There is a much needed debate in the humanitarian and responsible data communities. It reflects on just one of the ethical issues, that of consent to data-sharing in the context of humanitarian emergency. In the paper, from The Centre for Internet and Society written by Sean Martin McDonald, it is said that mobile phone data (CDRs, or Call Detail Records) are one of the most sensitive kinds of digital data available. The groundbreaking paper highlights the absence of discussion around the legal risks posed by the collection, use, and international transfer of personally identifiable data and humanitarian information. Additionally it speaks about the grey areas around assumptions of the public good. McDonald speaks about the need for a critical discussion around the experimental nature of data modeling in emergency response due to mismanagement of information and how it has been largely emphasized to protect human rights.These CDRs are all revealing of personal characteristics, showing all kinds of information that not only make people identifiable, but also make it possible to track, locate, monitor and influence behavior. Due to the sensitivity of the information that is available via CDRs, it is asked, “Should it be considered unethical to use CDRs to collect information on someone when it comes to humanitarian emergencies?” The study, “Ebola: A Big Data Disaster”, was undertaken with the support from the Open Society Foundation, Ford Foundation, and Media Democracy Fund, in order to explore the use of Big Data in the form of Call Detail Record (CDR) data in humanitarian crisis. According to McDonald, while using Liberia’s experience of the recent Ebola epidemic as the case study, consent is the key factor to this social issue. To all intents and purposes, data sharing without consent is illegitimate. However, the argument is precisely that some emergency contexts may make it necessary to share data without being able to get people’s consent. So, perhaps it is more ethical to acknowledge that the obtaining of this information is actually happening without explicit individual consent at all. To some, it seems that the sharing of CDRs is the data protection equivalent of suspending constitutional rights for the American people. However, when these rights are suspended it is usually only on a temporary basis. Instead, when it comes to the instance of when data is let out, it is out for good – it will only replicate and be re-shared. There is no way to take it back once it is out in the tech world. Due to this, the kind of context where there is an urgent case for sharing such sensitive data from the CDRs is also the context where it is most likely to be repurposed and used for further sharing. Due to this, a principle of non-consent and acknowledgement that privacy is being violated may, in fact, be the most appropriate and ethical way to approach this ethical and social issue.
Take a look at the study for yourself and tell us your stance on this issue. Does this possible use of CDRs scare you? What would you want the choice to be if you were in this situation? We want to hear from you!