Distributed Digital Communication: Privacy, Persistence, and Power

Does a private conversation truly exist within remote collaboration?

One of my last ‘proper’ jobs was as Equalities Manager at a university in inner London. 

As well as policy stuff, this involved a lot of casework, where my position meant the threading of a difficult needle: advocating for the vulnerable and those being discriminated against, while also operating under the obligation to try and make sure my employer wasn’t sued. These cases, at every stage from the first HR meeting to the odd tribunal, frequently came down to one person’s word against another.

We did have email within the institution at that time, but that was mainly used for academic or administration purposes, rather than for harassment and discrimination. Those conversations took place face-to-face where they could not be witnessed or easily countered and disputed, especially when vast power imbalances were in play.

This has always been the case, in life as in work. The evolution of persistent digital conversation should definitely make it easier to pinpoint unfair or illegal practices, in the workplace and elsewhere. But discrimination and harassment haven’t stopped happening. In fact in many ways their impact has become far more invidious, intruding into our personal lives and devices like never before.

We still have a sense that some communications are intended to be private though, and despite the fact we know they are digitised and could theoretically one day be used in evidence, we treat them as though they are a completely secret conversation.  

I guess it’s easy to forget, whether you are a cheating spouse or an incompetent government minister attempting to navigate a global health crisis, that what you think of private messages might one day be thrown into the spotlight of public scrutiny, simply because they exist in digital form.  Throwaway remarks on a messaging app FEEL both private and ephemeral. We might not even remember sharing them - but, a persistent digital record exists, and probably not just on our own devices.

Privacy is dead. Is that a good thing?

As we wince through the UK Covid enquiry evidence from politicians and public figures, listening to news broadcasters awkwardly beeping their way through WhatsApp transcripts ranging from misogyny to ignorance to outright lies, which of us hasn’t felt a twinge of discomfort - perhaps memories of some conversation we may have had via the same app, believing it to be totally private for all time?  Because instant text messaging is simply the way we communicate nowadays, especially when we are not in the same room together. And we rarely think about how it would stand up to public scrutiny.

In remote teams, it’s exactly the same: Crucial work-related instruction and discussion and updates happen on the same platform as gossip, flirtation, and backbiting, in the private messaging channels. 

So what happens if that conversation crosses a line, and becomes illegal or discriminatory conduct?

What are the implications, when that conversation takes place on a company-owned server and messaging platform?