Digital footprints and e-reputation

In the article on Wired, You Are What Google Says You Are, the author raises a current big issue concerning personal information on the internet. Anyone can write anything on the internet, and as long as it appears in the first two pages in a google search, it almost makes what you are in the eyes of the majority of people who don’t know you well. Even though internet users can assess by themselves the credibility of information and not take all of it for granted beyond reasonable doubt, it is true that people can believe enough of it, so it harms you in the end. There are today countless cases of people who lost their jobs because of information that has been published online, or who did not get a job for the same reasons.

A study published by the Pew Internet & American Life Project in December 2007 showed that internet users are becoming more aware of their digital footprint. However, it also states that "roughly one third of internet users say the following pieces of information are available online: their email address, home address, home phone number, or their employer. Most internet users are not concerned about the amount of information available about them online, and most do not take steps to limit that information" ⁽¹⁾. This study was released two years ago, and things might have slightly changed since then. I believe more people are aware of the danger of so much personal information potentially circulating on the internet. When googling “e-reputation” one finds many internet sites advising “how to control your e-reputation”, and many new companies offer an internet cleaning-up service. They basically focus on two activities, trying to erase as many bad references as possible by asking for it or using threat of lawsuits, and burying unwanted information by publishing new positive information by creating sites or profiles in social networking sites.

According to Clive Thompson on Wired, “Online, your rep is quantifiable, findable, and totally unavoidable. In other words, radical transparency is a double-edged sword, but once you know the new rules, you can use it to control your image in ways you never could before.” This might be true for big companies which decided to strengthen their communication department and created new positions in order to control what is being said about the company and its products. Using techniques such as reputation management companies do, one can create from scratch a brand new reputation. But this consumes a lot of time and resources. It is typically very hard for an individual to handle this, and despite some companies offer the same kind of service for a lower budget, it would be necessary enough only for people with specific backgrounds, such as the case of a former French gun-runner who started over his life in Italy building a new company, and who needed his name erased from online newspapers’ articles and published rulings ⁽²⁾.

Now, for such matters as official documentation, governments are aware of the harm it can cause and are starting to come up with new policies. For instance in France, there is currently a big debate around whether or not to create a new “right to be forgotten” (there is no English translation for “droit à l’oubli” yet) for internat. Online newspapers are also pretty cooperative concerning the change of names. So how about people who used to take part in unions activities with the information all over internet and thus cannot find a job, or people simply victims of some strangers who have fun inventing false Reuters news⁽³⁾ about them? All the linkages on internet make it difficult to effectively take away such infomation. Nowadays, even using a username when posting something on the internet (on a blog, on a social networking site or even signing a petition), one can be traced as an internet service provider may be compelled to disclose the identity of a person at a specified IP address, thereby unmasking an anonymous blogger against whom action can be taken (as in The Author of A Blog v Times Newspapers Ltd [2009]) ⁽⁴⁾. There thus should be some way to get rid of unwanted information we have voluntarily or not posted on the internet without having to artificially make it not appear.

Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, professor in the National University of Singapore and author of Delete : The Virtue of Forgetting in the Digital Age (Princeton University Press 2009), argue in this way in an interview by suggesting for example to require an expiry date for any information put online. This would actually be the easiest solution, if indeed respected by every concerned party. But he still thinks there should also be some laws and rights enacted to support this idea, which will need some time. Until then, it is more up to each of us to control what is being put online about us...