The ironies are piling up. I read David Lat’s blog on going public with his diet while sucking down a root beer float at some roadside Steak & Shake. We were heading home from a weekend in Memphis where I had been overeating on a grand scale. David’s premise is: the internet is making privacy obsolete, and that’s a good thing. People tend to behave better when their actions are public, so posting constant updates on his diet would be a powerful motivator.
I spent a good portion of my weekend getaway publicizing my own life, checking in on Brightkite, posting pictures of the interesting stops, and whistling a few tweets on twitter. Then, of course, there's friendfeed, flickr, and my new friend, Skitch. Even writing this weblog under a thinly disguised pseudonym, I'm spending a lot of time opening windows into my life.
In spite of all this, I have a knee-jerk reaction to protecting privacy. The words of Justice Brandeis resonate with me:
the right to be let alone-the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men.
Brandeis wrote that in dissent, so he lost, too.
Still, I'm not sure history shows that public scrutiny improves an individual's behavior. Of course, David Lat is no Britney Spears (thank God) and this narrow slice of publicity may just serve its purpose. I'm rooting for David as I pinch my own belly. But I question the value of living by committee. You can debate the knowledge of the masses, and a lot of people have. But the wisdom of the masses is something else, entirely. I guess I'm just not ready for wikibeing. I really don't want want people weighing in on some things (parenting decisions jump straight to mind). Sometimes, the best thing you can do is just make a decision and move on. Sometimes, the unexamined life is worth living after all.
|