Communication Privacy Management Theory…
An interpretive theory by Sandra Petronio
A metaphor to show how people think of the borders between private and public information.
When managing private information doesn’t go the way we expect.
4 Principals – Privacy ownership
1) People believe they own and have a right to control their private information. 2) People control their private information through the use of personal privacy rules. 3) When others are told or given access to a person’s private information, they became co-owners of that information. 4) Co-owners of private information need to negotiate mutually agreeable privacy rules about telling others.
A 5th principal that involves privacy turbulence…
5) When co-owners of private information don’t effectively negotiate and follow mutually held privacy rules, boundary turbulence is the likely result.
The content of potential disclosures; information that can be owned.
The feeling that one has the right to own private information.
A theory that assumes we can best understand people’s freely chosen actions if we study the system of rules they use to interpret and manage their lives.
Collective privacy boundary
An intersection of personal privacy boundaries of co-owners of private information, all of whom are responsible for the information.
Mutual privacy boundary
A synchronized collective privacy boundary that co-owners share because they have negotiated common privacy rules.
The rights and responsibilities that co-owners of private information have to control its spread
A confidant fully committed to handling private information according to the original owner’s privacy rules.
A recipient who sought out private information.
A co-owner of private information who did not seek it nor want it.
An alliance formed by co-owners of private information as to who else should be able to know.
The extent to which a boundary permits private information to flow to third parties.
Disruption of privacy management and relational trust that occurs when collective privacy boundaries aren’t synchronized.
The tragic moral choice confidants face when they must breach a collective privacy boundary in order to promote the original owner’s welfare.