Stand with The Libertarian Institute

The Empire has us on the brink of nuclear Armageddon. The central bank has us flirting with economic-social collapse. Americans are increasingly paranoid of one another and simultaneously invested in wielding the state against one another.

The voices of the establishment are legion. The voices of dissent are few. Make your stand for liberty by supporting The Libertarian Institute today.

Federal Privacy Rules Will Give You Less Privacy

by | Oct 17, 2022

Federal Privacy Rules Will Give You Less Privacy

by | Oct 17, 2022

pexels pixabay 267482

History shows that putting the federal government in charge of protecting privacy is like a blood bank hiring Dracula as a nightwatchman. But that’s what the Biden administration wants to do with the Internet.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is currently in the process of drafting a rule governing the way technology companies handle their user’s personal data. This is the latest attempt by FTC Chair Lina Khan to increase government oversight and control of “Big Tech.”

Almost all social media users have had the (what most consider) creepy experience of seeing ads for products they just did a Google search for pop up on their Facebook feed. This makes Khan and her allies think new rules “protecting” online privacy is both a political and policy victory.

As is usually the case, they are wrong.

The collection and use of user’s personal data is fundamental to technology companies’ business model. These companies provide a service to attract users and collect data to attract advertisers. Data collection allows advertisers to tailor their ads to those most likely to be interested in their products, as opposed to wasting money on ads that may or may not be seen by people who would be interested in patronizing the advertiser.

Data collection is why Big Tech offers consumers use of their platforms for free.

Khan has written that the fact that Big Tech does not charge its users justifies scraping the consumer welfare standard which has been used to evaluate antirust cases since the late 70s, in favor of a return to the old “big is bad” standard. As the name suggest, the consumer welfare standard judge’s business action by how they benefit consumers. This reflects the way markets work, as business thrive and prosper by how they enhance consumer welfare.

Khan is mistaken that charging low prices is the only way adherences to the consumer welfare standard judge if a businesses’ actions benefit consumers. Consumers do benefit from Big Tech’s ability to allow them to use their platforms for free. One reason the companies can do this is via data collection. Consumers also benefit from seeing search results, posts, and yes even ads that reflect their needs and interests. On the other hand, the collection of personal information may raise legitimate concerns that our data may be used in ways that actually reduce consumer welfare.

The fact that many consumers have legitimate concerns regarding data collection and use does not mean that users of social media will benefit from federal privacy regulations.

For all the complaining about Big Tech data collections, consumer’s demonstrated preference (a term from Austrian Economics meaning how consumers spend their money in the marketplace) suggests people derive higher value from not having to pay to use a social media platform, even if the cost is accepting that their data will be collected and shared, than if they had to pay for social media. If people were truly upset by Big Tech’ s data collection practices, they would be abandoning the major platforms and switching to companies that do not collect and share their user’s data.

We give social media our data, they give us social media. It’s a trade-off that most people on the planet consider worthwhile.

There is a real possibly that federal data privacy regulations could cause some companies to require users to pay fees to use certain service, that most consumers would find less appealing than having their data used to advertise them their favorite color of shirt.

In 1996, as part of the Health Insurance Portability Act (HIPA), Congress ordered the Department of Health and Human Services to draft medial privacy regulations. The resulting regulations actually allowed government officials and other favored special interest to access personal medical records without patient consent! Remember HIPPA was passed before 9/11 gave the federal snoop state a readymade excuse to violate our privacy.

Can anyone seriously doubt that it is almost any federal data privacy region will ensure federal agents can access any Americans online data to fight terrorism, drugs, and even expression of “extremism” or “hate speech”?

The way to deal with concerns over data privacy is through clear disclosure of how companies utilize their user’s data, and holding them liable for any violation of the terms and conditions none of us ever read. If Big Tech uses its consumers’ data in objectionable ways, new companies will arise to meet consumer demand for better privacy protection.

The market will do a better job of protecting consumer privacy than the government that engages in domestic spying that would make Dracula blush.

About Norman Singleton

Norman Singleton is currently a Senior Fellow at the Market Institute. Mr. Singleton worked for Congressman Ron Paul from 1997-2012. Mr. Singleton served as Legislative Aide on Education and Workforce issues for Congressman Paul from 1997-2001, when he became Congressman Paul’s Legislative Director, a position he held until Congressman Paul left Congress in 2013. Mr. Singleton also served as volunteer policy director for the Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign. Prior to working for Ron Paul, Mr. Singleton worked for the National Right to Work Committee. Mr. Singleton graduated Cum Laude from Washington and Jefferson College with a degree in economics and is a 1991 graduate of the University Of Pittsburgh School Of Law. He is also a founding member of the Republican Liberty Caucus.

Our Books

thisone

Related Articles

Related

Our Economic System Is Built To Enrich the 1%

Our Economic System Is Built To Enrich the 1%

I would like to attempt to describe our economic model since we abandoned sound money and any constraints upon our ability to print IOUs (or what most refer to as dollars without any understanding of what that really means). Before, there was mandated fungibility...

read more
How to Sell Progressives on Lower Taxes

How to Sell Progressives on Lower Taxes

As Democrats and Republicans across the country fought over control of Congress in this past midterm election, progressives in Massachusetts and California continued with one of their favorite pastimes: trying to raise taxes on the rich. In Massachusetts, voters were...

read more
We Must Separate Tech and State

We Must Separate Tech and State

Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) recently got in touch with his inner mobster and threatened Elon Musk—the new owner of Twitter and the CEO of electric car company Tesla and space ventures company SpaceX. He told Musk, “Fix your companies” or “Congress will.” As part of this...

read more

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This