The BBC reported today that google will publicly track people’s movement over the course of the coronavirus outbreak. Find more information about the story by reading the original article here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52138076.
According to the article, Google will publish details of the different types of places people are going to on a country-by-country basis in the UK, as well as similar data for 130 other countries. The information will be taken from location data gathered via the Google Maps App or one of the firm’s other mobile services. The data will be used to show how busy different types of places, such as retail and recreation areas, grocery and pharmacy shops and public transport spots, are in comparison to how busy they were prior to the lockdown.
This is certainly a significant development. The role of big tech companies, such as Google and Facebook, in our society have come under scrutiny in recent years due to concerns about how our data is gathered and used for advertising purposes and due to privacy concerns. Yet, this development shows how big tech companies, such as Google, may be able to harness their data gathering tools and information for the greater good; in this instance, to help tackle the coronavirus crisis. Yet, it is necessary to consider whether this development is positive or negative and whether it is something we should be worried about leading into the future.
Regarding the positives, one may highlight that this is a positive development because it will aid the fight against coronavirus, which, arguably, is good for all of us. The information produced from the data could help ascertain how well we are sticking to the new guidelines and laws, which is useful information for the government and public health officials. Indeed, google itself has emphasised the benefits that that the information can provide by suggesting it can be used by public health officials to help manage the outbreak. For example, the information could shape recommendations regarding business hours or could inform delivery service offerings. The data could also help facilitate the provision of public transport. For example, it may indicate when there is a need to add additional buses or trains in order to allow people room to spread out for social distancing.
Further to this, one might well argue that it is better for the government to use the data provided by google to see how we are adhering to the new rules and guidelines than it is to employ other means to achieve the same goals. The argument here being that the use of data to track our movements is better than the potential alternatives. Such alternatives could include using the police to more closely monitor our movements, which may feel physically uncomfortable for some. Proponents of this argument would suggest it is preferable to have our movements monitored via Google’s data gathering tools than to have them monitored by the police because this would entail more police presence in our daily lives. Of course, the tracking of our movements via Google’s data gathering tools is as morally questionable as the police physically doing the same thing. However, it may be a less bitter pill to swallow.
In addition, one may believe that big tech companies are able to play a positive role in our society and may see this development as positive as it could improve the reputation of big tech companies. For example, if Google is successful in helping in the battle against coronavirus, it could convince people that big tech companies have a positive role to play in society and are needed to help tackle large scale problems.
Yet, despite the above, there is cause for concern. It is bad enough that Google tracks our data, but for this information to now be readily available for governments is even worse. It does not take much explanation to understand the implications of this. Simply put, this move further threatens our privacy and also sets the precedent for more intervention in our lives by big tech companies and by governments. We want to guard against developments such as these in order to protect our liberty and privacy. Also, that Google feels comfortable publishing this data in order to help shows how much we, as a society, have normalised the data gathering behaviours of big tech companies. This move further legitimises such behaviour and sets the precedent that big tech companies, and now the government, can continue to harvest our data and encroach on our private lives moving forward. In addition, this development is worrying because it further increases our reliance on big tech companies. As we are already so reliant on these companies in our everyday lives, it can only be a bad thing to increase this reliance further.
It is worth noting that Google has promised that individual’s privacy will be preserved. For example, it says it has both anonymised the records and mixed in some randomly-generated data to safeguard individual users’ histories. Also, importantly, device owners can also decide not to supply data. Yet, it is still best to treat these companies with caution and scepticism as one can never know the true intentions of a large, powerful company like Google.
Of course, this is a complex issue with no easy answers. It is vital we tackle the coronavirus to save lives, but it is also vital that we guard against further encroachment of the state and large data companies in our private lives. We should be concerned by this development because it is always difficult to do away with precedents and norms once they have been set in society. Due to this specific development, and the coronavirus pandemic itself, two concerning precedents have been set: that we need big tech companies to help solve global pandemics and that it is necessary to encroach on our privacy and freedoms to solve global crises, such as the coronavirus. This is problematic as it is perfectly possible that similar measures will be taken in the future to solve other crises, such as a climate crisis for example, and these measures will be justified by the precedents set during this crisis.
Moving forward, we must continue to treat big tech companies with caution and scepticism. This will ensure we yield the benefits they can bring while preventing them from further encroaching on our lives and our privacy.
The politics blog 