FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND PROTECTION OF PERSONAL DATA ON THE INTERNET: THE PERSPECTIVE OF INTERNET USERS IN SERBIA
Abstract
The paper examines the views of Internet users concerning the protection of their rights on the Internet. The web survey, conducted by the snowball sampling, included 783 Internet users who expressed their views regarding the ways the state (Serbia) and private agents (Facebook and Google) relate to the right of freedom of expression and privacy on the Internet. Also, the survey was used to examine the individual responsibility of users when it comes to the use of Internet services. Several hypotheses suggested that Internet users in Serbia do not have confidence in the country and private actors on the issue of protecting their rights. However, users also do not demonstrate a satisfactory level of individual responsibility. The most important findings indicate that: 1) only one-sixth of the respondents consider that the Government of the Republic of Serbia does not violate the privacy of Internet users; 2) almost half of the respondents do not feel free to express their views criticizing the government; 3) almost 90% of users are not satisfied how Facebook protects their privacy, while it is 1% lower in the case of Google; 4) a third of respondents answered positively to the question whether they had read terms of use of the analyzed companies, but half of them did not give a correct answer to the main questions; 5) only 8.9% of respondents who claimed to have read terms of use are aware of the fact that Facebook shares their data with third parties.
References
Acquisti, A., & Gross, R. (2006). Imagined communities: Awareness, information sharing, and privacy on the Facebook. In G. Danezis & P. Golle (eds.), International workshop on privacy enhancing technologies (pp. 36–58). Berlin: Springer.
Andrews, D., Nonnecke, B., & Preece, J. (2003). Electronic survey methodology: A case study in reaching hard-to-involve Internet users. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 16(2), 185–210.
Ang, P. H. (2001). The role of self-regulation of privacy and the Internet. Journal of Interactive advertising, 1(2), 1–9.
Bennett, C. J., & Raab, C. D. (2006). The governance of privacy: Policy instruments in global perspective. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Beresforda, A. R., Küblerb, D., & Preibuscha, S. (2012). Unwillingness to pay for privacy: A field experiment. Economics Letters, 117, 25–27.
Chambers, C. (2014). Facebook fiasco: Was Cornell's study of ‘emotional
contagion‘ an ethics breach?. The Guardian. Retrieved April 5, 2018, from https://www.theguardian.com/science/headquarters/2014/jul/01/facebook-cornell-study-emotional-contagion-ethics-breach
Couper, M. P., & Miller, P. V. (2008). Web survey methods: Introduction. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(5), 831–835.
Freedom House Country Report, Freedom on the Net, Russia. (2018). Retrieved March 2, 2019, from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedomnet/2018/russia
Goggin, G., Vromen, A., Weatherall, K., Martin, F., Webb, A., Sunman, L., & Bailo, F. (2017). Digital rights in Australia. Sydney Law School Research Paper No. 18/23. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=3090774
Govani, T., & Pashley, H. (2005). Student awareness of the privacy implications when using Facebook. Unpublished paper presented at the “Privacy Poster Fair” at the Carnegie Mellon University School of Library and Information Science, Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Wouter_Steijn/publication/272852396_A_developmental_perspective_regarding_the_behaviour_of_adolescents_young_adults_and_adults_on_social_network_sites/links/55e43be508ae6abe6e8e9e3e/A-developmental-perspective-regarding-the-behaviour-of-adolescents-young-adults-and-adults-on-social-network-sites.pdf
Gregg, B. (2012). Politics disembodied and deterritorialized: The Internet as human rights resource. In H. F. Dahms & L. Hazelrigg (ed.), Theorizing Modern Society as a Dynamic Process (Current Perspectives in Social Theory, Vol. 30) (pp. 209–233). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Gross, R., & Acquisti, A. (2005). Information revelation and privacy in online social networks. Proceedings of the 2005 ACM workshop on Privacy in the electronic society, Retrieved from http://onemvweb.com/sources/sources/privacy_online_social_networks.pdf
Hick, S., Halpin, E., & Hoskins, E. (2016). Human rights and the Internet. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Khor, L. (2011). Human rights and network power. Human Rights Quarterly, 33(1), 105–127.
Liu, Y., Gummadi, K. P., Krishnamurthy, B., & Mislove, A. (2011). Analyzing Facebook privacy settings: User expectations vs. reality. Proceedings of the 2011 ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement conference. Retrieved from https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/32002912/p61.pdf
Maletić, V. i Dakić, J. (2012). Internet, socijalne mreže i ljudska prava. U Milojković, S. (ur)., INFOTEH Jahorina, 11 (str. 771–776). Istočno Sarajevo: Elektrotehnički fakultet.
McDonald, A. M., & Cranor, L. F. (2008). The cost of reading privacy policies. A Journal of Law and Policy for the Information Society, 4, 543–565.
Metzl, J. F. (1996). Information technology and human rights. Human Rights Quarterly, 18(4), 705–746.
Morando, F., Iemma, R., & Raiteri, E. (2014). Privacy evaluation: What empirical research on users’ valuation of personal data tells us. Internet Policy Review, 3(2), 1–12.
Napoli, P. (2014). Digital intermediaries and the public interest standard in algorithm governance. LSE Media Policy Project Blog. Retrieved May 4, 2018, from http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mediapolicyproject/2014/11/07/digital-intermediaries-and-the-public-interest-standard-in-algorithm-governance/
Ninković-Slavnić, D. N. (2016). Publika digitalnih medija: informisanje na internetu (neobjavljena doktorska disertacija), Fakultet političkih nauka, Univerzitet u Beogradu, Beograd. Preuzeto sa https://uvidok.rcub.bg.ac.rs/bitstream/handle/123456789/957/Doktorat.pdf?sequence=1
Obar, J. A., & Oeldorf-Hirsch, A. (2016). The biggest lie on the internet: Ignoring the privacy policies and terms of service policies of social networking services. Retrieved June 25, 2018, from https://ivebeenmugged.typepad.com/my_weblog/pdf/Obar-FCC-Privacy-Subsmission-2016.pdf
Olmstead, K., & Smith, A. (2017a). What the public knows about cybersecurity. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from July 25, 2018, from https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2017/03/22/what-the-public-knows-about-cybersecurity/
Olmstead, K., & Smith, A. (2017b). Americans and cybersecurity. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from July 25, 2018, from https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2017/01/Americans-and-Cyber-Security-final.pdf
Pitkänen, O., & Tuunainen, V. K. (2012). Disclosing personal data socially—An empirical study on Facebook users' privacy awareness. Journal of Information Privacy and Security, 8(1), 3–29.
Rainie, L. (2016). The state of privacy in post-Snowden America. Pew Research Centre. Retrieved May 5, 2017, from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/09/21/the-state-of-privacy-in-america/
Recommendation CM/Rec(2012)4 of the Committee of Ministers to member State on the protection of human rights with regard to social networking services. Retrieved June 25, 2018, from https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectID=09000016805caa9b.
Rosen, J., (2011). Free Speech, Privacy, and the Web that Never Forgets. Journal on Telecommunication and High Technology, 9, 345–356.
Schwartz, P. M. (1999). Internet privacy and the state. Connecticut Law Review, 32, 815–859.
Tow, W. N. F. H., Dell, P., & Venable, J. (2010). Understanding information disclosure behaviour in Australian Facebook users. Journal of Information Technology, 25(2), 126–136.
Towerk, H. (2017). How Germany is tackling hate speech. Foreign Affairs. Retrieved February 3, 2019, from https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/germany/2017-05-16/how-germany-tackling-hate-speech
van Kokswijk, J. (2010). Social Control in Online Society–Advantages of Self-Regulation on the Internet. In 2010 International Conference on Cyberworlds (pp. 239–246). Retrieved from https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5656363
Copyright
Authors retain copyright of the published papers and grant to the publisher the non-exclusive right to publish the article, to be cited as its original publisher in case of reuse, and to distribute it in all forms and media.
Licensing
The published articles will be distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 4.0 International license (CC BY-SA). It is allowed to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, and remix, transform, and build upon it for any purpose, even commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given to the original author(s), a link to the license is provided, it is indicated if changes were made and the new work is distributed under the same license as the original.
Users are required to provide full bibliographic description of the original publication (authors, article title, journal title, volume, issue, pages), as well as its DOI code. In electronic publishing, users are also required to link the content with both the original article published in CM: Communication and Media and the licence used.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Self-archiving policy
Authors are permitted to deposit author’s publisher's version (PDF) of their work in an institutional repository, subject-based repository, author's personal website (including social networking sites, such as ResearchGate, Academia.edu, etc.), at any time after publication.
Full bibliographic information (authors, article title, journal title, volume, issue, pages) about the original publication must be provided and links must be made to the article's DOI and the license.
Disclaimer
The views expressed in the published works do not express the views of the Editors and the Editorial Staff. The authors take legal and moral responsibility for the ideas expressed in the articles. Publisher shall have no liability in the event of issuance of any claims for damages. The Publisher will not be held legally responsible should there be any claims for compensation.