“If I Have Nothing to Hide, I Have Nothing to Fear”: privacy, public and private surveillance in the digital age

The 'nothing to hide' argument has been described as the 'most common retort against privacy advocates': suggesting that state surveillance only threatens criminals, and ordinary, law-abiding citizens should have nothing to fear. This essay critically evaluates the 'nothing to hide' argument in light of surveillance in the digital age - both by governments and private actors. It will argue that people generally have things that they would rather keep private, and that breaches of this privacy can lead to 'information-based harms'. Whilst UK and European surveillance law has developed safeguards against these, there remain significant risks in the form of foreign and private surveillance. Ultimately, it contributes to an ongoing discourse about the limits of individual privacy, and the role of the internet in democratic societies.