"People insist that privacy matters to them, expressing a strong desire to protect their personal data. Yet they readily share information, either for the sake of convenience or in exchange for a minimal reward. Their words seem to belie their actions. But there's a reason for this contradiction. It's not that people don't care about their privacy; it's that the systems designed to protect them are so convoluted and abstract they'd make Rube Goldberg blush."
"Tom Kemp, the newly appointed executive director of the California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA), rejects the notion that people are simply apathetic and hypocritical. "We fundamentally believe that exercising privacy rights should be easy," he said during a virtual event hosted by privacy management platform DataGrail earlier this month. Opt-outs "shouldn't be buried in legalese," and they "shouldn't be hidden and covered up with dark patterns," said Kemp, who was appointed in March after Ashkan Soltani, the agency's first executive director, left in January. No tricks, just fair treatment"
Apparent contradictions between stated privacy preferences and actual sharing behavior stem from convoluted, abstract systems rather than public indifference. Consumers often trade data for convenience or small rewards because privacy controls are difficult to find and use. The California Privacy Protection Agency emphasizes that exercising privacy rights should be easy and that opt-outs should not be buried in legalese or disguised with dark patterns. The CPPA issued an enforcement advisory warning businesses to avoid manipulative user-interface designs and signaled that such practices could attract enforcement and penalties. California's evolving privacy landscape includes multiple overlapping laws and acronyms that complicate compliance.
Read at AdExchanger
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]