Abstract
Etzioni has recently proposed that the success of Internet enabled commerce is surprising due to what I label the “trust in strangers” problem. In here responding to Etzioni, I argue that the “trust in strangers” problem effectively dissolves once it is recognized that current manifestations of Internet commerce are not associated with high levels of anonymity, but rather, with high levels of surveillance. In doing so, I first outline how data capitalism and security considerations have contributed to Internet surveillance being close to ubiquitous. Following this, I differentiate between three types of surveillance—i.e. top-down, bottom-up, networked—that many people who digitally connect rely upon. In concluding, I emphasize my basic argument. Namely, that it is “trust in surveillance”, rather than “trust in strangers”, that supports current manifestations of commerce online.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Web 2.0 is generally thought to have commenced around the start of this century, when the dot-com bubble burst and Web 1.0 came to a halt. Amongst other considerations, Web 1.0 is often thought to have been focused on directly selling products, and/or, acting like a publisher. Web 2.0, on the other hand, has a bigger emphasis on connecting buyers and sellers and enabling access to content. Myers West (2017) and O’Reilly (2007) explore such differences in more detail.
References
Agren, D. (2017). Outrage as Mexican student killed after using ride-hailing service. The Guardian, September 18, 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/18/mexico-woman-murder-student-ride-hailing-service-cabify.
Bardhi, F., & Eckhardt, G. M. (2012). Access-based consumption: The case of car sharing. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(4), 881–898.
BBC. (2017). Uber London loses licence to operate. BBC News, September 22, 2017. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-41358640.
Bhattarai, A. (2016). How Uber plans to put its own drivers out of business. The Washington Post, August 18, 2016. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2016/08/18/how-uber-plans-to-put-its-own-drivers-out-of-business/?utm_term=.98ed6b7008a6.
Change.org website. (2017). Save your Uber in London. https://www.change.org/p/save-your-uber-in-london-saveyouruber. Accessed 22 & 25 September 2017.
Etzioni, A. (2003). Introduction: Rights and responsibilities. In A. Etzioni & H. H. Marsh (Eds.), Rights vs. public safety after 9/11: America in the age of terrorism (pp. ix–xviii). Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
Etzioni, A. (2016). Apple: Good business, poor citizen? Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3233-4.
Etzioni, A. (2017). Cyber trust. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3627-y.
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. New York, NY: Random House.
Fry, E., & Rapp, N. (2017). This is the average pay at Lyft, Uber, Airbnb and more. Fortune, June 27, 2017. http://fortune.com/2017/06/27/average-pay-lyft-uber-airbnb/.
Goldfeder, S., Kalodner, H., Reisman, D., & Narayanan, A. (2017). When the cookie meets the blockchain: Privacy risks of web payments via cryptocurrencies. arXiv, August 16, 2017. https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.04748.
Hawkins, A. J. (2017). Uber’s CEO caught being a jerk on camera by one of his own drivers. The Verge, February 28, 2017. https://www.theverge.com/2017/2/28/14766868/uber-driver-argument-ceo-travis-kalanick-video.
Juels, A., Kosba, A., & Shi, E. (2016). The ring of Gyges: Investigating the future of criminal smart contracts. In CCS’16, proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC conference on computer and communications security, Vienna, Austria, October 24–28 (pp. 283–295)
Khalid, A. (2016). 7 Essential apps that will keep you safe at night. The Daily Dot, January 8, 2016. https://www.dailydot.com/debug/best-apps-for-personal-safety/.
Levin, S. (2017). Sexual harassment and the sharing economy: The dark side of working for strangers. The Guardian, August 23, 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/aug/23/sexual-harassment-sharing-economy-uber-doordash-airbnb-twitter.
Lyon, D. (1994). The electronic eye: The rise of surveillance society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Mann, S., Nolan, J., & Wellman, B. (2002). Sousveillance: Inventing and using wearable computing devices for data collection in surveillance environments. Surveillance & Society, 1(3), 331–355.
Matthews, N. (2014). Why women need personal safety apps. Elle, May 1, 2014. http://www.elle.com/culture/tech/news/a14941/womens-safety-apps/.
McCarthy, K. (2017). Dear racist Airbnb host, we’ve enrolled you in an Asian American studies course. The Register, July 13, 2017. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/07/13/racist_airbnb_host_punishment/.
McGrath, J. E. (2004). Loving big brother: Performance, privacy, and surveillance space. London: Routledge.
Myers West, S. (2017). Data capitalism: Refining the logics of surveillance and capitalism. Business and Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650317718185.
Nakamoto, S (2008). Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. Gmane, October 31, 2008. https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf.
O’Neill, O. (2002). Autonomy and trust in bioethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
O’Reilly, T. (2007). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Communications & Strategies, 65(1), 17–37.
Penney, J. W. (2017). Whose speech is chilled by surveillance? Slate-Future Tense, July 7, 2017. http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2017/07/women_young_people_experience_the_chilling_effects_of_surveillance_at_higher.html.
Pew Research Centre. (2016). Americans feel the tensions between privacy and security concerns. Fact Tan, February 19, 2016. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/02/19/americans-feel-the-tensions-between-privacy-and-security-concerns/.
Pew Research Centre. (2017). The fate of online trust in the next decade. http://www.pewinternet.org/2017/08/10/the-fate-of-online-trust-in-the-next-decade/. Accessed 22 September 2017.
Rosenblatt, A. (2017). How drivers shame Uber Lyft passengers. Medium, May 29, 2017. https://medium.com/uber-screeds/how-drivers-shame-uber-lyft-passengers-c0d83539460a.
Shrubb, R. (2015). How do you beat bad buyers on Amazon and eBay? WebRetailer, December 7, 2015. http://www.webretailer.com/lean-commerce/bad-buyers-amazon-ebay/#/.
Slee, T. (2015). What’s yours is mine: Against the sharing economy. New York: OR Books.
Solon, O. (2017). Airbnb host who canceled reservation using racist comment must pay $5,000. The Guardian, July 13, 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jul/13/airbnb-california-racist-comment-penalty-asian-american.
Soska, K., & Christin, N. (2015). Measuring the longitudinal evolution of the online anonymous marketplace ecosystem. In Proceedings of the 24th USENIX security symposium, Washington, DC, August 12–14 (pp. 33–48).
Sundarajan, A. (2016). The sharing economy: The end of employment and the rise of crowd-based capitalism. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Swan, M. (2015). Blockchain: Blueprint for a new economy. Beijing: O'Reilly.
Teaching Privacy website. (2017). Principles: There is no anonymity on the Internet. http://www.teachingprivacy.org/theres-no-anonymity/. Accessed 19 September 2017.
Whelan, G. (2017). Born political: A dispositive analysis of Google and copyright. Business and Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650317717701.
Zuboff, S. (2015). Big other: Surveillance capitalism and the prospects of an information civilization. Journal of Information Technology, 30(1), 75–89.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Ed Freeman for inviting me to make this reply. I would also like to thank the anonymous reviewer for their very helpful and critically constructive comments on a prior draft.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author declares no conflict of interest.
Human and animal rights
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Additional information
Editors at the Journal of Business Ethics are recused from all decisions relating to submissions with which there is any identified potential conflict of interest. Submissions to the Journal of Business Ethics from editors of the journal are handled by a senior independent editor at the journal and subject to full double blind peer review processes.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Whelan, G. Trust in Surveillance: A Reply to Etzioni. J Bus Ethics 156, 15–19 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3779-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3779-4