Google+ and privacy circles

I've been arguing too few people pay attention to what privacy actually means.  We bandy the word around in all kinds of contexts.

Is data loss a privacy breach, or a breach of trust?  We willingly handed-over our private data to a third party - a data loss is just part of the risk equation, right?

Is a kiss-and-tell a privacy issue, or a disregard of implied confidentiality?

What is absolutely certain is that the web introduces a whole new domain of privacy issues.  Some say the internet changes everything, but at Open Digital we prefer to look at the internet simply as a tool facilitating human interaction; and, as such, the internet just offers a new and efficient medium for channelling some antisocial behaviour patterns.

Almost all online privacy worries boil down to one simple question: what are the likely consequences of my action?

Essentially: am I "alone" or amongst "friends"?  If I'm "alone", what are the risks of accidental observation?  If I'm amongst "friends", is it easy to see every face in the room?  What is the combined risk of any one of the "friends" passing on a private message outside the closed circle?  Does each member of the audience understand the "rules"?  Is it clear any given message is in confidence, or for wider distribution?

None of the above questions are new, but form the essence of the concept of privacy in the social web.

We have private instincts, and over time we've learned to understand our physical surroundings in order to assess the privacy level of any given location.  In a field with no-one around, or in a busy street.  Are my friends likely to see me, or is there an anonymity amongst the crowd?

Additionally we've purpose-built private spaces. Not just lockable doors, but social conventions.  We knock on open doors before entering.  We are wary about discussing certain sensitive subjects in wider circles because we understand through social norms that most people prefer to keep certain categories of information private.

Enter Google+ circles.  Google's new social network is focussed around grouping your contacts into circles in order to make it easier to work out what you wish to share and with whom.  This isn't a new concept, a somewhat experimental social network Diaspora attempted to do the same with what it calls aspects.  But unlike Diaspora (sorry guys, I like what you did), Google's offering brings functionality and a user interface that makes it work.

In theory, notwithstanding any as-yet-undiscovered flaws, circles allow you model your real-life world in a social network.  You can have a lads circle, a work circle and a family circle.  You can add the same contact to multiple circles, so if you happen to work with your wife, all's well!

Personally I believe this is a highly positive step in bringing clarity to the key question - what are the likely consequences of me posting this message/picture/video?).  In the real world we are able to moderate our behaviour according to our surroundings, because, in the most part, we understand our surroundings.  So now we have a tool to make it easier to understand who's going watching.

Google+ offers another privacy-friendly feature: it lets you see the audience for other people's posts before you reply.  On one hand there's a privacy leak, in that it gives you some clue as to the members of the poster's circle(s); but on the other hand it lets all potential responders see who's in the audience before posting a reply.

Of course this doesn't solve the social problem that people in any one of our circles may re-post information we consider sensitive outside the intended circle; but this is not a new problem, people have always gossiped, it's just the internet and social networks makes it far easier to knowingly or unknowingly break a confidence.

I'm sure over time both technology and social etiquette will evolve to reduce the harm coming from the multitude of overlapping circles that is life. The internet doesn't really change anything, we just need a bit of time to apply the old rules to the new media.

@JamesFirth