Privacy and Humanity: Reflective Post

 

Looking back through my past blog posts there were two themes that I seemed to revisit time and time again. The first was privacy and the digital world. The second was what defines us as human.

I tended to look at the idea of privacy in relation to the digital world by inserting myself into situations we read about and attempting to see how I would feel. Head Full of Ghosts first sparked my thoughts on this issue, and I tied those ideas to an article I had read about a TV show that broadcast a man’s death in the ER without his family’s consent or knowledge. That blog post can be found here. After I considered how I would feel in that situation, I came to the conclusion that this was a particularly cruel thing to do because of loved ones that might see it. I wrote that many of the materials we had looked at thus far in class, “provide examples of how technology has the potential to create digital ghosts, but also how these reminders of the dead can “haunt” living friends and relatives without their consent and in a far more vivid way than was possible prior to recording technology.” I revisited this idea most clearly when I created a digital will for myself and detailed the experience in another post, found here. Here, I came to the conclusion that I didn’t particularly care what happened to my digital possessions unless they would help friends and family grieve. In that case I thought they should have access to them. Finally, I revisited this theme with a blog post on the way the stories of people’s deaths are often used in campaigns without their consent. That post can be found here. Just like in my first post, I put myself into the shoes of the woman who I wrote about and found, “While undoubtedly these campaigns have the potential to make a positive difference in many lives, I can’t imagine I would particularly want details of my private struggles to be used without giving it the ok.”

Since I was little all over the place in these blog posts, I tried to sum up my final thoughts on privacy in the digital age. Personally, I wouldn’t want anything I hadn’t shared with the online world during my life to be shared after my death. Moreover, I was primarily concerned with how the sharing of these things would impact those I loved. While I didn’t realize I had focused on this issue so much in my blogs until after I finished writing it, I also looked at privacy in my final project in relation to how it is portrayed in Station Eleven. By the end of the semester I had settled more firmly on the idea that the extent to which the digital world invades our privacy is not great. I concluded, “Mandel’s treatment of remembering in Station Eleven at least forces us to question if the extent of information provided by the digital age can be just as much a burden as it is a gift in remembering the dead.”

The second issue that I addressed frequently in my blog posts was what makes us human. In my first blog post, found here, I commented that zombies seem to be particularly horrifying because superficially they maintain much of the appearance of their human counterparts. At that point, I had difficulty coming up with a concrete definition of when something stops being human (and in retrospect I never really came up with a detailed definition). I revisited this idea when I looked in depth at an episode Dead Set. That blog post can be found here. I wrote, “While I watched, I felt as though this set the characters up for a rather bleak outcome no matter what: either they died because of their humanity, or in fighting “the other,” they lost what made them better, or at least different, in the first place.” From this, it seems that in part, I define humanity by the ability to empathize. I reiterated this is my second project, where my podcast used an episode of Supernatural in parallel with a Dead Set episode to look further into this idea. In that project I extended my claims further to the idea that, “empathy for the monstrous is what makes us human, though…this is not the easiest path to follow.”

To provide a final conclusion or sorts to these thoughts, I attempted to synthesize what I have learned from the two themes that I addressed the most frequently in class. I’ll be the first to admit it was kind of a stretch. But anyway, here it is: if I choose to define humanity by our potential for empathy, then technology has the ability to increase our humanity via facilitating human connection and understanding (an example of this is in my third project, Pictorial Memorial) or it can threaten it in a number of ways such as the numbing flood of excess information or even the invasion of privacy as I detail in a number of my blogs.

My snapchat project is the only one that didn’t get any love in this post, so here’s a cool selfie from my title page to finish out my digital studies career.

Haunted Google Drive

Context:

For my haunted media project, I chose to create a Google Drive that belongs to a Davidson College senior named Daniel Watson, also known as Dan, also known by many nicknames: Dan, Lit Dan, Dan the Man, and Danny. Daniel has a pretty flawless reputation on campus: He is an active member of a controversy-free fraternity on campus, serves on the Student Government Association, consistently does well in all of his classes, has nothing but positive things to say about everyone, comes from a wealthy family, has a high-paying banking job lined up after graduation, is popular and has a high traffic Instagram to prove it. The username/email to the account is “littyAFdan@gmail.com” and the password is “Watson2017”. For the sake of this story, Daniel’s brother knows his password and is easily able to have access to this account.

 

The Death of Dan the Man:

One day, on April 6th, President Quillen sends out a school-wide email to the student body informing everyone that Daniel Watson has been in a fatal car collision and was pronounced dead at noon that day, but it is inconclusive as to whether foul play was involved. The death of this charismatic and well-known student brings public outcry within the campus. Soon after the family is informed of Dan’s death, Charles (Dan’s brother) goes through Dan’s internet history to try to find out if there are any leads he can find on his own. Charles, informs the family that Dan’s internet history is very normal. Dan had checked a couple emails, watched some Netflix, was on his Google Drive throughout the day, and scrolled through his Instagram feed a handful of times. Nothing was out of the ordinary. Dan’s Google Drive consisted of a couple of class papers, a resume, class schedule, to-do list, and so on. It was not until a couple days later that Charles realized that a couple things were off in Dan’s Google Drive. There were a couple files that were illegible with gibberish like the following file “To-Do List”:

This is a screenshot of the “To-Do List” file on Dan’s Google Drive.

Charles realized that this file is encrypted. Luckily Dan left behind a hint on the document for the password to decrypt this file: “a man’s best friend.” Naturally, this hint makes Charles think of their childhood pet dog Maximus (you as the third party can know this by looking through Dan’s Instagram posts which are also conveniently on Dan’s Google Drive in the form of screenshots on a Google Slides file). If you click the “Protect File” tab at the top of this file and click “Decrypt,” type in the password “Maximus” and the gibberish will change into the following:

Screenshot

Looking at this decrypted to-do list, Charles is confused as to what Dan was delivering and who Mark is. Dan’s to-do list, its encryption, his paying someone for “supplies,” and his asking about an potential expansion all imply that there is secretive and illegal activity. Charles makes note that the tasks stopped being checked off starting from “ask Mark about expanding.” Charles is inclined to believe that Dan’s asking about “expanding” led to some trouble with Mark. Daniel’s death was not an accident by any means, rather it was a contracted killing.

Charles is thoroughly freaked out and begins to look through all of his brother’s files on his Google Drive in the hopes to find out what is behind Dan’s illegal activities and sudden death. Charles sees Dan’s schedule for the week. It is filled out with his classes for the day but there are mysterious 30-minute chunks of time that are blocked off in red with no description. By referencing the to-do list, Charles sees that the number of deliveries on the to-do list match the number of red boxes for every day. Dan was pronounced dead at noon, but according to this schedule there was a red box at 11:30. Maybe this was Dan’s meeting with Mark and Mark felt threatened by Dan’s savvy entrepreneur mind. Maybe Mark took care of it. The puzzle pieces were starting to fit.

There was one last document that Charles did not open which was titled “Look Here.” When he opened the document it was encrypted, too:

Screenshot

The hint this time was “best place on Earth.” Charles took a little longer to find this out, he tried “home” or his home city “NYC” or even “Davidson College,” but then he recalled all the times Dan talked so fondly of the family beach house in Hawaii, and surely “Honolulu” works to decrypt this final document. (In Dan’s Instagram, there is a post that has Honolulu as a geotag).

Screenshot

Charles must now decide whether to delete Dan’s Google Drive or to submit this information to the police with the hopes to investigate and prosecute Dan’s murderer to receive justice for his brother’s death.

 

Theoretical Analysis:

In making this haunted Google Drive, I raise a couple of questions regarding death in the digital age. First, should Charles comply to Dan’s last requests? Second, to what extent does the information on this drive belong to the purview of the public versus the private?

The letter encrypted in “Look Here” is, in an essence, Dan’s digital will. Though it is by no means a typical digital will, it is his one last request upon his death. Ending this story without resolution was an intentional decision because it leaves it up my audience to put themselves in Charles’ shoes and think about what they would have decided on amid unclear moral lines. This cliff hanger also makes it uncertain as to what will follow: closure for the Watson family, or the beginning of a complicated pain. In one of our class readings it explicates that “one of the defining features of postmodernism is the blurring of boundaries” (Pinedo 17). Gitlin, a postmodern and political science scholar, expands this definition by describing the postmodern era as a time where moral clarities are blurred (353). For Charles, the information on this drive leads to much confusion, inner turmoil, and a blurring of what is right and wrong. If Charles fulfills Dan’s wishes, he must come to terms with not fully knowing the story behind his brother’s murder. If he turns in this information into the police to for further investigation, then not only would Dan’s death become a scandal but his life’s flawless image and family’s great reputation would become tainted too.

This project taps into another debate brought up in one our class readings, in which we discussed the case of Mario Costeja Gonzalez and how he was protected by the “right to be forgotten” (Senemar). The article explains how “the data that ‘represents’ you on the internet, for the most part, does not belong to you. In fact, it often isn’t even created by you — it’s generated passively, an idle consequence of your living in a world in which all ‘things’ can be connected by the internet. So who really owns ‘your’ data?” (Senemar). Even if Charles decided to share the context of this Google Drive with the police, we must ask if this is fair and to whom. Does he still not have the right to be forgotten even though he is dead? The Watson family may feel that they have the right to know what happened to Daniel. However, if these rights are at odds with one another, which party deserves to be appeased?

 

 

Artist Struggles

I had a lot of fun creating this project, but it did not come without extra research and experimenting to figure how to make certain components of the Google Drive work or look aesthetically pleasing/appropriate for the storyline. For this project, I originally started with the idea of a simply email account that show email exchanges between Daniel and his close friends while he was still living. Once I made the account however, I realized that a Google Drive could encompass more platforms of sharing digital information (such as a using a slideshow for social media screenshots, class schedule, documents, unique passwords, etc.). When I questioned how to make it more haunted I thought about making the drive like an escape the room type of game, where one has to use the information they have access to to use as clues or codes to get to the next stage.  I Googled how to password protect individual Google files and the only encrypt-able type of file on Google Drive was a Google sheet. I got the template and instructions from here. For this template to work I had to keep certain text in certain boxes, however this text was not relevant to the storyline, so I worked around this by making the text color the same as the cell’s background color to make it essentially invisible.

Regarding the Instagram screenshots, I got the template from here which allowed me to customize a profile picture, the number of likes, the geotags, and the captions. I wanted these images to look as real as possible so I made sure to make the handles and hashtags in the same blue font that Instagram uses for these specific linked words.

There are a couple of files that were not relevant to Dan’s death but were added for the aesthetic of being a college student. These files are not my own work. I copy and pasted from Wikipedia and resume samples online which are linked here: ENG 350, ECO 101, Resume.

 

Works Cited

Gitlin, Todd. “Postmodernism: Roots and Politics.” Cultural Politics in Contemporary America. Ed. Ian Angus and Sut Jhally. New York: Routledge, 1989. 347-60.

Pinedo, Isabel Cristina. Recreational Terror: Women and the Pleasures of Horror Film Viewing. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press, 1997.

Senemar, Alex. “What Happens To Your Data When You Die?.” A Medium Corporation. 27 Jul. 2015. Web.

My Life & Wishes: An Archive for the Grievers, not the Deceased

While reading “Cyberspace While You’re Dead,” by Rob Walker, I was struck both by the author’s commentary regarding the number of Americans that don’t have a will, as well as the number that acknowledge that some sort of digital will would probably be a good idea but haven’t done that either. So I decided to see what the experience would be like. After a quick Google search, I came across the site, My Life and Wishes (www.mylifeandwishes.com), which calls itself “an online archive of everything you want your family to know after death.” As an added bonus, there’s a 30 day free trial before a subscription fee of $79 annually, so I signed up, setting the account to cancel after the free trial.

The website allows you to fill in everything from financial information and healthcare information to who should get your pet and what you want to be in your eulogy. You can also set exactly who should be able to see what information. For example I set my parents able to see financial information but my siblings to be in charge of determining where my cat ends up. Additionally, the way it prompted you for answers made me include things that I can’t imagine I would have in a real will, for example, what kind of food my pet eats.

An image from the dashboard of the My Life & Wishes account. (www.mylifeandwishes.com).

In reflecting on the experience of setting the whole thing up, I had a quite similar experience to Walker when he wrote about how his wife was relatively disturbed about receiving an email detailing her role as digital executor. My parents were both confused and slightly concerned when I explained what I up to. Knowing my parents would want little to do with it, I set up my roommate as in charge of my social media accounts. I asked her what she would do with them and she said, “absolutely nothing.” She also seemed slightly irritated that I was making her responsible for it, but that also could just be because I interrupted her Netflix to ask. Maybe in part because I don’t have a whole lot of financial information or any dependents, I felt like the whole thing was a little unnecessary. When my roommate asked me what I would want done with my social media accounts, I came to the realization I really didn’t care. I would want my friends and family to have access to whatever would help them grieve or come to terms with my death, but that’s the extent of my preferences. After all, I’d be dead, and whether my Facebook account remains active or not isn’t going to change that, but if it helps those who mean the most to me, why not let them do what they want with it.

Walker, Rob. “Cyberspace When You’re Dead.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 08 Jan. 2011. www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/magazine/09Immortality-t.html.