the world.

In addition, it strengthens bonds with your loved ones. Distance is not a barrier anymore because of social media. For instance, you can easily communicate with your friends and relatives overseas.

Most importantly, it also provides a great platform for young budding artists to showcase their talent for free. You can get great opportunities for employment through social media too.

Another advantage definitely benefits companies who wish to promote their brands. Social media has become a hub for advertising and offers you great opportunities for connecting with the customer.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Disadvantages of Social Media

Despite having such unique advantages, social media is considered to be one of the most harmful elements of society. If the use of social media is not monitored, it can lead to grave consequences.

Thus, the sharing on social media especially by children must be monitored at all times. Next up is the addition of social media which is quite common amongst the youth.

This addiction hampers with the academic performance of a student as they waste their time on social media instead of studying. Social media also creates communal rifts. Fake news is spread with the use of it, which poisons the mind of peace-loving citizens.

In short, surely social media has both advantages and disadvantages. But, it all depends on the user at the end. The youth must particularly create a balance between their academic performances, physical activities, and social media. Excess use of anything is harmful and the same thing applies to social media. Therefore, we must strive to live a satisfying life with the right balance.

FAQs on Social Media

Q.1 Is social media beneficial? If yes, then how?

A.1 Social media is quite beneficial. Social Media offers information, news, educational material, a platform for talented youth and brands.

Q.2 What is a disadvantage of Social Media?

A.2 Social media invades your privacy. It makes you addicted and causes health problems. It also results in cyberbullying and scams as well as communal hatred.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

• Commercial AI Use
• Gov't AI Use
• AI in the Criminal Justice System
• Screening & Scoring
• FTC Commercial Surveillance Rulemaking

Social Media Privacy

• Data Brokers
• Communications Privacy
• Competition and Privacy
• Web Scraping
• Article III Standing
• Data Security
• Election Security
• Presidential Directives
• International Privacy
• Enforcement of Privacy Laws
• Government Records & Privacy
• Location Tracking
• Children's Privacy
• Student Privacy
• Health Privacy
• Workplace Privacy
• Privacy & Racial Justice
• Voter Privacy
• Census Privacy
• Donor Privacy
• Online Harassment
• Access to Information
• Freedom of Information Act
• Federal Advisory Committee Act
• Privacy Impact Assessments
• Fourth Amendment
• International Privacy Laws
• U.S. Privacy Laws
• Proposed U.S. Legislation
• State Privacy Laws
• FISA Section 702
• Face Surveillance & Biometrics
• Drones & Aerial Surveillance
• Traveler Screening & Border Surveillance
• Privacy in Public
• Intelligence Surveillance
• Government Databases
• PATRIOT Act
• Wiretapping
• EPIC Publications
• Digital Library
• EPIC in the News
• EPIC Statements
• EPIC Commentaries
• EPIC Projects
• Board & Staff
• EPIC Advisory Board
• Careers & Internships
• Being a Non-profit
• Cy Pres Awards
• Privacy Policy

Consumer Privacy

Too many social media platforms are built on excessive collection, algorithmic processing, and commercial exploitation of users’ personal data. That must change.

Amicus Briefs

APA Comments

• Consumer Cases

Over the past two decades, social media platforms have become vast and powerful tools for connecting, communicating, sharing content, conducting business, and disseminating news and information. Today, millions or billions of users populate major social networks including Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube, Twitter, LinkedIn, and dating apps like Grindr and Tinder.

But the extraordinary growth of social media has given platforms extraordinary access and influence into the lives of users. Social networking companies harvest sensitive data about individuals’ activities, interests, personal characteristics, political views, purchasing habits, and online behaviors. In many cases this data is used to algorithmically drive user engagement and to sell behavioral advertising—often with distortive and discriminatory impacts. 

The privacy hazards of social networks are compounded by platform consolidation, which has enabled some social media companies to acquire competitors, exercise monopolistic power, and severely limit the rise of privacy-protective alternatives. Personal data held by social media platforms is also vulnerable to being accessed and misused by third parties, including law enforcement agencies.

As EPIC has long urged, Congress must enact comprehensive data protection legislation to place strict limits on the collection, processing, use, and retention of personal data by social networks and other entities. The Federal Trade Commission should also make use of its existing authority to rein in abusive data practices by social media companies, and both the FTC and Congress must take swift action to prevent monopolistic behavior and promote competition in the social media market.

Social Media & Surveillance Advertising

Social media companies—and in particular, Facebook—collect vast quantities of personal data in order to “microtarget” advertisements to users. This practice, also known as surveillance advertising or behavioral advertising, is deeply harmful to privacy, the flow of information, and the psychological health of social media users. 

As former FTC Commissioner Rohit Chopra  wrote  in his dissent from the FTC’s 2019 Facebook  order , “Behavioral advertising generates profits by turning users into products, their activity into assets, their communities into targets, and social media platforms into weapons of mass manipulation.” Chopra went on to explain how surveillance advertising operates in Facebook’s case:

To maximize the probability of inducing profitable user engagement, Facebook has a strong incentive to (a) increase the total time a user engages with the platform and (b) curate an environment that goads users into monetizable actions.  To accomplish both of these objectives, Facebook and other companies with a similar business model have developed an unquenchable thirst for more and more data. This data goes far beyond information that users believe they are providing, such as their alma mater, their friends, and entertainers they like. Facebook can develop a detailed, intimate portrait of each user that is constantly being updated in real time, including our viewing behavior, our reactions to certain types of content, and our activities across the digital sphere where Facebook’s technology is embedded. The company can make more profit if it can manipulate us into constant engagement and specific actions aligned with its monetization goals.  As long as advertisers are willing to pay a high price for users to consume specific content, companies like Facebook have an incentive to curate content in ways that affect our psychological state and real-time preferences.

Notably, tracking and behavioral advertising by social media companies is not limited to the platforms themselves. Firms like Facebook use hard-to-detect tracking techniques to follow individuals across a variety of apps, websites, and devices. As a result, even those who intentionally opt out of social media platforms are affected by their data collection and advertising practices.

Social Media & Competition

Data collection is at the core of many social media platforms’ business models. For this reason, mergers and acquisitions involving social networks pose acute risks to consumer privacy. Yet in recent years, platforms that have promised to protect user privacy have been repeatedly taken over by companies that fail to protect user privacy.

One of the most notable examples of this trend is Facebook’s 2014 purchase of WhatsApp, a messaging service that attracted users precisely  because  of strong commitments to privacy. WhatsApp’s founder stated in 2012 that, “[w]e have not, we do not and we will not ever sell your personal information to anyone.” Although EPIC and the Center for Digital Democracy  urged  the FTC to block the proposed Facebook-WhatsApp deal, the FTC ultimately  approved  the merger after both companies promised not to make any changes to WhatsApp user privacy settings. 

However, Facebook  announced  in 2016 that it would begin acquiring the personal information of WhatsApp users, directly contradicting their previous promises to honor user privacy. Antitrust authorities in the EU  fined  Facebook $122 million in 2017 for making deliberately false representations about the company’s ability to integrate the personal data of WhatsApp users. Yet the FTC took no further action at the time. It wasn’t until the FTC’s 2020  antitrust lawsuit  against Facebook—six years after the merger—that the FTC publicly identified Facebook’s acquisition of WhatsApp as part of a pattern of anticompetitive behavior.

For many years, the United States stood virtually alone in its unwillingness to address privacy as an important dimension of competition in the digital marketplace. With the 2020 wave of  federal and state antitrust lawsuits  against Facebook and Google—and with a renewed interest in antitrust enforcement at the FTC—that dynamic may finally be changing. But moving forward, it is vital that antitrust enforcers take data protection and privacy into account in their antitrust enforcement actions and assessments of market competition. If the largest social media platforms continue to buy up new market entrants and assimilate their users’ data into the existing platforms, there will be no meaningful opportunity for other firms to compete with better privacy and data security practices. 

Social Media & Data Breaches

The massive stores of personal data that social media platforms collect and retain are vulnerable to hacking, scraping, and data breaches, particularly if platforms fail to institute critical security measures and access restrictions. Depending on the network, the data at risk can include location information, health information, religious identity, sexual orientation, facial recognition imagery, private messages, personal photos, and more. The consequences of exposing this information can be severe: from  stalking  to the forcible  outing  of LGBTQ individuals to the  disclosure  of one’s religious practices and movements. 

Without federal comprehensive privacy legislation, users often have little protection against data breaches. Although social media companies typically publish privacy policies, these policies are wholly inadequate to protect users’ sensitive information. Privacy policies are disclaimers published by platforms and websites that purport to operate as waivers once users “consent” to them. But these policies are often vague, hard to interpret, full of loopholes, subject to unilateral changes by the platforms, and difficult or impossible for injured users to enforce. 

EPIC’s Work on Social Media Privacy

For more than a decade, EPIC has advocated before Congress, the courts, and the Federal Trade Commission to protect the privacy of social media users.

Beginning in 2008, EPIC warned of the exact problem that would later lead to the Facebook  Cambridge Analytica scandal . In  Senate testimony  in 2008, then-EPIC President Marc Rotenberg stated that, “on Facebook … third party applications do not only access the information about a given user that has added the application. Applications by default get access to much of the information about that user’s friends.” 

In 2009, EPIC and nine other public interest organizations filed a  complaint  with the FTC detailing how Facebook changed its privacy settings to begin disclosing information to third-party applications and the public which users had sought to keep private. Facebook implemented these changes without obtaining affirmative consent from its users or even giving them the ability to opt out. In 2011, the FTC  announced  that Facebook had settled charges that it deceived users by failing to keep its privacy promises and credited EPIC with providing the factual basis for its complaint against Facebook.

In 2014, EPIC filed a  complaint  with the FTC alleging that Facebook “altered the News Feeds of Facebook users to elicit positive and negative emotional responses.” Facebook had teamed up with researchers to conduct a  psychological experiment  by exposing one group of users to positive emotional content and another group of users to negative emotional content to determine whether users would alter their own posting behavior. The study found that “emotional states can be transferred to others via emotional contagion, leading people to experience the same emotions without their awareness.” EPIC alleged that the researchers who conducted the study “failed to follow standard ethical protocols for human subject research.” EPIC further alleged that Facebook engaged in unfair and deceptive practices in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act by not informing users that they were potentially subject to behavioral testing. Finally, EPIC alleged that Facebook’s psychological study violated the  2011 FTC Consent Order  by misrepresenting its data collection practices.

In 2014, when Facebook entered a deal to acquire the text-messaging application  WhatsApp , EPIC and the Center for Digital Democracy filed a  complaint  with the FTC urging the Commission to block Facebook’s acquisition of WhatsApp unless adequate privacy safeguards were established. Although the FTC approved the merger, the Commission sent a letter to Facebook and WhatsApp notifying the companies of their obligations to honor their privacy promises. In 2016, WhatsApp  announced  its plans to transfer users’ personal information to Facebook for use in targeted advertising. 

In March 2018, news broke that Facebook had allowed  Cambridge Analytica , a political data mining firm associated with the Trump campaign, to access personal information on 87 million Facebook users. EPIC and a coalition of consumer organizations immediately wrote a  letter  to the FTC urging it to investigate this unprecedented disclosure of personal data. The groups made clear that by exposing users’ personal data without their knowledge or consent, Facebook had violated the 2011 Consent Order with the FTC, which made it unlawful for Facebook to disclose user data without affirmative consent. The groups wrote that, “The FTC’s failure to enforce its order has resulted in the unlawful transfer of [87] million user records … [i]t is unconscionable that the FTC allowed this unprecedented disclosure of Americans’ personal data to occur. The FTC’s failure to act imperils not only privacy but democracy as well.”

EPIC also submitted an  urgent FOIA request  to the FTC following the Cambridge Analytica revelations. The  request  sought all the privacy assessments required by the FTC’s 2011 Order and all communications between the FTC and Facebook regarding those privacy assessments. Following the FTC’s  release  of heavily redacted versions of the assessments, EPIC filed a Freedom of Information Act  lawsuit  to obtain the full, unredacted reports from the FTC.

In 2019, following a proposed  settlement  between the FTC and Facebook in connection with the Cambridge Analytica breach, EPIC  moved to intervene  in  United States v. Facebook  to protect the interests of Facebook users. EPIC argued in the case that the settlement was “not adequate, reasonable, or appropriate.” 

In 2020, following President Trump’s threat to effectively ban social network TikTok from the United States, Oracle reached a  tentative agreement  to serve as TikTok’s U.S. partner and to “ independently process  TikTok’s U.S. data.” In response, EPIC sent demand letters to  Oracle  and  TikTok  warning both of their legal obligation to protect the privacy of TikTok users if the companies entered a partnership. The deal would have paired one of the largest brokers of personal data with a network of 800 million users, creating grave privacy and legal risks. “Absent strict privacy safeguards, which to our knowledge Oracle has not established, [the] collection, processing, use, and dissemination of TikTok user data would constitute an unlawful trade practice,” EPIC wrote. In 2021, the Oracle-TikTok deal was  effectively scuttled . 

Also in 2020, EPIC and coalition of child advocacy, consumer, and privacy groups filed a  complaint  urging the Federal Trade Commission to investigate and penalize TikTok for violating the  Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act . TikTok paid a  $5.7 million fine  for violating the children’s privacy law in 2019. Nevertheless, TikTok failed to delete personal information previously collected from children and was still collecting kids’ personal information without notice to and consent of parents. 

Recent Documents on Social Media Privacy

Doe v. grindr.

US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Whether Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act prohibits a lawsuit against a dating app alleging that the app was designed in a dangerous way because it repeatedly matched a high schooler with adults who sexually abused him.

In re: Safeguarding and Securing the Open Internet

Epic comments on colorado universal opt-out mechanism (uoom) shortlist, netchoice v. paxton / moody v. netchoice.

US Supreme Court

Whether the First Amendment prevents nearly all regulation of social media companies' content-hosting and content-arranging decisions.

Aleksandr Kogan and Alexander Nix; Analysis to Aid Public Comment

Examining facebook’s proposed digital currency and data privacy considerations, carr v. department of transportation.

Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Whether the First Amendment protects a public employee from being fired for a Facebook post

In re: Facebook, Inc. Internet Tracking Litigation

Whether Facebook violated the privacy rights of users by tracking their web browsing history even after they logged out of the platform

EPIC v. FTC (Facebook Assessments)

US District Court for the District of Columbia

Seeking disclosure of Facebook assessments, reports, and related records required by the 2012 FTC Consent Order

Top Updates

Scotus will hear texas age-gating case.

July 2, 2024

Supreme Court Deals Blow to Big Tech’s Campaign to Immunize Itself from Regulation

July 1, 2024

Senate AI Roadmap Fails to Recognize or Address AI Harms

May 15, 2024

Sarah Gilbert, Jessica Vitak, & Katie Shilton | 2021

Shoshana Zuboff | 2021

Kate Klonick | 2020

Roger McNamee | 2019

Shoshana Zuboff | 2019

Ari Ezra Waldman | 2016

Support Our Work

EPIC's work is funded by the support of individuals like you, who help us to continue to protect privacy, open government, and democratic values in the information age.

Social Media Ethics and Patient Privacy Breaches Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Ncsbn guidelines, analysis of the breach, lessons for nurses.

Today, social media is a crucial part of daily life for most people. It enables us to communicate with friends and family, share important moments of our lives, and exchange information with others. However, the use of social media by people of certain professions creates concerns related to privacy and confidentiality. The National Council of State Boards of Nursing (NCSBN, 2018) explains how social media may lead to breaches of patient privacy and offers guidelines on how to avoid this dangerous consequence and use social media responsibly. The present paper will seek to reflect on the guidelines as well as on other sources on the subject while also analyzing a recent patient privacy breach that occurred in Texas.

The guidelines provide essential insights into the topic of social media and its relation to the nursing profession. First of all, the document also stresses the legal repercussions of using social media irresponsibly. Indeed, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) established rules for protecting patient information, and thus failing to do so can result in legal action against the nurses or their organization (HIPAA Journal, 2018a). The information protected under HIPAA includes any information disclosed by patients in their communication with healthcare providers, as well as images and videos of patients, their name, address, age, and other identifying information (NCSBN, 2018).

Secondly, the guidelines go beyond legal issues to explain the problem in ethical terms. It is true that patients trust their care providers and expect any information they share to remain confidential (NCSBN, 2012). Part of nurses’ ethical duty is to maintain patient privacy and confidentiality, and thus by posting protected patient information on social media, nurses act unethically and may lose patients’ trust (NCSBN, 2018). Because ethics is an important subject in nursing, stressing the ethical side of the problem is essential to show its scope and consequences.

Finally, the guidelines provide information on how to avoid patient privacy breaches while using social media. NCSBN (2018) states that nurses must refrain from publishing images and videos of patients, as well as any other patient information while using social media. Nurses must also avoid referring to patients in a disparaging manner, even when no identifying patient information is given (NCSBN, 2018). The video published by NCSBN (2012) also highlights that these rules apply to both public and private social media communication. Practicing in compliance with these guidelines can assist nurses in preventing professional and ethical consequences, thus supporting trustful relationships with patients.

One case when the guidelines on responsible social media use were not followed occurred in Texas recently. According to HIPAA Journal (2018b), the pediatric ICU/IR nurse was caring for a patient who was suspected of having measles. This disease is preventable by vaccination, and the nurse decided to share her experience in a closed anti-vaxxer group on Facebook (HIPAA Journal, 2018b). The nurse did not share patient images, videos, names, or any other identifying information. However, her job and organization were visible on her Facebook profile, and this could allow identifying the patient (HIPAA Journal, 2018b). The nurse was suspended and later fired due to an evident HIPAA Privacy Rule Violation (HIPAA Journal, 2018b).

In the post and comments, the nurse shared her experience and feelings in relation to treating a patient with measles. The nurse was an anti-vaxxer herself, and therefore, it is understandable that the case was difficult for her. As noted by NCSBN (2018), sharing feelings and seeking support are among the key purposes of using social media. Nevertheless, when taking into account NCSBN (2018) guidelines, it is evident that the nurse violated patient privacy and confidentiality. While she did not disclose any identifying information, she discussed the diagnosis, treatment, and the patient’s condition. These items constitute protected health information under the HIPAA, and thus, the act of disclosing them is considered a breach of privacy and confidentiality. The consequences faced by the nurse did not include legal action, but the patient’s parents could have charged both her and the hospital with privacy violations.

The case illustrates the importance of maintaining patient privacy and confidentiality while using social media. The nursing profession is stressful and full of cases that cause strong emotions, but nurses should always recognize that their ethical duty to their patients comes first. The analysis also shows that nurses have to be extremely careful on social media because protected information extends beyond details such as the patient’s name, address, or age. The guidelines composed by NCSBN (2018) offer an excellent framework for nurses to use social media responsibly because they prohibit the sharing of all patient information online, including the diagnosis, treatment, and other non-identifying details.

Overall, social media is a highly complicated environment for nurses. On the one hand, nurses might feel the need to seek support and share their experiences online when faced with particularly tough cases. On the other hand, sharing protected patient information online constitutes a breach of patient privacy and confidentiality and may lead to legal and professional consequences. The analysis of NCSBN (2018) guidelines on the responsible use of social media shows that nurses should remember their ethical duty to maintain patient privacy and confidentiality and avoid sharing any information about patients online. Ensuring compliance with these guidelines will assist in establishing and maintaining trust between patients and care providers, thus leading to improved quality of care.

HIPAA Journal. (2018a). HIPAA soc ial media rules . Web.

HIPAA Journal. (2018b). Texas nurse fired for social media HIPAA violation . Web.

National Council of State Boards of Nursing. (NCSBN) (2018). A nurse’s guide to the use of social media . Web.

National Council of State Boards of Nursing. (NCSBN) (2012). Social media guidelines for nurses [Video file]. Web.

• Social Network Sites' Influence on Americans of Different Ages
• Identity Theft and Time-Consuming
• Measles Outbreaks in Australia
• Importance and Limits of H.I.P.A.A
• International Measles Outbreak in 2011
• Monitoring Media Use to Control Workplaces
• How Does Social Media Affect Leadership?
• The Effects of Social Media on Marriage in the UAE
• Likecoholic: Social Media Addiction
• Social Media Impacts in the "Cyberbully" Film
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, September 8). Social Media Ethics and Patient Privacy Breaches. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-media-ethics-and-patient-privacy-breaches/

"Social Media Ethics and Patient Privacy Breaches." IvyPanda , 8 Sept. 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/social-media-ethics-and-patient-privacy-breaches/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'Social Media Ethics and Patient Privacy Breaches'. 8 September.

IvyPanda . 2021. "Social Media Ethics and Patient Privacy Breaches." September 8, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-media-ethics-and-patient-privacy-breaches/.

1. IvyPanda . "Social Media Ethics and Patient Privacy Breaches." September 8, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-media-ethics-and-patient-privacy-breaches/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Social Media Ethics and Patient Privacy Breaches." September 8, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-media-ethics-and-patient-privacy-breaches/.

Social Media and Lack of Privacy

Social media has presented different platforms where families and friends can connect despite other geographical locations. Social media users relate to various platforms using their devices and share moments or ideas in economics, politics, or even business. Although social media has made the world a smaller place, it has fallbacks. This paper will look at how social media has hugely caused a lack of privacy.

Social media users tend to post issues concerning their private lives or public matters. For years now, social media privacy has been an issue. There are numerous reports about data breaches, causing social media users to be more cautious about their privacy. The data breaches have led to a lack of trust and raised suspicions among the users whether they have lost control over their information.

The number of social media users is rising, making them vulnerable to different forms of security breaches. When private information gets unauthorized, the impacts can be grave. According to Pew Research center (2017), about 13% of online users in the U.S. have reported their accounts hacked by unauthorized users. These hacks can cause redirects and malware of various types, which would cause vulnerability to evil deeds.

Sharing private information may cause judgments by the public. Social media users can ruin or build their reputations, depending on their activities on these platforms. They can do this through their relationships and influence from other people using similar platforms. Therefore, some people can be subject to unfair judgments or misunderstandings resulting from a small portion of one’s story (Rahman et al., 2019).

The different types of social media threats include phishing, data mining, and malware. Phishing is among the most common ways criminals gather private information from social media users. Phishing attacks come in calls, emails, or text messages from a legitimate institution. The statements or calls may trick users into sharing sensitive and private information like passwords or bank information.

Data mining is extracting helpful information from a large data set. Online users open new social media accounts almost every day, meaning that every social media user leaves a stream of data. Social media platforms require personal information such as name, date of birth, personal interests, or location (Rahman et al., 2019). Similarly, different firms use the information to obtain data based on how, where, and when users are active on their platforms. The data obtained will enable companies to understand their target markets and improve their advertising methods. It can be worse as firms may share the data with third parties without the users’ knowledge. Finally, malware is suspicious software designed to attack computers and gain information that they contain. If malware is successfully installed in a user’s computer, then all the information and data can be stolen (Rahman et al., 2019). Social media platforms are potential delivery systems for various malware. Compromising one account can spread the malware to friends and contacts by taking charge of the account.

To conclude, social media privacy continues to be in question as different forms of hacking and data breaches are introduced. The youths and young people are the most vulnerable to such insecurities as they never take the matter seriously. Also, these youngsters are more influenced by their peers than adults or parents, hence exposing them to insecurities. Social media users are urged to avoid sharing sensitive information or conceal information that they do not feel comfortable sharing.

Americans and Cyber Security . (2017, January 16). Pew Research Center.

Rahman, H. U., Rehman, A. U., Nazir, S., Rehman, I. U., & Uddin, N. (2019, March). Privacy and security—limits of personal information to minimize loss of privacy. In  Future of Information and Communication Conference  (pp. 964-974). Springer, Cham.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Related Essays

Abstract expressionism vs. mexican muralism, essay about album art, does music play a role in social movements, alienation and fetishism of commodities in mardi gras made in china, gender roles in kate chopin’s the awakening, in the company of wolves by angela carter, popular essay topics.

• American Dream
• Artificial Intelligence
• Black Lives Matter
• Bullying Essay
• Career Goals Essay
• Causes of the Civil War
• Child Abusing
• Civil Rights Movement
• Community Service
• Cultural Identity
• Cyber Bullying
• Death Penalty
• Depression Essay
• Domestic Violence
• Freedom of Speech
• Global Warming
• Gun Control
• Human Trafficking
• I Believe Essay
• Immigration
• Importance of Education
• Israel and Palestine Conflict
• Leadership Essay
• Legalizing Marijuanas
• Mental Health
• National Honor Society
• Police Brutality
• Pollution Essay
• Racism Essay
• Romeo and Juliet
• Same Sex Marriages
• Social Media
• The Great Gatsby
• The Yellow Wallpaper
• Time Management
• To Kill a Mockingbird
• Violent Video Games
• What Makes You Unique
• Why I Want to Be a Nurse
• Send us an e-mail

You may opt out or contact us anytime.

Get More Zócalo

Eclectic but curated. Smart without snark. Ideas journalism with a head and heart.

Zócalo Podcasts

Does ‘Slacktivism’ Deserve Its Bad Rap?

Lazy forms of protest—from social media posts to bumper stickers—can also help effect change.

Don’t be quick to dismiss slacker activists, writes political scientist Lisa Mueller: Social movements need veteran changemakers and “slacktivists” over the long run. Demonstrators in Los Angeles protest after George Floyd’s death, in 2020. Courtesy of AP Photo/Marcio Jose Sanchez.

by Lisa Mueller | August 22, 2024

This essay publishes in tandem with tonight’s event “ When Does Protest Make a Difference? ” Register now to join in person in downtown Los Angeles or watch online at 7 p.m. PDT.

Earlier this year, activists opposing the war in Gaza marched onto the Golden Gate Bridge and Interstate 880 in Oakland. They blocked traffic for hours, some chaining themselves to vehicles or cement-filled drums. Twenty-six were arrested and charged .

Similar scenes played out across the country —perhaps most controversially on college campuses, where students found themselves banned, suspended, and expelled —in this latest chapter of the global “age of mass protests.” Participants in historic uprisings from Hong Kong to Paris to Sidi Bouzid have braved tear gas, rubber or real bullets, imprisonment, and even set themselves on fire while standing up for their beliefs.

Headline-making demonstrations raise questions about what protesting requires of us: Are huge risks necessary to engender social change? Do I personally need to step in front of moving cars, spend a night in jail, or launch a hunger strike to advance the causes that matter to me? Does my social media post, bumper sticker, lawn sign, signature on a petition, or attendance at a peaceful rally still make a difference?

According to social science, strenuous and risky protest does tend to make a bigger impact than protest involving lower effort and risk. But studies also show that slacker activists— slacktivists , who stick to low-cost, mostly online activism—play key roles in successful movements.

Costly protest, like when demonstrators suffer violent repression , sends a strong signal to the media, voters, and power holders that activists mean business. If someone is willing to spend hours of their time, endure discomfort, and even put their life on the line for a cause, their grievances come across as more genuine than those of someone who spends a few seconds typing “#MeToo” or “#BlackLivesMatter.” (One caveat is that violence initiated by protesters, albeit costly, almost always backfires —nonviolent campaigns across the 20th century were more than twice as effective as their violent counterparts.)

Some protesters bear significant costs simply by virtue of their social identities. Demonstrators from minority groups frequently endure harsher repression than their white counterparts; women face backlash for daring to speak out against the patriarchy; and low-wage hourly workers pay a higher economic price relative to their income (in foregone wages, transportation expenses, etc.) to attend a protest than salaried professionals with flexible schedules. Though unfair, these disproportionate costs also empower protesters by amplifying their messages. Research by political scientist LaGina Gause reveals an “advantage of disadvantage” whereby lawmakers are more likely to support the preferences of low-income and minority protesters than the preferences of more privileged protesters. Gause highlights how protests concentrated in minority and low-income communities of L.A. after the acquittal of the police officers who beat Rodney King exerted electoral pressure on Southern California Republican Congressman Jerry Lewis. Lewis, whose Inland Empire district sat just east of L.A., switched his normal voting behavior to endorse the Dire Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1992, a Democrat-sponsored bill to fund relief for businesses destroyed during the protests.

While costly protest packs a punch, scholars also emphasize that activism is not all or nothing. “Slacktivists” strengthen movements in two critical ways.

First, they provide numbers. Hardcore veteran activists (the type who block traffic or take a rubber bullet) are exceptional. Usually, they cannot fill the streets on their own, so they must recruit greener activists into their ranks. One study of the Arab Spring showed that turnout by “peripheral” protesters with few previous activist connections contributed more to rising protest rates than turnout by “central” protesters with numerous Twitter followers. Movements, like viruses, need “fresh blood” to spread.

Second, including casual activists in a protest or movement helps to generate common knowledge about shifting social norms. If even your politically apathetic cousin starts posting “#BlackLivesMatter,” it becomes more socially acceptable for others in their network to endorse that cause—and eventually awkward not to. While support for Black Lives Matter in the general population has dipped from its high of 67% in 2020, a majority of Americans continue to support it. Ideas that were once fringe, like gay marriage and universal healthcare, became mainstream in part through ordinary internet users normalizing them, often from the comfort and safety of their couches.

A common concern is that slacktivism breeds complacency: If people are content to blast words of solidarity with their phones, they may never feel compelled to take up more demanding modes of activism that movements also need to meet their goals. “Someone still has to go to prison,” argued techno-critic Evgeny Morozov in The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom.

Fortunately, evidence from multiple countries indicates that dipping your toes in online activism makes you no less likely to perform costlier gestures such as demonstrating , attending political forums , or donating to charity . Slacktivists are not destined to remain slacktivists. Online activism can open a gateway to protesting in real life and to deepening one’s investment in a cause.

If slacktivists are ultimately harmless, and even beneficial, for social movements, then why do they get such a bad rap? For instance, some fans of Taylor Swift and other celebrities chose to unfollow their idols on social media for not speaking out forcefully enough about bloodshed in Gaza. Journalists branded these ex-Swifties as slacktivists indulging in empty virtue signaling rather than undertaking more meaningful action. Why did these former fans provoke such ridicule if they were not really hurting anyone?

The answer has to do with the fact that we are hardwired to judge others by the costs they inflict, or are unwilling to inflict, on themselves. This explains our instinctive admiration for courageous, selfless activists like Martin Luther King Jr. and our disdain for timid, “fake” activists who send nearly costless signals of their political commitments by, say, sporting an awareness ribbon or unfollowing insufficiently “woke” celebrities. Higher risks earn greater rewards.

However, as I elaborate in my new book , we would be wise to refrain from wagging our fingers at slacktivists. For one thing, most of us behave like slacktivists at one point or another. Michelle Obama and Malala Yousafzai took flak for tweeting “#BringBackOurGirls” after armed extremists kidnapped more than 250 Nigerian schoolgirls in 2014, but it is difficult to seriously question their activist bona fides. As First Lady, Obama spent countless hours on the Let Girls Learn initiative, and Yousafzai won the Nobel Peace Prize for promoting girls’ education in Taliban-occupied Pakistan, for which she was shot by a would-be assassin.

More importantly, shaming slacktivists can discourage them from attempting any kind of activism at all. The savvy organizer strives to make activism more—not less—accessible by sharing their wisdom with newcomers. Building a truly inclusive mass movement calls for patience and humility on the part of status-conscious movement leaders. This is its own form of sacrifice for a cause: the sacrifice of one’s ego. Community-engaged scholar Biko Mandela Gray implored fellow activists, “Let us check our egos at the door of political engagement and resistance, and remember that our wellbeing is always connected to the wellbeing of the whole.”

Some slacktivists will blossom into the next generation of devoted changemakers, whereas others will continue dabbling. And that’s OK. Both types of people have roles to play in the collective pursuit of justice.

Send A Letter To the Editors

Please tell us your thoughts. Include your name and daytime phone number, and a link to the article you’re responding to. We may edit your letter for length and clarity and publish it on our site.

(Optional) Attach an image to your letter. Jpeg, PNG or GIF accepted, 1MB maximum.

By continuing to use our website, you agree to our privacy and cookie policy . Zócalo wants to hear from you. Please take our survey !-->

No paywall. No ads. No partisan hacks. Ideas journalism with a head and a heart.