MARY ANNE FRANKS: Hi there. I am Mary Anne Franks. I am the president, and the
legislative and tech policy director of the Cyber
Civil Rights Initiative. And I'm absolutely
delighted today that I get to sit down
and talk with the vice president of the Cyber
Civil Rights Initiative about her book, The Fight For
Privacy, Protecting Dignity Identity and Love
in the Digital Age. So excited to have
this conversation with you, Danielle. Danielle Citron, vice president
of the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative, but also
a professor of law at the University of
Virginia Law School, MacArthur Fellow, any
number of other accolades that we could go into. But we are here really
to focus on this book, because it came out recently. And it's absolutely brilliant. And it's life
changing in many ways. And I just wondered
if we could talk a little bit about
your motivation for writing this
book, and how it relates in some ways to the
work that we do together at the Cyber Civil
Rights Initiative. DANIELLE CITRON:
So working as long as we have on intimate
privacy violations, that is the way in which individuals,
companies, and governments will expose our bodies, our health,
our close relationships, our sexual orientation,
sexual activities, and gender. The people at the heart of
those stories of violation have so long both
felt Invisible, and have been so
Invisible in so many ways to companies, to lawmakers,
and even to individuals who they interact with
who say it's no big deal. To police officers or
law enforcement who just don't see them,
and the fullness of what they're experiencing. And so what motivated
me at the heart of why I sat down and wrote this
book, after writing all this scholarship
over a period of time was to make them
visible, and to make both the suffering and their
identities, and who they are. And the varied ways in
which we are at risk, but also a story of hope too. Because we have the Cyber
Civil Rights Initiative have been working to change
both what companies do, what lawmakers are doing,
and we've seen some change. And we've seen important
change across the globe. And so I wanted to
make that fight, I wanted to make it visible. So we could all see it. So we could
understand the stakes, and so that we could draw--
everyone can join it. Like a call to
arms in many sense, is what motivated me to
sit down and bring together all the reasons why
privacy matters, intimate privacy in particular. Why we should prioritize
it as a foundational value, and how we can do it. It's not that we can't, we can. We just aren't doing a
sufficient enough job, especially in the United States. MARY ANNE FRANKS:
It's so interesting what you say about the victims
and the survivors whose stories that you tell so
eloquently in this book. That you talk about
them being invisible because in so many ways
what they're experiencing is incredible visibility. Because what's happened to
so many of the people who you describe is that their
intimate images, the most private acts that
they were engaged in, the most personal
moments in their lives were taken from them and
exposed to the world. And so there's this
moment where they're hyper visible, but exactly
as you point out in the book, they become Invisible because
they're reduced to that. They're reduced
to these objects. They're reduced to a
kind of entertainment. They're not human beings
with feelings and rich lives. And so what you give them
in this book is the chance to be seen in all
their complexity, and who they were before,
and how this affected them, and what they became after. So it is such a service
that you've done to-- in some ways to re-inscribe
for them what their lives might mean that's beyond. DANIELLE CITRON: Their
true meaningful selves. The whole self to be seen
as who your social esteem, that is your whole self. Not as an-- not a fragment,
not an object, not a body part. And you talked to
so many people, like I'm just a vagina
on the internet. And they say I may be
change from this experience, but I am a fully
integrated person, and I want to determine my
identity on my own terms. And that privacy is
such an important part of the journey for
self development. And the desire
for human dignity, which is both self esteem, and
of course social esteem, to be seen as a full person, a
whole person, fully integrated person rather than
just an object. And of course, privacy, intimate
privacy is crucial for love. MARY ANNE FRANKS: Exactly. DANIELLE CITRON:
And friendships. MARY ANNE FRANKS: And the
way that you tell the story is so careful and so
respectful of the individuals that you're talking to. That when they tell
you these stories it's clearly very intimate. It's clearly very-- in
many of these stories humiliating and painful. But you treat their stories
with care and respect. And so much of your book is
about becoming a fiduciary for people's intimacy. It's about having a
respectful attitude towards the kinds
of vulnerabilities that people share with you. And one of the things I
love so much about the book is that you enact it for us. Because it's what you're
doing with the book is taking these really
incredibly intimate painful stories, and
not displaying them for some kind of
consumption, but to actually try to portray the
humanity, and to take care, and to really illustrate
the principles that you're giving us. So thank you for
that because I think it was such a gift for
I hope for the survivors that you're in contact with. But certainly for the reader. DANIELLE CITRON:
Oh, and every story is like, what do they say? I felt like I was a steward. I was the guardian
of their experience. And that's even true
when we're talking about corporate violations
of intimate privacy, or governmental like with
Rana Ayyub, the journalist. Like making sure that I'm
going to tell your story, I'm going to make sure I honor
it in all of its fullness. And so I made sure every--
as I wrote the book to show the middle
version, like this is what the story looks like. And here's the final
and that everyone's OK. Because I felt like
a protector educator. That is what I understood
from all the people who I did feature in the
book, both pseudonymously and in their own names,
was the notion that they felt like telling this-- having me help
tell the story gave them back their esteem self,
and the ability to say, this is my story. And I'm going to
be able to move on in some respect changed in many
ways, but on their own terms. So that was the
hope of-- in telling those stories is that we
could appreciate and see them for who they are and not
as victim, as a body part, but as in the fullness
of their self. But it's important as we know. Because, Dr. Franks, so-- as president of the Cyber
Civil Rights Initiative, you work with state for
state, lawmaker for lawmaker. And I know you bring
those victims stories to all of your work, because
to get people to care, you need to tell those stories. So that experience of
us, and your experience has so informed how I
think about the fight for intimate privacy so that
we are telling those stories and advocating, and creating
both a normative reason why we should care, and then the
prescription of how to do it that we all think of ourselves
as fiduciaries, as stewards of each other's intimate
privacy because democracy is on the line, because
loves on the line. Because our own identities
are on the line. So in bringing that
fight I feel like I learned so much from you. And making sure that the
dignity of those stories were told in ways that
honored those individuals. And then in that fight for our
lawmakers to pay attention, and for law enforcement
to pay attention that we needed to share those
stories as an important way for them to understand,
and get invested in what we were doing at the
cyber civil rights initiative. MARY ANNE FRANKS: Right. And it really in some ways is-- it's an extension of what
it was that we were doing, or a reflection
because you're doing all this at the same time. This is obviously
not the first time you've written about
these kinds of issues. Your previous book, Hate
Crimes In Cyberspace, which I know that there are
social media companies that use it as a guide in
some ways for them to think through
carefully about the harms that platforms can facilitate. And of course, the piece
of yours from back in, I think it's 2009. So you write a piece
called Cyber Civil Rights. And our name, obviously,
the name of the organization is the Cyber Civil
Rights Initiative. So your work from
the very beginning was animating a lot of
the plan, the agenda that the nonprofit had. But of course, it began as
Dr. Holly Jacobs's story. So when Holly contacted me,
and then I contacted you about what had happened
to her in this just horrific set of circumstances
where her intimate photos are being used against her this
way, and back in 2012, 2013, among the many
emotions she's feeling. And of course, we know
what those effects are. The humiliation. The psychological distress. The impact on her education. The impact on her employment. She was also thinking the
fact that the law says that what happened to me isn't
a crime is not acceptable, and no one should have to go
through what I'm going through. So not only was she willing
to share her story with me, with you, but her entire
reason for wanting to do that was to
create something, what eventually
became CCRI, was so that no one had to experience
what she experienced. That she didn't just
want to survive. She wanted to triumph,
and she wanted to make it easier
for other survivors. And so that really--
her story, and the fact that we were both privileged
enough to hear the story. And for each of us along
with the other board members to make our contribution
to the project that she had, and the vision that
she had was really fueling what we were
doing, because it begins with that story. But I want to return to
something you hinted at, and that you say-- you talk
about in the book so well. And that's-- oftentimes when
people hear about privacy, and about some of the specific
recommendations that you make, because it's easy, I think,
for people to say, oh, sure we should respect privacy. That's a good principle. But you say, no, no, no. I mean, there should be laws. I mean that there should be
penalties for certain things. We need to change not just
norms, but actual regulations about this. And people will sometimes
say, we've heard this a lot. About how-- well,
those regulations, those laws are going
to oppress free speech. They're going to censor people. The cure is going to be
worse than the disease. And you respond to that so
well, I think, in the book. Could you just
share a little bit about what you think the
relationship is between privacy and freedom of
expression, and what it means to protect
privacy and also protect freedom of expression. DANIELLE CITRON:
So privacy is not in a zero sum game with a battle
to the death of one victor, privacy and free speech. In fact, the privacy of our
innermost thoughts, our bodies, our health, our relationships,
our communications is essential for
free expression. That we know from
empirical studies, now that we've been working on
this for more than 12 years. That there is now empirical
work that shows without a doubt that when you are denied
your intimate privacy, you are way more
reluctant to stay online. You shut down all of
your communications. You withdraw from relationships. That is your speech
is without question silenced by brute force of
your being hyper visible in some sense. Your identity taken
from you in ways that are dignity destroying,
identity denying, equality disrupting. We don't recognize and see
that securing intimate privacy is securing free-- and including sexual expression. That we're on the
side of free speech. I always feel like I want to
explain to folks that when they say we're in intact, or
would accuse the book of being an antagonist of free speech. I say, no. It's actually a prescription
to protect free speech. But to protect free speech
for all on equal terms. So that you can
tell your own story of your body, your images. Like we should all be able
to tell our own stories. We shouldn't be coerced into
expression that is never chosen by us in any way. So I resist the narrative that
we're in a fight to the death. That privacy and free speech
are on a collision course. No, in fact intimate
privacy is essential as a precondition
to free expression, and that we need to preserve
it, to be Democratic citizens. And law has to play. You know that law is a big part
of this book because we can't-- self-regulation
hasn't worked so far. We have a market
failure in many senses, both human and actual
corporate failure, and a government failure. And we need law because
it's our teacher. It plays this crucial
expressive role. MARY ANNE FRANKS: Yeah. And I want to talk
a little bit more about that, because
that is something that's been a theme of your
work for a really long time. That it's-- what I think
sometimes people focus on is, oh, you're talking about
putting people in jail. And it's certainly
true that as part of what the CCRI's
legal reform project, and some of the reforms
that you mention in the book they do involve
the criminal law. But people want to focus on
people being put in jail. And what I think is so evocative
about a lot of your work is that you're talking
about law as a teacher. And what that means is
it's not about the moment at which someone chooses
to violate the law, and gets punished. What you're actually,
I think, and you can tell me if this is right. What I hear you saying is
that law teaches us so that we don't do this to other people. There are two tragedies here. We don't want to
celebrate incarceration. We don't want to
celebrate having to bring the criminal
justice system into play. But the view here is if we have
the law, have this expressive potential, it teaches us what's
important, and what's harmful. And that not only
prevents people from maybe engaging in
these types of acts. Well, certainly, we hope that
it means that they will not engage in these acts. But it will also
make them understand what the experience is like
for a victim or survivor going through this. So yeah, could you say a little
more about-- why is that-- what have you seen in some
of the stories that you tell? Because some of the stories you
tell are the ones that I think are more familiar to people
about the really vengeful ex-boyfriend. The one who's really trying
to destroy someone's life. And a lot of people will
conclude that person should probably be punished. But there's all these stories
that you also mentioned, which are not really
about some personal desire to hurt or harass the victim. It's much more impersonal. So could you talk a
little bit about that and what role the law
you see playing there for situations like that. DANIELLE CITRON: Yeah. I know. Both from the anecdotal
stories that I tell, but also empirical work is that
when we get a chance to interview or to survey people
who have invaded other people's intimate privacy. If they're not doing
it for revenge, they're often doing
it to show off. They are doing it
because it makes them look good for their peers. They're doing it because
they think it's fun. They're doing it
because they think it'll get them some social
capital in ways that-- it's like trading cards. Like, oh, I just passed out
the coolest trading card. What do you think? And they're not doing it because
they want to hurt someone. So an intent to destroy their
lives isn't what's behind it. It is society hasn't
yet quite caught up, and law has not caught
up to teach them that this is really harmful. That it's wrong. And we know from studies
that perpetrators say if they knew that
law would come in and say it's wrong that
they might face some penalty or punishment that
they would never do it. That in fact showing
them that it's harmful, and explaining how
much people suffer, they then say, gosh, well
I wouldn't have done it. Had I known it was so
tragic for that person, had I known it wasn't
a joke, had I known it wasn't going to give
me cache but rather like risk penalties
criminal, and civil, I wouldn't have done it. So law has to. Whenever we have these social
failures, like market failures, law comes in to help teach
us, and to deter problems, and to shape behavior. So I want law to be our teacher. MARY ANNE FRANKS: Yeah. And you write to say
that here we actually have some empirical evidence
that isn't available I think. And a lot of other-- it is-- it's a valid
point to say, do we really know if criminal law is deter. And as you're pointing out to
the 2017 study that CCRI did. Where we asked
perpetrators, what would have kept you from
engaging in this behavior? And there was a
little bit of well, finding how harmful it was. But most of it, or if
I knew I could get sued was another option. Some of them worried a
little bit about that. But as you're pointing out,
the really strong showing was if I thought I could go to
jail I wouldn't have done it. And I think what
we can certainly interpret from that is people
know that that means something serious. That the law takes
this seriously. I'm not going to do this
thing that doesn't necessarily bring me a benefit. Something that I might have
done as a lark, who knows. If I knew that there were
going to be serious penalties. And so we do have pretty
good evidence here to suggest that if the law
took a certain strong stance on these issues, then
we'd probably just have a lot less perpetration. So that one of the things
that you point out in the book is that there are civil
suits that people can bring. There are ways that we can
try to get some sort of remedy back for victims. But in so many ways what's
happened to them if not exactly irreparable, it's
not the kind of thing you can make them
whole again for. So could you say a
little more about what some of the experiences
were for the people that you talk about in the book. DANIELLE CITRON: So the-- think of lawsuits, civil
lawsuits, and civil penalties is like you're paying recompense
and you're putting people back to where they were. With intimate
privacy violations, as the victims have said,
it is an incurable disease. That is you're changed forever. There are ways in which you
can't get that old self. So often you talk to folks. And they say that other person,
talking to the same person. That other person, that's
a different person. I don't that person anymore. So there's a way in which civil
penalties just can't do it all. You can't just keep
paying someone. That incurable
disease what they want is to it have not happened. They want to be
that old self who never had to go through all
this pain and suffering, whose privacy was intact. Whose integrity and identity
was theirs on their own terms. And so what the criminal
system does crucially is teach us so that
it doesn't happen. I don't want to
throw anyone in jail. I want to fix the criminal
justice problems, of course. But what civil penalties and
common law claims can't really do is capture the concept
of don't ever do it. And don't ever do it. And we from studies
that perpetrators say I wouldn't have done
it had I known there were potential
criminal penalties. And they wouldn't have done it. So in that effort to minimize
the occurrences of violations of intimate privacy, criminal
law plays an important role. MARY ANNE FRANKS: Right. Because in contrast,
some of the other harms we think about that tort
law can maybe manage. We can't really--
there really isn't any way to compensate a person. And so what we're
really focusing on is deterrence, as in this just
can't happen to begin with. And that the way that we
really get that, or the closest that we come to a
social deterrence is through the gravity
of the criminal law. And the other thing that
seems so important about that is criminal law also
stands in for saying this wasn't just something
you did to one person. It's something you've
done to a value. And exactly what your
book does so masterfully, it says that should be a
value that is a social value. It's not just that individual's
privacy was violated, you violated a value that is
integral to the social fabric. And so criminal law
really does convey that. And the fact that
it is overused, and that it is improperly
used shouldn't stop us from thinking that there are
times where it's justified. And you make a really
compelling case for saying that this
is one of those. DANIELLE CITRON: And
privacy isn't me. It's we. It's us. So it's both societal,
it's relational. And we have to fight for it in
a way that's a social reckoning. And we've got to use all
the tools at our disposal. I'll take them all. I'll take civil. I'll take criminal. And I also think as the
Civil Rights framing is both civil and criminal. But it helps us understand
it's a right that each and every one of us enjoys. But that it is particularly
vulnerable to inequality, and to discrimination, and
to invidious attitudes, and stereotypes. That we need to Marshal all of
it so that we all can enjoy it, and as a society we
can all enjoy it. MARY ANNE FRANKS: And if you
could say a little bit more about that. Because one of the
animating themes of your work before now, but
also particularly in this book is about the concept
of civil rights. It's not just a question of
this is an individual harm, it's privacy as a-- specifically intimate
privacy as a civil right. Could you spell out a little
bit more what you mean by that? And why does it need
to be conceptualized as a civil right? DANIELLE CITRON: Right. Because you can call intimate
privacy a moral right. You can call it a human
right, which often would just constrain governments. But what I think the Civil right
conversation, what it adds, is one that has a long and rich
history, and our understanding of civil rights-- the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The concept of civil
rights is something that is so foundational to
living a life of flourish-- that you can flourish. That one of integrity
that you have-- that it sets the floor for
engaging with other people, and to falling in love. All of those
opportunities that you need intimate privacy
as a precondition to all of those things. And when we say something
as a civil right, it is so indispensable
to our development, to our flourishing. That we say that everyone who
has some power over that right needs to just get in the game. That they need to act as the
steward of those opportunities. So when you say something
is a civil right, yes, each and every one
of us should enjoy it. Yes, we should
protect, especially the people most vulnerable to
having it be lost, and denied. But it also means that all
of us are the stewards. If we have some power
over someone else's intimate privacy. Whether it's a company,
or a dating app. Whether it is your Alexa. Whether it's another individual,
or a government actor, they are the stewards. But they're the guardians
of those rights, and have special
responsibilities in the way that schools have
special responsibilities to ensure that we can
enjoy the environments without sexual
hostility for instance, or harassment in the
way that employers have responsibilities. So that when you switch
the framing, as opposed to consumer protection approach,
or it's just boys being boys. You can do whatever you want. Boys being boys, go for it. Or companies call it a
consumer protection problem, which means you
can do it unless we can show all sorts
of aggregate harm unless you don't
lie to us basically. Companies can do
whatever they want in handling our
data so long as they don't lie to us in
their privacy policies. But if you flip it, and you
say the default is your right. You are actually responsible
for something really important. You're the guardian of
something that's so sacred. You can't exploit it
for no good reason. Like when you call
something a civil right it means that it
can't be traded away. It's a priority. It can't be traded away without
a really, really good reason. And that really
good reason needs to be justified and proven. And so we've all got
responsibilities to it. It's the theme of the work. MARY ANNE FRANKS:
And I love that as a theme because
it really does-- it tells everyone
what their role is because it isn't just I
think as your book highlights, that any one of us could become
the target of an invasion of intimate privacy. It's that all of us are going
to be entrusted with someone's privacy at some point. And your book does
such a wonderful job of saying that there
are corporations who have our private information. There are governments
that have it. There's also just our
neighbors, our lovers, our friends who have this. And when you're promoting
this view of privacy as something sacred, that
it's such an important-- it's such an important
lesson for us to think about on either sides of this. Whether it's our intimate
privacy or someone else's. I know that you and I both-- DANIELLE CITRON: It us. MARY ANNE FRANKS: It's us. And you and I both are I
think captivated in some ways by the Lady Godiva story. I think part of the reason
why we find it so interesting is because in the story we
know that Lady Godiva isn't riding around naked
because she wants to. This is not something that she's
choosing as a-- she thinks that it's going to mean that-- or she's hoping
that it would mean that her husband who's
this horrific ruler is going to be kinder
to the citizens. So she's got this
motivation that's trying to protect her
beloved townspeople. And because the beloved
townspeople understand this, even though the husband
forces her to do it. They all choose, they choose,
not because they had to. They choose not to look. They all choose to look
away because they understand that this is an exposure that
she has not really consented to. And with the exception of
the person who now has been known as now the peeping Tom. One person decides to look. Everyone else out of
respect, and out of loyalty says we're not going
to look at this thing that we could look at. And that the person who
does should be the outcast. In the story, depending
on which version we hear, he's either struck
blind or he struck dead. So there are very
serious penalties to being the person
who doesn't look away. So what I really do-- among the many
things that I think is powerful about what
your book has done, it's invited us to
think about ourselves as those kinds of people
who respect each other. And respect the fact that
if someone has either shared consensually
with us, or has been coerced into sharing
something with us, that our first impulse
should not be to exploit it. It shouldn't be
to take advantage of that vulnerability. It should be to safeguard it. So I think that that's really
such a compelling aspect of what your book has done. And I guess I would just ask you
in closing about what would you like readers to
come away with most? I mean, so what's your dream
for how people read this book. They put it down. What is it that you hope they're
feeling, or experiencing, or doing? DANIELLE CITRON: That they-- I would in an ideal world. You've put this thing
down, and you say, OK, I'm going to go to talk
to everyone I care about and everybody I meet. And I'm going to
explain let me tell you why intimate privacy
matters, and how we are responsible for each
other, and we are an us. And that we see ourselves as
being reciprocally responsible for one another. That we're this together. That is we're not at odds. That we can do this. And we have to do it one by one. But we have to do
it as a society too. So that's the hope. The takeaway. MARY ANNE FRANKS:
That's wonderful. DANIELLE CITRON: Thank you
for talking to me about it. MARY ANNE FRANKS: And again-- DANIELLE CITRON: And
for your leadership. MARY ANNE FRANKS:
Oh, but this is The Fight For Privacy,
Protecting Dignity Identity and Love in The Digital Age,
Danielle Citron, professor of law at UVA, but also the vice
president of the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative. Thank you so much for
talking to us about your book and your wonderful work. DANIELLE CITRON:
Thank you so much.
