In his important new book, Nothing to Hide: The False Tradeoff Between Privacy and Security, Daniel Solove argues that if we continue to view privacy and security as diametrically opposed to each other, privacy will always lose. Solove argues that the predetermined abandonment of privacy in security-related disputes means that the structure of the privacy-security debate is inherently flawed. Solove understands that privacy is far too vital to our freedom and democracy to accept its inevitable demise. The central thesis of this Review is that Solove's polemic is a strong and desperately needed collection of frames that counterbalances the "nothing to hide" argument and other refrains so often used in privacy disputes. Nothing to Hide is succinct and accessible. In his ambitious quest to concisely respond to a wide range of problems, however, Solove risks leaving the reader unsatisfied, wanting more details about his proposals to untangle the tension between privacy and security. Yet this critique does not detract from the importance of this book as a collection of frames to counter a popular narrative in the privacy and security debate.
The Fight to Frame Privacy,
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol111/iss6/10