Parsing Internet addiction

While I have no doubt that addiction is real, I would also like to point out the social labeling dimension of the phenomena.  In class, I used the example of the person who is consumed by the pleasure they derive from playing an instrument, writing music, etc.  I used the example of Lang Lang (check Youtube and see what an incredible virtuoso piano player he is) and Bruce S.  All six of the criteria for addiction could be applied to these guys but you'd never use the word "addiction" for it.  Obsession, maybe but not addiction.  In short, are there "good" behavioral addictions and "bad" ones? and who gets to determine which is which?  And if we adopt this "social constructionist" approach to the problem, what would be the policy implications? How about feeding a heroin addicts' addiction legally?  The person comes in every day, gets their shot, and proceeds on their way.   I don't want to downplay the suffering of the alcoholic but isn't the interesting question--who profits from alcoholism?  We wag our fingers at the behavior but are happy to see advertising on TV that makes alcohol consumption look awfully pleasureable, even if in tine print it says, "drink responsibly".  In short, maybe we shouldn't be trying to draw lines but instead look at the sociology of line drawing--who is doing it, who gets do it, what are social consequences of one line drawing vs another? 

That complex thing called privacy

Over the last two class periods, we have "complexified" the concept of privacy.  It occurs to me that a way of thinking about this is that privacy is both horizontal and vertical.  The horizontal axis is interpersonal; our concerns that others may steal our online materials, or that we might embarrass ourselves by not being private enough about our Facebook photos, etc.  However, we also saw that visibility can be importantly positive, allowing us to help others in need or discover people who are different than ourselves.  On the vertical axis, we saw that the issue is power.  Powerful forces can invade our privacy and sometimes we are fine with that--if they can find the bad guys by doing so, "I have nothing to hide" and therefore I don't care.  On the other hand, how do I know what these forces are doing with my data?   I don't know and it's hard to find out.  In other words, there is a lack of transparency; the power is assymetrical (i.e., you don't have much and corporation and government have a lot).

I was wondering what the relationship might be between the vertical and horizontal meanings of privacy.  Are they entirely separate?  Or are there elements of each dimension that help us to understand the privacy issue better?