American View: It’s Time to Take the Privacy-Invading Security State Out of Christmas (But Not Out of the Office)

Terrifying, right? The little plastic Elf on the Shelf was simply another agent subordinate to the state’s mission to know everything about everyone, all the time. I’m surprised that the home-focused Elf wasn’t immediately followed up with a legion of like-minded posable plastic snitches: that Rat in your Flat, the Dwarf at the Wharf, the Skeleton on the Peloton, et al.

Astonishingly, this nightmare month is just fine with American adults. Many parents revel in the opportunity to coerce “good” behaviour out of their terrified children. By fostering a home environment where every person, object, and device is perceived to be eagerly lying in wait for a chance to ruin a child’s holidays, they create a climate of pervasive fear that can only be mitigated with self-restraint … and ratting one another out before they can do the same to you!

I’d wager that the original lies were intended to take some of the burden off mum and dad. It’s hard enough to police your bored children; during the run up to Christmas, kids are so psyched up by toy commercials, chocolate, and irrational expectations that they’re bouncing off the walls the moment they awake. That makes a few “white lies” okay if it helps settle the noise house down for a blessed few moments (downstream ramifications to trust be damned).

And yet .. AND YET! … when those exact same adults reach their workplace every day, they gripe and grouse about their employer’s bog-standard internal surveillance policies. Nearly every organisation in business today has some sort of Acceptable Use Policy that spells out how users have no Reasonable Expectation of Privacy whilst using company information systems or when occupying company facilities. The use of any space or communication system constitutes “consent to monitoring,” full stop. IT and/or Security can read all their emails, instant messages, and saved documents. The company can listen to all their phone calls. The company can track which doors they pass through, and measure how long they spend in the loo. Everything a worker does in the modern office is subject to constant, invasive, non-negotiable monitoring.

They read what I’ve been typing / They know when I’m on Slack / They log if I logged in on time / My every twitch is tracked

Moreover, the potential consequences of getting “caught” saying or doing something inappropriate in the office can cost a transgressor their livelihood … a damming fate, considering that most American adults’ healthcare eligibility is tired directly to their employment. No job? No medical care! [2] Saying the “wrong” thing about your boss in a Slack thread can strip away your ability to afford the medications you need to survive. How’s that for coercive?

No wonder that workers hate living like this. The idea that they have no choice in the matter – that their every move is passively tracked by an army of digital agents, ready to be used against them the moment they fall out of political favour – is bloody exhausting. It’s demoralising, too. Where’s the trust? Why can’t you cut me some slack, boss? What did I do wrong that you feel it’s justified to treat me like a recidivist felon?

Hypocritical much, amigo? How come it’s perfectly all right to terrorise your children with this kind of constant stress every December but it’s somehow not all right when your own in loco parentis figure at the office does it to you? Hmm? Whatever happened to what’s good for the Christmas goose is good for the workaday gander?

The non-facetious answer is that the Orc on the Spork style mind games played by parents at Christmastime are supposed to be harmless fun. Aside from those creepy weirdos who hide “nanny cams” throughout their house, most people participating in the holiday season charade aren’t truly observing anyone. [3] It’s just a “fun game” to play with your kids in the winter, whereas the eternal Eye of Sauron watching your every misstep at the office is very, very real. That makes it a serious problem. I can see that.

The slightly facetious answer is that it’s all based on who is in control at a given location. At home, a worker believes themselves to be benevolent and magnanimous. They would never abuse their surveillance power because everyone can’t help but believe that they’re the hero of their own life’s story. Therefore, it’s safe, just, and fair that they can be trusted to rule their domain by fiat. Whereas someone else is in charge at the office … someone who obviously cannot be trusted because they might have hidden motives. Note that this location-based disconnect still holds true for top executives, since they can’t imagine their tame IT or security minions ever turning the organisation’s surveillance power onto them. It’s an “I’m a real person and everyone else isn’t” delusion.

The thoroughly facetious (but probably more accurate) answer is that people are inherently irrational and inconsistent. Take your pick. Just don’t harass your security team this winter when they ding you for doing your holiday shopping on company time. They’re required to monitor your boring discourse to protect the company. They don’t enjoy it any more than you do.

[1] If you can’t remember the song, I envy you; here, it’s guaranteed to play once per hour on infinite repeat in every public space from 1st through 25th December.

[2] Unless you’re among the super-rich. Laws and rules don’t apply to them in America.

[3] Smart TVs and other smart devices already do that, just for the benefit of faceless and soulless corporations, not for parents. That makes it fine, right?