Main Article Content
Medical device manufacturers and other high-technology companies increasingly incorporate algorithmic data surveillance in next-generation medical wearables. These devices, including hearing aids, leverage patient data created through human-computer interaction to not only power devices but also increase corporate profits. Although data protection laws establish privacy requirements for personal information collection and use, these companies continue to use patients’ personal information with little notice or education, significantly curtailing the agency of wearers. We explore the complex ecology of the Starkey Halo smart hearing aid, focusing on the opacity of its algorithmic functionality and examining patient education materials for disclosures of data surveillance. We contextualize these findings within privacy law in the United States and European Union that are relevant to algorithmic surveillance and recommend specific steps to enhance wearer agency through informed decision-making.
Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, 573 U.S. 208 (2014).
Amoore, L. (2011). Data derivatives: On the emergence of a security risk calculus for our
times.Theory, Culture & Society, 28(6), 24-43.
Baca, M. (2019, Sept. 9). These apps may have told Facebook about the last time you had
sex. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/ technology/2019/09/10/these-apps-may-have-told-facebook-about-last-time-you-had-sex
Ball, K., Di Domenico, M., & D. Nunan (2016). Big data surveillance and the body-subject.
Body & Society, 22(2), 58-81.
Ball, K. (2009). Exposure: Exploring the subject of surveillance. Information,
Communication & Society, 12(5), 639-657.
Edney, A., & Chen, C. (2015, September 14). Big pharma hands out fitbits to collect better personal data. Bloomberg. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-14/big-pharma-hands-out-fitbits-to-collect-better-personal-data
Citron, D. K. (2008). Technological due process. Washington University Law Review, 85(6), 1249.
Citron, D. K., & Pasquale, F. A. (2014). The scored society: Due process for automated predictions. Washington Law Review, 89(1), 1.
Cooper, M. (2011). Rhetorical agency as emergent and enacted. College Composition and
Communication, 62(3), 420-449.
Crist, R. (2019, July 13). Amazon and Google are listening to your voice recordings. Here’s
what we know about it. c|net. Retrieved from https://www.cnet.com/how-to/ amazon-and-google-are- listening-to-your-voice-recordings-heres-what-we-know/
Davis, D. (2010). Inessential solidarity: Rhetoric and foriegner relations. Pittsburgh:
University of Pittsburgh Press.
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Galster, J. (2014, April 2). What does the Halo Made for iPhone hearing aid mean for
Hearing aid research? Starkey Hearing Technologies Blog. Retrieved from
Haggerty, K.D. & Ericson, R.V. (2003). The surveillant assemblage. The British Journal of
Sociology, 51.4, 605-622.
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). P.L. No. 104-191,
Stat. 1938 (1996).
Hern, A. (2019, July 26). Apple contractors ‘regularly hear confidential details’ on Siri
recordings. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/ technology/2019/jul/26/apple-contractors-regularly-hear-confidential- details-on-siri-recordings.
Ingraham, C. (2013). Toward an algorithmic rhetoric. In G. Verhulsdonck & M. Limbu. (Eds.),
Digital rhetoric and global literacies: Communication modes and practices in a
networked world. (pp. 62-79). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Ingraham, C. (2018, September 25). An insurance company wants you to hand over your FitBit data so it can make more money. Should you?. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/09/25/an-insurance- company-wants-you-hand-over-your-fitbit-data-so-they-can-make-more-money-should-you/?noredirect=on
Katz, S. (1992). The ethic of expediency: Classical rhetoric, technology, and the Holocaust.
College English,54(3), 255-275.
Kennedy, K. (2017). Designing for human-machine collaboration: Smart hearing aids as
wearable technologies. Communication Design Quarterly,5(4) 40-51.
Kennedy, K. & Wilson, N. (2019). The banality of digital aggression: Algorithmic data
surveillance in medical wearables. In J. Reyman & E. Sparby (Eds.), Digital ethics:
Rhetoric and responsibility in online aggression, hate speech, and harassment. (pp.
-230). New York: Routledge.
Marx, G.T. (2015). Surveillance studies. International Encyclopedia of the Social &
Behavioral Sciences, 23, 733-741.
Marx, G.T. (2016). Windows into the soul: Surveillance and society in an age of high
technology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Miller, C. (2007). What can automation tell us about agency? Rhetoric Society Quarterly
Neff, G. & Nafus, D. (2016). Self-tracking. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Nieva, R. (2019, Sept. 6). Google Assistant and Amazon Alexa could be next targets for child
privacy laws. c|net. Retrieved from https://www.cnet.com/news/google-assistant-
Nissenbaum, H. (2004). “Privacy as contextual inquiry.” Washington Law Review 79(1),
Nissenbaum, H. (2011). Privacy in context. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Peppet, S. (2014). “Regulating the Internet of Things: First steps toward managing
discrimination, privacy, security, and consent.” Texas Law Review 93(1), 85-175.
Pogue, D. (2018). Hearing aids are finally entering the 21st century. Scientific American.
Retrieved from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/hearing-aids- are-finally- entering-the-21st-century/
Price, W.N. (2015). “Black box medicine.” Harvard Journal of Law and Technology 28(2),
Potts, L. (2013). Social media in disaster response: How experience architects can build
for participation. New York: Routledge.
Reyman, J. (2013). User data on the social web: Authorship, agency, and appropriation.
College English, 75(5), 513-533.
Reyman, J. (2018). The rhetorical agency of algorithms. In Hess, A. & A. Davisson (Eds.)
Theorizing digital rhetoric(pp. 112-125). New York: Routledge.
Richards & Hartzog (2019). “The pathologies of digital consent.” Washington University Law
Solove, D. (2013). “Privacy self-management and the consent dilemma.” Harvard Law
Review 126(7), 1880-1903.
Starkey Hearing Technologies. (2015). Halo made for iPhone hearing aid. [Patient
Starkey Hearing Technologies. (2019). SoundPrint. (Version 184.108.40.206). [Mobile application
software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com.
[Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com.
The Economist. (2018, June 4). How data-driven policing threatens human freedom.
Retrieved from https://www.economist.com/open-future/2018/06/04/
The Washington Post (n.d.) How the NSA is tracking people right now. Retrieved from
The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy & National Security Council.
(1996). Fact sheet: U.S. global positioning system policy. Satellite Navigation - GPS -
Presidential Policy. Federal Aviation Administration. Retrieved from https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/techops/navservices/gnss/gps/policy/presidential/
Tschider, C. (2017). “Enhancing cybersecurity for the digital health marketplace.” Annals of
Health Law 26(2), 1-38.
Tschider, C. (2018). “Deux ex machina: regulating cybersecurity and artificial intelligence
for patients of the future.” Savannah Law Review, 5(1), 177-210.
Tschider, C. (2018). “Regulating the IoT: Discrimination, privacy, and cybersecurity in the
digital age.” Denver University Law Review, 96(1), 87-143.
Tschider, C. (2019). “The consent myth: Improving choice for patients of the future.”
Washington University Law Review (forthcoming).
Waldman, A. (2014). “Privacy as trust: Sharing personal information in a networked
world.”University of Miami Law Review, 69:9, 559-630.
Yeung, K. (2017). ‘Hypernudge’: Big Data as a mode of regulation by design. Information,
Communication & Society, 20(1), 118–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 1369118X.2016.1186713