Katie M. linked me to this blog entry because I’m actually doing my thesis on it! Part of the issue is what you described as “lack of relative terms”.

Privacy is a social construct first off. To be able to measure it, would be a little odd, because it’s a fairly abstract notion. What we can measure is how much information we are willing to part with, from an economic perspective. We make constant evaluations on what information we are willing to reveal given our assessment of the situation. Of course, our assessment of the situation isn’t always a fair one. Often times, we ended up relying on others, (such as friends on facebook) to set a social norm on what information is acceptable to reveal.

The media does spend a lot of time talking about identity theft, and in part, they are doing a fairly good thing. Think of it as having an impact given the theory of reasoned action.

Finally, the generational issue also comes down to an issue in a discrepancy in the life cycle of information. Just like software, and hardware, information goes through a life cycle too. Previously, it was often a very short life cycle. Now, that life cycle has been stretched and stretched to near permanence. An older generation might be slower to come to terms with that change, while a newer one may expect that it’s “just how things have always been”. Divides are good for reinforcing that structure.

It’s something to think about, even if it isn’t exactly right. Just some thoughts.