海角大神

When people lament that privacy is dead or dying, they typically point fingers outwards, saying that government and corporate surveillance deserve all the blame.听But as recent events highlight, our urge for online voyeurism plays an important role in the erosion of privacy.

As the Ashley Madison hack had the Internet gawking over details of the possible infidelity of its members, another lurid tragedy was going viral thanks to a听woman听 the breakup of a couple听sitting next to her on an airplane. Both are examples of people succumbing听to their baser instincts and failing to look away when when someone's personal life is spilled online.

But until we can resist those urges, stop from clicking those articles, and trolling the databases hackers' victims, we are just encouraging other hackers with an ax to grind, digital eavesdroppers, and snoopers to uncover our private moments and publishing them for the world to see.听And, unfortunately, it doesn't seem like we've hit that point of maturity in our collective Internet evolution.

Much of the online discussion after hackers exposed users of the听adultery-encouraging Ashley Madison site听focused on听whether cheaters will receive their comeuppance 鈥� not just in the case of hypocritical public figures, but everyday people, too. But if you don't care that听illegal activity brought the names to light, do you really have any standing to seek some kind of moral justice?听

As Danielle Citron and Maram Salaheldin听: "Today, it鈥檚 a database of alleged adulterers.听Tomorrow, it could be the personal information of donors to an abortion rights or pro-life charity, or hospital records, or even Google search histories."

What philosopher听calls 鈥溾�� seems to be in play. Ms. Manne says it manifested here when 鈥減eople tacitly tried to maintain or cultivate a sense of their own moral superiority by pouring scorn on those who got outed,鈥� even as a massive 鈥溾�� already occurred. I agree. Some people wanted to read the Ashley Madison stories and voice strong reactions to them just to feel better about themselves.

In the case of the airplane breakup, the media is largely responsible for creating the story. Yes, the play-by-play was already听broadcast on social media. But aggregating mean spirited tweets into well-trafficked platforms is enough to woo a sizable pool of readers who crave schadenfreude 鈥� joy at other people鈥檚 suffering.

It might seem that there鈥檚 a big difference between the two cases. While a hack obviously invades privacy by stealing听customers' personal information, the media covered a breakup that dissolved in public. But it鈥檚 a victim-blaming attitude to say that all privacy interests evaporate the second conversation is pursued that could have happened behind closed doors. Such a callous outlook ignores the importance many of us place on what听听and I refer to as听听鈥撎齮he ease or difficulty of acquiring information and making sense of it.听

If you鈥檙e not a prominent figure, it鈥檚 reasonable to expect that conversations you have in public will only be accessible to a limited audience 鈥� such as the folks who are within earshot.听Obscurity accounts for why we don鈥檛 mind showing our faces in public, but can have听reservations about companies using facial recognition technology. It鈥檚 why travelers will think about the impressions they鈥檙e cultivating for folks close by, but don鈥檛 expect those impressions to be widely shared. 听

Another way to appreciate the privacy point is to think about schadenfreude as the secret sauce of so much reality TV. Adults appearing on reality TV shows consent to participating in a genre that鈥檚 widely known for thriving on jealousy, insecurity, betrayal, and embarrassment. Presumably the couple on the airplane wasn鈥檛 hamming it up for an audience and weren鈥檛 asking for a broadcast spotlight to shine on their affairs.听

Sadly, it鈥檚 not surprising that these are popular stories. We鈥檝e seen ugly sensibilities on display before in cases where privacy is invaded. A big reason why hacked photos of naked celebrities and听e-mails containing negative insider information听about them go viral is that some people enjoy the rush of power that comes from mortifying people who are accustomed to being influential and envied. Once the floodgates are open and pent-up resentment gets released, concern for others and society as a whole all too easily can wash away.听听

What can be done to make things better? Appealing to media ethics won鈥檛 work. So long as media outlets believe stories that make us feel better at other people鈥檚 expense will draw in readers and viewers, they'll run them. They鈥檙e just giving the public what it wants, after all, and shouldn鈥檛 be shouldered with the paternalist burden of saving us from ourselves.听

The onus is on us. We need to accept responsibility for having made privacy-eviscerating stories popular. And we need to come to terms with our role in enticing hackers and voyeurs to do illegal and immoral things. So, let鈥檚 flip the script. We鈥檙e powerful enough to make stories about protecting privacy the ones media can鈥檛 wait to run.

听is a professor of philosophy at听. Follow him on Twitter听.听

听