Australian Human Rights Commission Human Rights in the Digital Age: Additional Material Submitted to the UN Global Digital Compact, 30 April 2023 20. Despite being aware, and disapproving, of the risks to privacy, individuals are often unwilling or unable to stop using appliances or services which threaten their privacy.7 This reluctance or inability to avoid products or services which threaten privacy, may partly be in response to a lack of effective competition or alternative. The ACCC has previously found that a lack of competition and unavailability of reasonable alternatives (which may better protect privacy) can lead users to accept undesirable terms and conditions.8 21. Even where an individual understands how their data will be used, this power imbalance remains, as ‘one party controls the design of applications and the other must operate within that design’.9 22. The Commission would also highlight the impact of the ‘privacy paradox’: the phenomenon that, despite understanding the privacy risks of a product or service, there is no obvious influence upon an individual’s behaviour.10 Namely, individuals will still engage with privacy-adverse products and services even where they are highly aware of the risks. 23. This does not mean that individuals do not care about their privacy. In fact, data protection is crucial in maintaining trust in digital ecosystems. The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) Australian Community Attitudes to Privacy Survey 2020 report demonstrates that a majority of Australians (around 70%) believe that privacy is a major concern in rapidly evolving digital environments.11 24. Moreover, 79% of Australians agree that companies should not be able to sell a users’ data under any circumstances. A further 70% are uncomfortable with companies using data to monitor their online behaviours.12 25. The above highlights fundamental issues in a model which places the onus on individuals to protect their own data. The Commission is aware of emerging models which move away from such individual-onus-heavy approach. 26. For example, the Consumer Policy Research Centre in its In whose interest? Why businesses need to keep consumers safe and treat their data with care (Working Paper) put forward two alternative approaches to protecting data in Australia – which may have global application. 27. The Working Paper canvasses the creation of a duty of care or best-interest duty, which would operate similarly to fiduciary duties in the finance sector to hold businesses accountable for how they collect, share and use consumer data.13 28. The Working Paper also advocates for a: 6