The Kaleidoscope of Privacy: Differences across French, German, UK, and US GDPR Media Discourse

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2104.04074v1
• Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2021 12:46:23 GMT
• Title: The Kaleidoscope of Privacy: Differences across French, German, UK, and US GDPR Media Discourse
• Authors: Mary Sanford and Taha Yasseri
• Abstract summary: The European Union passed the General Data Protection Regulation on 25 May 2018. The research presented here draws on two years of media reporting on topics from French, German UK and US sources.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Conceptions of privacy differ by culture. In the Internet age, digital tools continuously challenge the way users, technologists, and governments define, value, and protect privacy. National and supranational entities attempt to regulate privacy and protect data managed online. The European Union passed the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which took effect on 25 May 2018. The research presented here draws on two years of media reporting on GDPR from French, German, UK, and US sources. We use the unsupervised machine learning method of topic modelling to compare the thematic structure of the news articles across time and geographic regions. Our work emphasises the relevance of regional differences regarding valuations of privacy and potential obstacles to the implementation of unilateral data protection regulation such as GDPR. We find that the topics and trends over time in GDPR media coverage of the four countries reflect the differences found across their traditional privacy cultures.

Related papers

• Differential Privacy Overview and Fundamental Techniques [63.0409690498569]
  This chapter is meant to be part of the book "Differential Privacy in Artificial Intelligence: From Theory to Practice" It starts by illustrating various attempts to protect data privacy, emphasizing where and why they failed. It then defines the key actors, tasks, and scopes that make up the domain of privacy-preserving data analysis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-07T13:52:11Z)
• Evaluating the Effects of Digital Privacy Regulations on User Trust [0.0]
  The study investigates the impact of digital privacy laws on user trust by comparing regulations in the Netherlands, Ghana, and Malaysia. The main findings reveal that while the General Protection Regulation in the Netherlands is strict, its practical impact is limited by challenges enforcement. In Ghana, Data Protection Act is underutilized due to low public awareness and insufficient enforcement, leading to reliance on personal protective measures. In Malaysia, trust in digital services is largely dependent on the security practices of individual platforms rather than the Personal Data Protection Act.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-04T11:11:41Z)
• PrivacyMind: Large Language Models Can Be Contextual Privacy Protection Learners [81.571305826793]
  We introduce Contextual Privacy Protection Language Models (PrivacyMind) Our work offers a theoretical analysis for model design and benchmarks various techniques. In particular, instruction tuning with both positive and negative examples stands out as a promising method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-03T22:37:01Z)
• A Unified View of Differentially Private Deep Generative Modeling [60.72161965018005]
  Data with privacy concerns comes with stringent regulations that frequently prohibited data access and data sharing. Overcoming these obstacles is key for technological progress in many real-world application scenarios that involve privacy sensitive data. Differentially private (DP) data publishing provides a compelling solution, where only a sanitized form of the data is publicly released.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-27T14:38:16Z)
• A Critical Take on Privacy in a Datafied Society [0.0]
  I analyze several facets of the lack of online privacy and idiosyncrasies exhibited by privacy advocates. I discuss of possible effects of datafication on human behavior, the prevalent market-oriented assumption at the base of online privacy, and some emerging adaptation strategies. A glimpse on the likely problematic future is provided with a discussion on privacy related aspects of EU, UK, and China's proposed generative AI policies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-03T11:45:18Z)
• PLUE: Language Understanding Evaluation Benchmark for Privacy Policies in English [77.79102359580702]
  We introduce the Privacy Policy Language Understanding Evaluation benchmark, a multi-task benchmark for evaluating the privacy policy language understanding. We also collect a large corpus of privacy policies to enable privacy policy domain-specific language model pre-training. We demonstrate that domain-specific continual pre-training offers performance improvements across all tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-20T05:58:32Z)
• How Do Input Attributes Impact the Privacy Loss in Differential Privacy? [55.492422758737575]
  We study the connection between the per-subject norm in DP neural networks and individual privacy loss. We introduce a novel metric termed the Privacy Loss-Input Susceptibility (PLIS) which allows one to apportion the subject's privacy loss to their input attributes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-18T11:39:03Z)
• Regional Differences in Information Privacy Concerns After the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica Data Scandal [0.0]
  We analyze a large-scale dataset of tweets about the #CambridgeAnalytica scandal in Spanish and English. We observe a greater emphasis on data collection in English than in Spanish. Our results call for more diverse sources of data and nuanced analysis of data privacy concerns around the globe.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-14T22:35:19Z)
• Ctrl-Shift: How Privacy Sentiment Changed from 2019 to 2021 [14.600192799641077]
  We study the sentiments of people in the U.S. toward collection and use of data for government- and health-related purposes from 2019-2021. After the onset of COVID-19, we observe significant decreases in respondent acceptance of government data use. Following the 2020 U.S. national elections, we observe some of the first evidence that privacy sentiments may change based on the alignment between a user's politics and the political party in power.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-18T16:13:02Z)
• Digital Divide and Social Dilemma of Privacy Preservation [0.6261444979025642]
  "Digital privacy divide (DPD)" is introduced to describe the perceived gap in the privacy preservation of individuals based on the geopolitical location of different countries. We created an online questionnaire and collected answers from more than 700 respondents from four different countries. Individuals residing in Germany and Bangladesh share similar privacy concerns, while there is a significant similarity among individuals residing in the United States and India.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-06T11:43:46Z)
• Robustness Threats of Differential Privacy [70.818129585404]
  We experimentally demonstrate that networks, trained with differential privacy, in some settings might be even more vulnerable in comparison to non-private versions. We study how the main ingredients of differentially private neural networks training, such as gradient clipping and noise addition, affect the robustness of the model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-14T18:59:24Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.