80% of people would donate a kidney to access a social network

Would you agree to donate a kidney in exchange foraccess to a social network? Sounds like a wacky question, but what if it were one clause within the terms of service of the latter, accepted without having read them? This is the hypothesis that a group of researchers from York University, in Toronto, Canada, wanted to investigate, revealing how people – even those who claim to be concerned about their privacy on the web – generally they ignore what is written in the online agreements relating to the terms of service, potentially accepting the most disparate conditionsfrom collecting data by activating a camera or microphone, to sharing it with national security agencies, up to donations of kidneys, arms, legs or other “redundant organs”. The study, which was published in the journal International Journal of Communicationshighlights the need for think about the design of login screens to digital services and rethink the way they are communicated the policy of service, often too long and complicated.

The biggest lie on the internet

Many experts believe that accept the terms of servicethe privacy policies and other policies on online digital services both “the biggest lie on the internet”because it is generally accepted by responding to a common consensus mechanism, without knowing in detail what you are agreeing to. In other words, people tend to ignore what is written in the access policies of digital serviceslying, at the time of acceptance, about their knowledge and understanding of the implications they may have, especially regarding the privacy. In particular, a very common way in which this manifests itself false consent is through the so-called clickwrap, digital prompts that allow the user to give or deny their consent to a policy or set of policies by clicking on a button that suggests ‘I accept’ or ‘I do not accept’. For social networking services, clickwraps often appear during signup, or when the terms of service change, including a beautifully designed “Accept” or “Join” button, with a link nearby to view the terms of service and privacy policies. In fact, the text accompanying the clickwrap generally suggests that, by clicking on the button, people accept the policies, accessible via links. What happens, though, is that people click the agree button without first viewing the terms of servicecommunicating to the digital service provider that they have accessed and understood them, when in fact they really didn’t.

This behavior is part of the so-called privacy paradox, or the phenomenon that understands the differences between what individuals say about their privacy concerns and the actions they actually take to protect it. That is it also happens for those who normally worry the most: according to numerous studies, in fact, adults over 50 years of age declare more than other age groups to have concerns about online privacy and to be willing to adopt specific behaviors based on them. In light of this information, the researchers wanted to investigate whether, the measure and the reasons why these people they lie on acceptance applications of the online terms of service.

I study

To do this, the researchers involved over 500 people over the age of 50 in a survey which investigated the habits of accepting the terms of service and privacy policies of digital services; subsequently the participants were asked to log intovia a clickwrap, to a false company of social media called NameDrop.

Indeed, the results revealed that the 77.6% of participants has accepted the privacy policy without view it. Even for those who decided to view the policies proposed by the company, however, the average time spent reading them amounted to approximately 70 secondswhile on terms of service they were spent on average 81.4 seconds. “The privacy policy could have been 10 or 100,000 words”, reads the study. “He may have had information regarding the collection of personal data and their connection to future initiatives with artificial intelligence; may have mentioned connections between data use, privacy, reputation and suitability for services; may have reported information about opportunities for dissent, such as information about privacy organizations, ombudsmen, or references to applicable laws or policies”. But due to the decision made by many participants to accept without logging in or by reading the privacy policy via the clickwrapthe authors point out, users quickly circumvented this information, giving up engagement and opportunities for dissent in the realm of online services and privacy.

The extreme consequences

To highlight the possible consequences of this behavior, the researchers included two clauses in the privacy policy: one that allowed the company that owns the social network to activate the camera and microphone of a device for data collection and another that allowed for sharing of data collected with the National security agency and with data brokers. The latter, in particular, specifically stated that the use of the data could lead to the development of products designed to assess suitability of the person in areas such as employment, the provision of financial services (such as bank loans and insurance), university entry, travel, the justice system. The study reports that, by accepting the privacy policy, 91.4% of participants accepted these conditions. The terms of service also included a clause requiring, in exchange for access, a donation of a “redundant organ” like a kidney, an arm or a leg: without wanting to, 83.4% of participants agreed to this extreme clause.

According to the authors, therefore, the use of the clickwrap and the failure (or too fast) reading of the privacy policies and terms of service are very fitting examples of the privacy paradox, which also manifests itself in older adults, who report being attentive to these issues. “Some of the attendees said they ‘should’ read the policies, suggesting that many want to protect privacy, but perhaps not enough is being done to support meaningful consent processes”, says Obar, according to which the design with which clickwraps are conceived it is one of main reasons people ignore policies.

The way access policies and terms of service are written is also a problem: in the study, in fact, participants found the policies lengthy and complicated, which hampered their desire to join online services quickly. According to Obar and Anne Oeldorf-Hirsch, co-author of the study, digital service providers should work on optimizing these two frontswhile researchers recently launched a site web to engage policy makers, platform providers and the general public in their online consent research, hoping that “this will help support the changes needed to deliver positive online privacy outcomes“.