Westin (2003) also has described three distinct empirically-derived (not
theoretically-derived) positions on privacy that the public holds. The High-Privacy
position assigns a high(er) value to privacy claims and seeks comprehensive
governmental interventions to protect privacy. (See Bennett 1995, for an overview,
and Lyon and Zuriek 1996, for examples of the High-Privacy position.) The
Balanced-Privacy position values privacy claims but advocates tailored (e.g., sectoral)
governmental interventions to address demonstrated abuses as well as voluntary
organizational initiatives to promote individual privacy. (See Etzioni 1999, and
Westin 1967, for different approaches to Balanced Privacy.) The Limited-Privacy
position usually assigns a lower value to privacy claims than to business efficiency
and societal-protection interests and it opposes governmental intervention as
unnecessary and costly. (For an example, see Singleton 1998.) I would add a variant
on the Limited-Privacy position, based on the claim that openness ought to trump
privacy. This position has its roots in humanistic psychology (e.g., Jourard 1971).
Interestingly, a contemporary advocate of this position is Mark Zuckerberg, the
founder and CEO of Facebook, currently the largest social networking site (Vargas
2010), although his motives have been questioned (e.g., Lyons 2010). As useful as
these three positions on privacy could be in research on privacy attitudes of social
media users, there are questions about the generalizability of these three positions
on privacy (Margulis et al. 2010).