“The Great Hack” documentary captures how Cambridge Analytica takes the 10s of thousands of data points per person to identify opportunities to divide people and the design a misinformation campaign that will resonate with each faction.
Imagine being able to compile the cheapest pressure point for everyone in the world using surveillance and then exploiting it on a industrial scale. Most modern surveillance is in a legally ambiguous area of the law.
In theory you can target anyone with habitual use of a computer or with friends who use computers a lot for very cheap.
- It could be in the interest of a government to make sure people aren't spreading what they would consider disinformation
- It is then in the government's interest to prevent the spread of disinformation, perhaps to identify those spreading it or those who may be inclined to spread it
- It's not a stretch then to consider that it could be in the interest of government, particularly one with malicious or authoritarian intent, to tap into private conversations of people suspected of spreading disinformation.
I find it particularly concerning, because I assume that what people within a society would consider disinformation is 1) inconsistent, 2) ephemeral.
To add to the siblings' comments, it is also likely that a lack of privacy leads to groupthink. Groupthink may propagate misinformation, as people become afraid to speak up against it.