Paper short abstract:

In this paper I discuss to what extent the so called privacy paradox should actually be considered paradoxical. I draw attention to two distinctions that I think have largely gone under the radar in the privacy paradox discussion, and conclude that the privacy paradox is not very paradoxical at all.

Paper long abstract:

As numerous studies have shown, people tend to behave online in ways that do not mirror their own privacy concerns. While they report strong concern for their privacy, they behave as if their privacy were not very important to them at all. This has become known in the literature as "the privacy paradox”. In this paper, I discuss to what extent this pattern should actually be considered paradoxical. In doing so, I draw attention to two distinctions that seem to me to largely have gone under the radar in the privacy paradox discussion. The first (1) is a distinction between two kinds of privacy intrusion, and the second (2) is a distinction between two kinds of privacy concern.

(1) A privacy intrusion may either constitute a direct threat to my wellbeing or integrity, or be more indirect, with smaller effects (at least short-term) – if any – which I may not even be aware of.

(2) A privacy concern may be either self-interested or non-self-interested. I may object to privacy intrusions for purely self-interested reasons, or I may oppose them (partly) on ethical or ideological grounds.

I conclude (with previous authors, but on slightly different grounds) that the privacy paradox is not very paradoxical at all, and that acknowledging the two above distinctions in the discussion about the privacy paradox (and what explains it) may help to further our understanding of people’s privacy worries and online behaviour.