Hannah Whelchel

Communication Privacy Management Theory and Facebook

Indiana Wesleyan University
November 21, 2014

Communication Privacy Management Theory and Facebook

Whelchel 2

Introduction:
Sandra Petronios Communication Privacy Management Theory states that as humans,
we have a strong desire for privacy. It also states that if we open up and reveal our private
information with others there is potential for greater depth in relationships. There are three
components to this theory: privacy ownership, privacy control, and privacy turbulence. These
components make up the idea that we all have private information that we chose to either share
or keep to ourselves. Alongside these components are five core principles. The first principle of
CPM states that people have a right to own and control their own information. This means that
we own our own information, and we are in control of who we disclose our personal and private
information to. Secondly, it states that people control their private information through the use of
personal privacy rules. This means that we create personal boundaries when it comes to our
private information. We decide when and where to disclose vulnerable information. Thirdly,
when others are told or given access to a persons private information, the become co-owners of
that information. When someone is given or is told information that is considered personal or
private, they become a shareholder of that information. They now own the rights to the
information as much as the original owner does. The fourth principle is that co-owners of private
information need to negotiate mutually agreeable privacy rules about telling others the given
information. This is so that boundaries for sharing the information are mutually understood.
Lastly, when co-owners of private information dont effectively negotiate and follow mutually
held privacy rules, boundary turbulence is likely the result. This is where tension arises due to
misunderstandings or intentionally breached privacy boundaries, depending on the situation.
Boundary turbulence occurs when information that has been shared along mutually agreed
privacy terms is shared outside of the privacy agreement. This causes tension between the parties

Communication Privacy Management Theory and Facebook

Whelchel 3

involved. There are many factors that play into the way we develop our own privacy rules. These
factors are culture, gender, motivation, context, and risk/benefit ratios. All of these factors and
principles help make up Communication Privacy Management Theory. This theory can be
applied to many different social media sites. However, I felt that Facebook was the most
applicable social media to this theory because of the amount of control that users have over the
content that they choose to post.

CPM and Facebook:

This theory can be applied in many situations. It can be applied in day-to-day situations
where we receive information with an added, dont tell this to anyone. It can be applied when
we have information that we choose to share with a selective number of people. It can be applied
in extreme situations as well. One of the most common applications is the popular social media
site, Facebook. Facebook has become one of the top social media sites in the world. With that
said, Facebook has begun to dominate a lot of social interactions. Because of this, face-to-face
conversations have taken a backseat. When it comes to Facebook, users can post any information
regarding themselves, true or false. They have the ability to post status updates, photos, or even
articles. They can create a persona, or be genuine in the way that they portray themselves.
Because there is no way to tell if someone is being genuine or if a faade is being created, it is
easy to only put out information that shines a positive light on how others view that person,
keeping private information from being posted. Because it is so easy to paint yourself in a
positive light, people tend to play to this. They will only post the positive things that happen to
them. However, these positive things only scratch the surface of what is truly happening in their
reality. This occurs because as humans, we desire privacy. We dont like to show everyone our

Communication Privacy Management Theory and Facebook

Whelchel 4

dirty laundry. When it comes to Facebook, we will control the information that we are putting
out there in an effort to protect ourselves.
When it comes to CPM, Facebook is a prime example. As one of CPMs five core
principles states, we believe we own and have a right to conceal our private information. On
Facebook we have total control over the information that we choose to conceal or share. We are
in control of the posts we create and the photos we post. As the second core principle states,
people control their private information through the use of personal privacy rules. When posting
to Facebook, we control the privacy of what we post. We have the power to choose about posting
the news about our job acceptance over our failed paper in school. We have the power to choose
to post about our new car over our car wreck. The third principle states that when others are told
or given, or in Facebooks case read, they become co-owners of that information. This means
that the information that we post to Facebook is automatically shared information that becomes
public knowledge. Every friend that someone has on Facebook has access to that information;
they become co-owners of the posted information. By posting a status or a photo, one is granting
others the opportunity to be co-owners of their private information.
The fourth core principle is where the water with Facebook becomes murky. The
principle states that co-owners of private information need to negotiate mutually agreeable
privacy rules about telling others information. This is where the virtual reality of Facebook
becomes dangerous. Because people cannot talk to every Facebook friend that they have
individually and tell them not to share something that they would like to post, they are risking the
possibility that the information they have shared will not be respected, and the privacy that they
desire will be breached. This becomes dangerous. This is where information that doesnt need to
be posted can be posted anyways out of intense feelings, and relationships can be harmed. For

Communication Privacy Management Theory and Facebook

Whelchel 5

example, if someone is frustrated or angry, it is easy for him or her to post out of these emotions,
not being careful with their private information. However, in doing so, this information becomes
public, gaining many co-owners.
This leads to the last principle, which states that when co-owners of private information
dont effectively negotiate and follow mutually held privacy rules, boundary turbulence is likely
the result, creating tension in relationships that exist in reality. This means that relationships can
suffer strain from online interactions such as Facebook posts. Sometimes Facebook can be seen
as a journal where people can post their feelings. While there is a mature way to do this, some
people choose to be careless about it. When this happens, their private information becomes
public. Relationships can be harmed and social media is abused when others post about personal
situations, especially involving another person. This can be compared to the act of sub
tweeting on Twitter. This means that a post (or tweet) is formed that is directed at another
person without mentioning their name directly. However, due to the contents or context of the
post, that person, and others, may realize that this is a post about them or someone they know.
This causes tension among relationships because private information is abused.

Real Life Application:

When developing relationships, face-to-face interaction is crucial. This is something that

Facebook cannot provide. When relationships are created in reality as opposed to online, parties
reach a level of comfort that cannot be reached through social media. This provides healthier
relationships in which private information can be shared. It becomes easier to share private
information when a deeper connection in a relationship is developed. It is also easier to take

Communication Privacy Management Theory and Facebook

Whelchel 6

principle four of CPM into account. As a reminder, principle four states that co-owners of private
information need to negotiate mutually agreeable privacy rules about telling others the given
information. This can be done a lot easier in person because all accounts of communication, such
as non-verbal language, can be taken into account, providing a greater level of trust when setting
privacy boundaries. Those who are disclosing information that is private to them can feel
reassured by hearing, in person, that someone has heard and understands the desired privacy
boundaries regarding the information that they are now co-owners of.
I wanted to take principle four to another level. I asked multiple friends how they felt
about sharing private information online versus in person. The majority of my friends agreed that
while you can hide behind a faade on Facebook, it is more comfortable to share private
information with someone in person. I was curious as to their reasoning why. My friend Eliza
stated that she does sometimes share more vulnerable information on Facebook only because she
slimmed down her friends list to where she only has people in her friends list who are close
enough to her to make her feel comfortable sharing private information. She is okay with those
friends being co-owners of her information. She said that if there were a status that she did not
want a specific friend or two to see, she would adjust the privacy settings, controlling the spread
of her private information, limiting the number of co-owners.
My second friend, Miranda, stated that she sees Facebook as a faade creator, and she
does not like sugar coating everything online to make her look better. She said that there is a fine
line between being real and protecting our own private information. Because of this, she now
posts general private information but excludes the details. She said that this provides more depth
in her real life relationships. She stated, If people see a vague status about something Im going
through, and care enough to ask me for more details in person, it means a lot more to me than if

Communication Privacy Management Theory and Facebook

Whelchel 7

they were to simply like the status on Facebook, and have that be the end of it. Miranda went
on to explain that it makes her nervous to share private information on social media because she
never knows how people will treat that information. She is not sure that everyone will respect her
desired privacy boundaries. She said, Once you post it, its out there. Anyone can take my
personal information and respect it, or abuse it. There is no telling what will happen, so instead I
keep it simple.

Case Study:
When it comes to parents and their online relationship with their children, CPM comes in
to play. In a study conducted by McAfee titled, 2013 Digital Deception: Exploring the Online
Disconnect Between Parents and Kids researchers found that 46 percent of teens said they
would change their online behavior if they knew their parents were paying attention. When asked
for the reason behind this, many teens said that their parents would not approve of the private
information they post. For example, they stated that in an effort to be cool many would post
pictures or stories from parties to fit in. They said their parents would not approve of this
behavior. In this same study, researchers found that 36 percent of teens that are friends with their
parents on Facebook will alter security settings on certain posts in an effort to hide information
from their parents. This is because they want to keep information about their activities private,
depending on the activity. They do not want their parents to be co-owners of this information out
of the fear that they might not agree with their behavior. Because we are in control of our
information, we choose what we share with others. In this case, these teens did not want their
parents to know certain information about their lives, so they chose to not allow their parents to
be co-owners of that information via Facebook.

Communication Privacy Management Theory and Facebook

Whelchel 8

Personal Connection:
In the past, I had a tendency to only post about my accomplishments, good news, and
photos that I felt painted myself in a positive light, one that would appeal to others. Being at a
smaller Christian school adds pressure to this idea. Thinking back, I realized that I have not
always been realistic in my postings. I was only posting the things that werent questionable or
vulnerable; I was controlling my information to create a faade that I had my life together. As I
have grown up I have realized that as Christians, this is not what we are called to. We are called
to be transparent and vulnerable, and to help others who are going through similar struggles.
How will that friend from high school (who Ive lose touch with) know that they can talk to me
about a low self-esteem if they dont know I struggle with that? Not that I need to post my
struggles all over my Facebook wall, but I do need to show that I am human, and my Facebook is
only a snippet of my life. After realizing this, I decided to post a private and vulnerable status to
Facebook last night, and see if I received any reactions. My status read, Confession: Too often
when asked how I am doing, I respond with "Im so busy." I don't like that I do that. Being busy
is a blessing, having things that Im passionate about that keep me occupied? Thats a privilege. I
never want to make "being busy" an excuse for my attitude to turn lousy. I want to substitute joy
for busy, and embrace the life I have been blessed with. Here's to new goals. After posting that
status, I felt a sense of nervousness rush through me. I felt as though I had just exposed a
negative side to my character and I didnt like the discomfort of knowing that all of my
Facebook friends were now co-owners of that information. I kept the status posted and went on
with my night. The next morning I was walking to class when my friend Chris stopped me. He
wanted to tell me that he really appreciated my vulnerability on social media. He said that he was

Communication Privacy Management Theory and Facebook

Whelchel 9

thankful for my transparency, and that he has been struggling with the same thing. He said he
was thankful that I exposed a side of myself that he could relate to, and learn from. I then had the
opportunity to pray with him. Had I not been transparent with my social media post, Chris would
have not known that I was struggling with this. This has encouraged me to be more open online,
and paint a more realistic picture of the life that Im living. At the same time, it is still important
that I am careful with the private information that I share on Facebook. The information that I
choose to share gains hundreds of co-owners the moment it is posted.
After talking to Chris, I decided to conduct an experiment. I chose three friends on
Indiana Wesleyans campus who are avid Facebook users and interviewed them about their
posting habits. I asked questions such as, Why do you post the things you post, Do you
refrain from posting certain things because you want to keep the information a secret, and Do
you sugarcoat your posts? The results did not surprise me. All three of my friends had similar
answers. The all agreed that they choose to withhold information about certain situations from
Facebook so that people will not own their vulnerable private information to share with others.
One friend stated that she a few years ago she posted about how wonderful her birthday was, but
failed to mention the fact that she had a huge argument with her mother the same day that ended
up with her not being able to go out with her friends for her birthday. When I asked her to
explain further, she told me that she didnt want people to think negatively of her, so she
withheld this information, and posted information that was positive instead, because she knew
the information posted would be public forever. With the second friend, I explained CPM and
asked him how he felt that this related to his filtered posts. He told me that he sugarcoats his
Facebook posts in an effort to secure his private information. He explained that if something bad
happens to him, he does not want the whole world to know about it, so he would not post about

Communication Privacy Management Theory and Facebook

Whelchel 10

it. He explained that he does not like the virtual reality that Facebook creates, and he doesnt like
being vulnerable online because he would rather be vulnerable in person, controlling who is let
in on his private information.
I found these results to be very interesting. I realized that the results I received completely
backed up CPM. Like the first principle of CPM states, we have thee right to own and control
our own information, and that is exactly what my friends are doing.

Conclusion:
CPM can be applied to Facebook due to the fact that Facebook users have the right to
choose what information they post versus what information they conceal. Scholar Neil Haynes
stated, The Internet is not a haven for free-floating identity, disconnected from our physical
form, but it is a place where bodies may still be seen as a representation of an individual and
images may still be regulated. While CPM can be applied to many situations, Facebook
embodies all five principles of the theory.
Being honest about what is posted to Facebook, and not creating a false reality is up to us
because we are in control of what we post. Ethically, we are to be honest with our words as
Christ followers. At Indiana Wesleyan University we are in close quarters with those around us,
including the friends we have on Facebook. This is where we must be careful with the
information that we choose to post on social media. It is important to walk in line with what we
say, online and in reality. Communication Privacy Management can help up be more aware
about how we are representing ourselves online, but more importantly, how we are protecting
and sharing our private information.

Communication Privacy Management Theory and Facebook

Whelchel 11

Bibliography:
Cohen, David. "STUDY: Parents Have No Clue What Their Kids Are Doing On Facebook,
Other Social Networks." AllFacebook. N.p., 4 June 2013. Web.
Haynes, Neil. "Social Networking and Parent-child Relationships Archives - Global Social
Media Impact Study." Global Social Media Impact Study RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Nov.
2014.
West, Anne, Jane Lewis, and Peter Currie. "Students' Facebook friends: Public and Private
Spheres." Journal of Youth Studies 12.6 (2009): 615-27. Web.