Securing Your Online Identity After Death

 

By Lilian H. Hill

 

Unlike physical belongings, digital content does not fade with time; social media platforms are designed to preserve, replicate, and resurface information indefinitely.

Online identities survive the deaths of those they represent, leaving friends and families to struggle with the appropriate ways to incorporate these identities into the practices of grief and mourning. Planning for the management or closure of your social media accounts after death is an increasingly important part of digital estate planning.

 

Most social media platforms restrict access to a deceased user’s account to protect privacy and security, even for close family members. As a result, accounts cannot be logged into, even when you know the passwords, or managed without prior authorization. Instead, platforms typically offer processes for memorialization, limited management, or permanent deletion once appropriate documentation, such as a death certificate or proof of authority, is provided (Meta, 2024; Google, 2024).

 

Why Social Media Accounts Should be Closed

Failing to close or manage a deceased person’s social media accounts can create significant security, privacy, emotional, and legal risks. From a cybersecurity standpoint, inactive accounts are vulnerable to hacking, impersonation, and identity theft. Cybercriminals frequently exploit abandoned profiles to contact friends and family, solicit money, spread malicious links, or gather personal information for broader fraud schemes. Because social media platforms do not automatically deactivate accounts after a user’s death, these risks may persist indefinitely unless formal action is taken (Federal Trade Commission [FTC], 2023; Meta, 2024).

 

Unmanaged accounts also pose serious privacy and legal concerns. Social media platforms store private messages, photographs, contact lists, and sometimes sensitive professional or financial information. If accounts remain open, these data may be accessed, misused, or exposed without the consent of the deceased or their estate. In some cases, continued visibility of accounts can complicate estate administration or conflict with state laws governing digital assets, such as the Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act (RUFADAA), which requires explicit authorization for fiduciaries to manage digital accounts (Uniform Law Commission, 2015).

 

The emotional impact on loved ones is another critical concern. Algorithm-driven features such as birthday reminders, memory notifications, or automated friend suggestions can surface unexpectedly and intensify grief. Family members may also receive ongoing messages or tags directed at the deceased, sometimes from individuals who are unaware of the death. Research on grief and digital memory suggests that unregulated online reminders can contribute to prolonged or complicated grief reactions, particularly when survivors are unprepared for repeated exposure (Brubaker et al., 2013).

 

Leaving social media accounts open can also result in reputational harm. For professionals, educators, clinicians, or public figures, dormant or compromised accounts may disseminate inaccurate information, misleading communications, or content that conflicts with the individual’s values or professional identity. This can create confusion for colleagues, students, clients, or institutions and may undermine a carefully established legacy (LinkedIn, 2024).

 

Finally, the absence of advance planning places a substantial administrative and emotional burden on survivors. Navigating platform-specific policies, gathering required documentation, and submitting formal requests can be time-consuming and stressful during periods of acute grief. Without clear instructions or designated digital representatives, families may delay action, increasing the likelihood that accounts remain vulnerable (Google, 2024).

 

Digital Estate Planning

Comprehensive digital estate planning involves proactively closing, memorializing, or otherwise managing social media accounts. Addressing digital assets in advance is not only a matter of security and legality but also a caring act that protects privacy, preserves dignity, and reduces distress for those left behind. Preparing for social media management after death involves creating a digital estate plan that documents accounts, usernames or associated emails, and clear instructions for each platform.

 

Individuals are advised against storing passwords in wills, as such documents may become public records. Instead, use a secure password manager, encrypted digital files, or attorney-held instructions. Naming a digital executor, either formally in a will or informally through clear documentation, can further ensure that wishes are carried out appropriately, consistent with state laws such as the Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act (RUFADAA; Uniform Law Commission, 2015).

 

Process for Closing Social Media Accounts

Facebook and Instagram, both operated by Meta, allow accounts to be either memorialized or permanently deleted after death. Memorialized accounts preserve existing posts and photos while preventing new activity and login access. Meta also allows users to designate a “legacy contact” in advance, who may manage limited aspects of a memorialized account, such as posting a pinned message or updating a profile photo, but who cannot access private messages (Meta, 2024). Without a legacy contact, family members or executors must submit formal requests with verification documents.

 

X (formerly Twitter) does not offer memorialization options and permits only permanent account deletion after death. Immediate family members or authorized representatives must submit a request along with a death certificate, government-issued identification, and proof of their relationship to the deceased (X Corp., 2024). Similarly, LinkedIn allows for the closure of a deceased member’s account through a verification process that typically includes an obituary or death notice, though login access is never transferred (LinkedIn, 2024).

 

TikTok also requires family members or legal representatives to submit documentation to request the removal of a deceased user's account. As with other platforms, TikTok does not permit continued use of an account by another individual, even with informal consent given before death (TikTok, 2024). These policies reflect a broader industry standard prioritizing user privacy over account continuity.

 

Google accounts—including Gmail, Google Drive, YouTube, and Google Photos—offer one of the most comprehensive advanced-planning tools through the Inactive Account Manager. This feature allows users to designate trusted contacts, specify which data can be shared, and set whether the account should be deleted after a defined period of inactivity. This tool is widely recommended as part of proactive digital estate planning because it provides clear, automated instructions that reduce the burden on survivors (Google, 2024).

 

These are not the only social media to consider. Each company will have a policy statement about closing or memorializing accounts. The policy and instructions are usually available in the licensing agreement or in Settings.

 

Conclusion

Addressing social media accounts in advance can significantly reduce emotional distress, prevent unauthorized access or impersonation, and protect the digital legacy of the deceased. Thoughtful planning also supports survivors by providing clarity during a time of grief and ensuring that online identities are handled with respect and intention.

 

References

Brubaker, J. R., Hayes, G. R., & Dourish, P. (2013). Beyond the grave: Facebook as a site for the expansion of death and mourning. The Information Society, 29(3), 152–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2013.777300

Federal Trade Commission. (2023). Identity theft and deceased family members.
https://www.identitytheft.gov

Google. (2024). Plan your digital legacy with inactive account manager. Google Account Help. https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/3036546

LinkedIn. (2024). Close a deceased member’s account. LinkedIn Help Center.
https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin

Meta. (2024). Memorialization settings and legacy contacts. Facebook Help Center.
https://www.facebook.com/help

TikTok. (2024). Account management for deceased users. TikTok Support.
https://www.tiktok.com/legal

Uniform Law Commission. (2015). Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act (RUFADAA). https://www.uniformlaws.org

X Corp. (2024). Request the deactivation of a deceased person’s account. X Help Center. https://help.x.com

 

 

 

From Scrolls to Screens: The Evolution of Reading Modalities

 

By Lilian H. Hill

The way humans read—the modality of reading—has evolved dramatically throughout history, reflecting broader cultural and technological transformations. In ancient and early societies, reading was primarily oral and communal. Literacy was limited to a small elite, and texts often functioned as scripts for performance or worship rather than objects of private study. Reading was typically done aloud, sometimes even when alone, because the act of decoding text was closely tied to sound and speech. This oral modality made reading a social experience that reinforced collective memory and shared meaning (Ong, 1982).

 

By the late Middle Ages and into the early modern period, reading gradually became a silent and private activity. The spread of manuscripts and, more significantly, the invention of the printing press in the fifteenth century transformed how people accessed and engaged with written material. Books became more affordable and abundant, enabling individuals to own and read texts independently. Silent reading encouraged introspection, critical thinking, and personal interpretation. This shift also marked an important cultural change: reading was no longer about communal storytelling or religious devotion but now included individual reflection, education, and intellectual growth (Manuel, 1996).

 

During the 18th to 20th centuries, the print era reached its height. Reading became a linear and sustained process, often tied to formal education and civic participation. Novels, newspapers, and textbooks structured reading as a disciplined, sequential activity, one that required focus, comprehension, and extended attention. Print literacy was viewed as essential for participation in democratic societies and for personal advancement (Chartier, 1994). Readers were expected to move from the beginning to the end of a text, building a logical, cumulative understanding. This period solidified reading as a cornerstone of modern life and identity.

 

Text Interaction

Another way to think about reading modalities is to consider how we interact with text (Bodayle, 2025). In this mode, there are five different modalities of reading:

• Wandering: Aimlessly reading, jumping from topic to topic.
• Searching: Reading to discover specific information.
• Skimming: Reading quickly to make a general assessment.
• Reading to Finish: Reading a book from cover to cover.
• Deep Diving: Immersing yourself in a book, trying to understand every tiny detail.

 

These five reading styles do not have sharp boundaries. Each reading style has its own utility and being a good reader means being able to shift between them freely. We frequently engage in multiple modalities simultaneously. Each modality has its merits and its problems. What is important is not to avoid one kind of reading in favor of the better kind of reading, but to be able to shift between these styles of reading comfortably. As our ways of interacting with text continue to evolve, the rise of digital platforms introduces new dimensions to how and why we read.

 

Digital Reading

In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, the emergence of digital technologies shifted the modality of reading toward multimodality, interactivity, and nonlinearity. Digital platforms blend text, images, sound, and video, creating new ways to construct and interpret meaning (Kress, 2003). Online reading involves scrolling, clicking, linking, and navigating through multiple layers of information rather than following a single, fixed path. Compared to deep reading text interactions, these actions are like wandering, searching, and skimming. The reader becomes not just a consumer but also a participant by commenting, sharing, and creating content in return. This marks a partial return to the social dimension of early oral reading but within a networked, global context (Lankshear & Knobel, 2011).

 

The consequences of digital reading are complex and multifaceted. On the one hand, digital modalities have expanded access to information and literacy. Readers across the world can instantly access vast amounts of content, connect across languages and cultures, and participate in collaborative knowledge-making. Digital tools also support diverse learning styles, offering text-to-speech, interactive media, and adaptive reading environments that enhance accessibility and engagement (Leu et al., 2015).

 

On the other hand, researchers have noted several cognitive and behavioral consequences of digital reading. Because digital texts often encourage multitasking and rapid scanning, readers may experience reduced attention spans and decreased depth of comprehension (Wolf, 2018). The ease of hyperlinking and scrolling fosters fragmented, nonlinear reading habits, which can make it more difficult to build sustained arguments or engage deeply with complex ideas (Baron, 2021). The physicality of print, the tactile sense of progress through pages, and the spatial memory of where information appears also contribute to comprehension, and these cues are often lost in digital environments (Mangen et al., 2013). Moreover, digital reading environments can blur the boundaries between reading for information and reading for entertainment, changing how individuals approach texts in educational and scholarly contexts (Hayles, 2012).

 

The acronym “TL;DR” (short for “Too Long; Didn’t Read”) first appeared in internet forums and Usenet newsgroups around 2002, originally used as a dismissive comment for excessively long posts. Over time, it evolved into a practical tool when writers began including a “TL;DR” summary at the beginning or end of their content, offering a quick takeaway for readers. By the 2010s, the term had become mainstream enough to be included in major dictionaries. Its rise reflects a shift in reading habits. Amid increasing information overload, TL;DR helps readers manage their attention efficiently while signaling how digital reading has changed how we engage with text.

 

At the same time, digital reading has transformed reading into a multisensory and social experience. Through social media, blogs, and online discussion forums, reading is once again a shared act, echoing the communal nature of early oral traditions. Audiobooks and voice interfaces, such as podcasts and smart assistants, reintroduce listening as a primary mode of engagement, bridging ancient oral culture and modern digital life (Wolf, 2018). Emerging technologies like artificial intelligence and virtual or augmented reality are creating even more immersive and personalized reading experiences, suggesting that reading’s next evolution will be both adaptive and interactive.

 

Conclusion

In summary, reading has moved from oral and communal to silent and individual, then to digital and participatory. This dynamic is portrayed in Figure 1. Each shift reflects not only technological innovation but also a deeper change in how humans think, learn, and connect. The digital age has expanded the meaning of reading. Still, it challenges educators, researchers, and readers alike to cultivate new forms of focus, discernment, and critical literacy in an increasingly multimodal world.

 

Figure 1: Changes in Reading Modalities Over Time

 

 

References

Baron, N. S. (2021). How we read now: Strategic choices for print, screen, and audio. Oxford University Press.

Bodayle, C. (2025, January 2). Five modalities of reading. The Rational Kernel. https://colinbodayle.substack.com/p/five-modalities-of-reading

Chartier, R. (1994). The order of books: Readers, authors, and libraries in Europe between the fourteenth and eighteenth centuries (L. G. Cochrane, Trans.). Stanford University Press.

Hayles, N. K. (2012). How we think: Digital media and contemporary technogenesis. University of Chicago Press.

Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. Routledge.

Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2011). New literacies: Everyday practices and social learning (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

Leu, D. J., Forzani, E., Rhoads, C., Maykel, C., Kennedy, C., & Timbrell, N. (2015). The new literacies of online research and comprehension: Rethinking the reading achievement gap. Reading Research Quarterly, 50(1), 37–59. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.85

Mangen, A., Walgermo, B. R., & Brønnick, K. (2013). Reading linear texts on paper versus computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 58, 61–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2012.12.002

Manguel, A. (1996). A history of reading. Viking.

Ong, W. J. (1982). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. Methuen.

Wolf, M. (2018). Reader, come home: The reading brain in a digital world. HarperCollins.

 

 

 

Transforming Workplace Safety with Wearable Technology

 

By Lilian H. Hill

 

This illustration shows Mandy as she prepares for work. Before she enters her workplace, she must change into protective gear that incorporates wearable technology to monitor her personal vital signs, augment her physical abilities, scrutinize the atmosphere, and alert her to dangers.

 

Industries like construction, warehousing, and manufacturing consistently report high rates of workplace injuries and fatalities. Across these sectors, common causes of injuries include overexertion, contact with equipment, and falls. To prevent injuries and fatalities, workplaces have embraced wearable technology to promote safety and worker well-being. From smart helmets and vests to biometric trackers and augmented reality glasses, these devices provide real-time feedback, risk prevention, and data-driven safety interventions. To realize the full potential of workplace wearables and avoid unintended harms, employers and employees alike must be equipped with information literacy. This blog explores how wearables and information literacy together form a powerful alliance for building safer, ethical, and more effective workplaces.

 

The Rise of Wearable Safety Technologies

Wearable technologies are smart, body-worn devices embedded with sensors that collect and transmit data on health, behavior, and environmental exposure. In high-risk sectors such as construction, mining, logistics, and manufacturing, wearables are already being used to:

• Monitor physiological signs like heart rate, temperature, and hydration to prevent heat stress and overexertion (Cannady et al., 2024).
• Detect environmental hazards, including gas exposure, excessive noise, or harmful vibrations (Turney, 2025).
• Alert users to poor posture or dangerous lifting behavior, reducing long-term risk of musculoskeletal disorders (de Looze et al., 2016).
• Enable fall detection and emergency response, especially for lone workers or remote job sites (Chander et al., 2020).
• Augment workers’ physical abilities by reducing strain, enhancing strength, and improving endurance during repetitive or physically demanding tasks. These include exoskeletons and assistive devices (U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2024).
• Support social distancing or zone alerts, helping avoid collisions or entry into hazardous areas.

 

These tools shift safety from a reactive to a proactive model, enhancing situational awareness and reducing incident rates. Nevertheless, some challenges exist:

·      Organizations may incur significant initial expenses when purchasing and implementing wearable technologies across the workforce (U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2024).

·      Meta-analyses of electronic performance monitoring studies reveal that monitoring may negatively affect worker well-being, leading to increased work stress and decreased job satisfaction (Glavin et al., 2024).

·      Some employees perceive wearables as bulky, difficult to operate, or physically uncomfortable. For instance, research has noted that workers expressed concerns about the added weight and inconvenience associated with certain wearable devices (de Looze et al., 2016; U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2024).

·      The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) released a fact sheet on December 19, 2024 titled Wearables in the Workplace: Using Wearable Technologies Under Federal Employment Discrimination Laws. It divided risks from wearables into three categories: collecting information from wearables; using information from wearables; and reasonable accommodations for wearables (O’Brien, 2025). As of July 24, 2025, that fact sheet is no longer available on the EEOC website.

 

The Role of Information Literacy

The integration of wearable technology with information literacy creates a powerful synergy that enhances workplace safety while empowering workers to engage critically with the technologies that monitor them. Their effectiveness depends on the user’s ability to interpret data accurately and act on it appropriately. Information literacy equips workers and supervisors with the skills to assess the reliability, relevance, and implications of the data collected, reducing the likelihood of misinterpretation or misuse (Glavin et al., 2024).

 

When workers understand how wearable data is collected, stored, and used, they are more likely to participate in safety initiatives with trust and agency. This helps shift the narrative from surveillance and control to transparency and collaboration. Informed workers can question unethical practices, ensure consent, and advocate for data protection policies, helping employers balance innovation with responsibility (Glavin et al., 2024).

 

Together, wearable tech and information literacy reduce risk and promote a culture of ethical decision-making and shared responsibility in the workplace. Here’s how:

 

1. Understanding What the Data Means

Wearables generate real-time biometric and environmental data. Without the ability to interpret it correctly, workers may misread alerts or overlook risk signals. Information literacy helps workers contextualize data and understand its implications.

For example, a spike in heart rate might indicate brisk movement or overexertion. Recognizing the difference prevents unnecessary panic or misreporting.

 

2. Questioning the Source and Use of Data

Information-literate individuals ask:

• What data is being collected?
• Who has access to it?
• How will it be used?
• How is it secured?

This is crucial when wearable data can inform safety interventions and performance reviews, insurance claims, or disciplinary actions (Donovan et al., 2022).

 

3. Ensuring Ethical Consent and Privacy

With biometric and location tracking often built in, wearables pose risks to worker privacy. Informed consent, central to ethical technology use, requires information literacy including the ability to read privacy agreements, understand surveillance implications, and make informed choices about participation.

 

4. Collaborating in a Data-Driven Culture

As employers increasingly rely on predictive analytics and AI-generated safety dashboards, information literacy prepares workers to:

• Recognize algorithmic bias
• Participate in safety decision-making
• Demand transparency in digital monitoring systems

Without these skills, workers may be passive subjects of surveillance, rather than active participants in shaping safe and equitable working conditions.

 

Moving Forward: A Dual Investment

To maximize the benefits of workplace wearables, organizations must invest not only in technology, but also in human skills. This means:

• Training workers and supervisors in information literacy principles
• Establishing transparent data governance policies
• Fostering participatory safety cultures, where workers help shape how data is used

By aligning wearable innovation with information literacy, we can move toward ethical, empowering, and truly smart safety systems.

 

References

Argento, Z. M., Kelley, B. J., O’Brien, S. P. (2025, January 2). EEOC fact sheet on wearable technologies indicates growing concern over employee monitoring. Littler. https://www.littler.com/news-analysis/asap/eeoc-fact-sheet-wearable-technologies-indicates-growing-concern-over-employee

Cannady, R., Warner, C., Yoder, A. Miller, J., Crosby, K., Elswick, D., & Kintziger, K. W. (2024), The implications of real-time and wearable technology use for occupational heat stress: A scoping review. Safety Science, 177, 106600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2024.106600.

Chander, H., Burch, R. F., Talegaonkar, P., Saucier, D., Luczak, T., Ball, J. E., Turner, A., Kodithuwakku Arachchige, S. N. K., Carroll, W., Smith, B. K., Knight, A., & Prabhu, R. K. (2020). Wearable stretch sensors for human movement monitoring and fall detection in ergonomics. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(10), 3554. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17103554

de Looze, M. P., Bosch, T., Krause, F., Stadler, K. S., & O'Sullivan, L. W. (2016). Exoskeletons for industrial application and their potential effects on physical work load. Ergonomics, 59(5), 671–681. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2015.1081988

Glavin, P., Bierman, A., & Schieman, S. (2024). Private eyes, they see your every move: Workplace surveillance and worker well-being. Social Currents, 11(4), 327-345. https://doi.org/10.1177/23294965241228874

Turney, T. (2025, March 25). Wearable tech: Safer workplaces of the future. Industrial Hygiene in the Workplace. https://industrialhygienepub.com/wearables/wearable-tech-safer-workplaces-of-the-future/

 U.S. Government Accountability Office (2024, March 4). Wearable technologies in the workplace. GAO-24-107303. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-107303

 

Healthcare Wearables and Information Literacy: Navigating Data for Better Health

 

 

By Lilian H. Hill

 

In today’s digital age, health is increasingly data-driven. Dehghani and Dangelico (2018) define healthcare wearables as portable, embedded computers designed to be worn on the body. McDowell (2025) comments that a “dizzying array of devices” is available to “track physical activity, heart rate, blood pressure, temperature, blood oxygen, glucose levels, stress, sleep patterns, and movement” (p. 28). These include smartwatches, smart rings, armbands, smart eyeglasses, ingestible devices, chest-strap monitors, and clothing embedded with sensors. Wearable health technology is not confined to specialized medical devices for patient care. Major tech companies, such as Apple, have developed wearables designed for health-conscious consumers (Kang & Exworthy, 2022). Nearly a third of adults wear a device to monitor their health and fitness. The global market for wearable healthcare devices is projected to reach nearly $70 billion by 2028, with annual growth expected to surpass 11% (Eastwood, 2024).

 

Wearable devices and artificial intelligence (AI) collaborate to enhance health and wellness monitoring by collecting real-time data, including heart rate, sleep patterns, and activity levels, and utilizing AI to analyze it for patterns and insights. AI enables wearables to provide personalized feedback, detect anomalies such as irregular heart rhythms, and support the management of chronic diseases. This combination also plays a key role in remote healthcare, allowing providers to monitor patients more effectively and reduce the need for in-person visits (Moore et al., 2021). Together, wearables and AI transform raw data into meaningful and actionable information.

 

Categories of Wearable Technology

Wearable devices can be categorized into two main types: consumer-grade and medical-grade wearables. The latter are approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, which requires that medical-grade wearables undergo clinical research and meet stringent standards. They require a doctor’s prescription, and many are equipped with an app or receiver to transmit information to the physician. Consumer-grade wearables include smartwatches, fitness trackers, and sleep monitors. These devices typically measure data such as heart rate, steps, calories burned, sleep quality, and sometimes blood oxygen or ECG readings. Unlike clinical or medical-grade devices, consumer wearables are not intended for diagnosis or treatment; however, they offer users real-time feedback and insights to support their wellness and lifestyle goals.

 

Consumer-Grade Wearables

Information literacy is now essential to digital health. While they have become popular tools in personal wellness routines, using consumer-grade wearables effectively requires more than just strapping on a device. It requires the ability to critically assess, evaluate, and use data to make informed decisions. It enables individuals to navigate the complex flow of personal health data generated by wearables. For example, a fitness tracker may tell you that your heart rate variability is lower than average or that your sleep quality declined last night. McDowell (2025) notes that wearable devices may not be suitable for everyone. Although fluctuations in heart rate or blood pressure are normal, continuous monitoring can provoke anxiety in some individuals. When users lack the information literacy skills needed to interpret data patterns or assess the reliability of the information, these readings may cause confusion or stress (Piwek et al., 2016).

 

Consumer-grade wearables are improving in accuracy, but their performance may vary across different types and brands (McDowell, 2025). Algorithms can oversimplify complex health conditions, and not all devices meet clinical accuracy standards. Individuals need to understand the difference between consumer-grade tools and medical diagnostics and know when to question or supplement data with professional input. Information-literate users recognize that data alone is not knowledge. They contextualize numbers, look for patterns over time, and consider additional sources of information, including conversations with healthcare providers, to make informed judgments about their well-being (Lupton, 2014).

 

Medical-Grade Wearables

Medical-grade wearable devices support the management of chronic conditions such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and sleep disorders by delivering real-time data to individuals and their healthcare providers. Technological advances have made these devices more compact and less intrusive than they were before. They enhance patient engagement by providing tools and information that enable individuals to track their health and make informed decisions. Through remote monitoring and early detection of issues, wearables also have the potential to lower hospital readmission rates and reduce overall healthcare expenses.

 

Healthcare professionals increasingly rely on patients' wearable data for remote monitoring. This makes it even more important that individuals know how to read and report their data accurately. Patients who can summarize trends, ask informed questions, and detect irregularities are better equipped to collaborate with their providers and take an active role in managing their health (Kvedar et al., 2016). Advances in telemedicine have improved access to medical care for patients in rural or remote areas. Wearable technology also contributes significantly by supporting virtual care environments such as telemedicine and helping to ease the demand on hospitals and clinics (LaBoone & Marques, 2024). Information literacy, in this context, becomes a bridge between raw data and effective care. A growing body of research indicates that wearable devices can empower individuals by supporting diagnosis, promoting behavior change, and enabling self-monitoring (Kang & Exworthy, 2022).

 

Data Collected by Wearable Devices

Wearables collect vast amounts of data through sensors that track metrics such as steps, sleep stages, oxygen saturation, and heart rhythm. While these devices make health data more accessible, they also raise important questions:

·      What exactly is being measured?

·      How accurate is the data?

·      What external factors might affect these readings?

·      Who has access to and control of the data?

 

These questions point to broader concerns about data privacy and individual autonomy in the age of digital health (Marr, 2020). As wearables continuously collect and transmit sensitive physiological data, users often have limited knowledge of how their information is stored, shared, or used by third parties such as app developers, insurers, or employers. The lack of transparency in data governance raises ethical issues about consent and control. Without explicit regulatory protections, individuals risk losing ownership of their biometric information, which can be monetized or used in ways that impact their access to services or employment opportunities. Therefore, discussions around wearables must extend beyond functionality and convenience to include advocacy for stronger privacy policies, clearer user rights, and mechanisms for individuals to manage their health data meaningfully.

 

Adult Health Learning

Wearables enhance healthcare education by making learning timely, relevant, and integrated into everyday health practices. They enable real-time, personalized education focused on health management and wellness. For example, adults using fitness trackers, glucose monitors, or heart rate sensors receive immediate feedback that helps them understand how lifestyle choices impact their health, promoting self-directed learning aligned with adult learning principles. In chronic disease management, wearables support ongoing education by providing data that encourages patients to adjust behaviors and adhere to treatment plans. Users often find themselves researching the meaning of new metrics or using apps that recommend changes to diet, exercise, or sleep hygiene. The more informed the user, the more likely they are to seek out trustworthy sources, compare conflicting claims, and avoid misinformation. In this way, wearable technology can promote lifelong learning about health and wellness.

 

Conclusions

As wearable technology continues to evolve, it will play an even more prominent role in preventive medicine and personal health. Devices are becoming increasingly sophisticated, featuring AI-driven recommendations, real-time alerts, and seamless integration with electronic health records. However, the real value of this technology lies in the user’s ability to understand and act on the information it provides. Healthcare wearables represent a promising frontier in personal health management, but only when paired with strong information literacy. To benefit from information generated by wearables, individuals must develop the skills to interpret data critically, seek reliable sources, evaluate the credibility of health claims, and make informed decisions. Ultimately, health is not just about collecting data; it is about making sense of it.

 

References

Dehghani M, Kim K, Dangelico R. (2018). Will smartwatches last? Factors contributing to intention to keep using smart wearable technology. Telematics Informatics, 35(2), 480–90. doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2018.01.007. doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2018.01.007.

Eastwood, B. (2024, June 21). The latest trends in wearable technology for healthcare. CDO Times. https://cdotimes.com/2024/06/21/the-latest-trends-in-wearable-technology-for-healthcare-healthtech-magazine/

Kang, H. S., & Exworthy, M. (2022). Wearing the future-wearables to empower users to take greater responsibility for their health and care: Scoping review. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth, 10(7), e35684. https://doi.org/10.2196/35684

Kvedar, J., Fogel, A. L., & Elenko, E. (2016). Digital medicine's march on chronic disease. Nature Biotechnology, 34(3), 239–246. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3495

LaBoone, P. A., & Marques, O. (2024). Overview of the future impact of wearables and artificial intelligence in healthcare workflows and technology. International Journal of Information Management Data Insights, 4(2), 100294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jjimei.2024

Lupton, D. (2014). Health promotion in the digital era: A critical commentary. Health Promotion International, 30(1), 174–183. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/dau091

Marr, B. (2020). The future of wearable technology in healthcare. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2020/01/13/the-future-of-wearable-technology-in-healthcare/

McDowell, J. D. (2025. July/August). Wear your health on your sleeve. AARP Bulletin.

Moore K, O'Shea E, Kenny L, Barton J, Tedesco S, Sica M, Crowe C, Alamäki A, Condell J, Nordström A, Timmons S, (2021). Older adults’ experiences with using wearable devices: Qualitative systematic review and meta-synthesis.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth, 9(6):e23832 https://doi,org/10.2196/23832

 Piwek, L., Ellis, D. A., Andrews, S., & Joinson, A. (2016). The rise of consumer health wearables: Promises and barriers. PLOS Medicine, 13(2), e1001953. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001953

The Struggle for Memory: Historical Erasure, Whitewashing, and Narrative Authority

 

By Lilian H. Hill

 

Historical erasure refers to the deliberate or unintentional exclusion of certain events, people, or perspectives from the historical record. Authoritarian politicians engage in historical erasure to avoid confronting past, ongoing, and future injustices. Assaults on historical truth serve a purpose. They prevent people from understanding that discrimination, especially sexism and racism, is systemic and has been maintained through centuries of law, policy, and violence (Walk, 2025). The erasures also deny people access to models of courage and organized resistance, such as Harriet Tubman and the Underground Railroad. Stanley (2024) states that authoritarian regimes often view historical accuracy as threatening because it challenges the cultural narratives they promote to maintain control and legitimacy.

 

Historical erasure results in systematic neglect of marginalized voices, including Indigenous peoples, enslaved individuals, religious minorities, women, LGBTQ+ communities, and colonized populations in textbooks, public monuments, and official histories. For example, history education may omit the contributions of Black Americans to the civil rights movement or the widespread violence against Indigenous populations in settler colonial states. Women’s contributions are diminished or attributed to men. Similarly, working-class uprisings and labor movements are often excluded from mainstream historical narratives.

 

Historical whitewashing and erasure are interconnected processes that involve the distortion, omission, or manipulation of historical facts, often to uphold dominant narratives while marginalizing or silencing others. Whitewashing is a specific form of distortion in which troubling aspects of history, particularly those involving white or colonial powers, are sanitized or reinterpreted to make them appear more acceptable or less violent. Historical whitewashing sends a clear message that only white men are recognized as belonging. This can include downplaying the brutality of slavery or even suggesting it benefited those enslaved, portraying Christopher Columbus as a heroic explorer while omitting his role in the exploitation of Indigenous peoples, or reframing colonialism as a ‘civilizing mission’ rather than a system of exploitation and oppression. Contemporary examples of “rooting a current policy in a made-up history” (Cox Richardson, 2025) include efforts to ban discussions of systemic racism in schools by framing the United States as having always been a perfectly just society. Another example is attempts to justify voter suppression laws by referencing a false narrative of widespread election fraud in American history. Supporters argue that historical erasure and whitewashing preserve history, while critics view it as an attempt to glorify a divisive and oppressive past.

 

Scholars and activists warn that narratives of nonwhite history are being erased at an alarming pace, pointing to examples like the painting over of the Black Lives Matter mural in Washington, D.C., and the temporary removal of Navajo Code Talkers' stories from federal websites (Kwong, 2025). Historical whitewashing sends a clear message that only white men are recognized as belonging. Recent actions include the removal of portrayals of African Americans, women, and LGBTQ individuals from public venues and the terminations of high-profile military leaders who are non-white, LGBTQ, or female. Controversial efforts to bring back public displays like monuments related to the Civil War and to rename military installations honoring Confederate leaders have sparked debate because such figures are associated with defending slavery and opposing the U.S. government. Supporters argue that historical erasure and whitewashing preserve history, while critics view it as an attempt to glorify a divisive and oppressive past. 

 

Historical erasure and whitewashing are not restricted to the United States. Stanley (2024) notes that authoritarian regimes often discourage citizens from challenging idealized versions of national history and impose severe consequences on those who resist. It is no coincidence that educational institutions, both locally and globally, are contested spaces, where efforts to challenge entrenched hierarchies may be silenced through intimidation or force. To maintain control, authoritarian movements seize control of educational institutions in their attempt to erase unflattering history, and with it, the culture of critical inquiry that fuels social and political advancement. In contrast, democracies rely on schools and universities to safeguard collective memory, particularly of progress driven by protests, social movements, and uprisings.

 

Confronting Historical Erasure and Whitewashing

Historical literacy encompasses a set of skills that enable individuals to analyze and comprehend the past critically. When histories of marginalized individuals are omitted from educational curricula, public records, or institutional narratives, it contributes to a broader culture of silence and invisibility. This erasure reinforces systems of discrimination that persist in contemporary society. Such discrimination affects individuals’ mental health, career advancement, and sense of belonging, while also undermining organizational culture, inclusivity, and productivity. Addressing historical erasure and current inequities is essential to fostering a more equitable and truthful society.

 

Both historical erasure and whitewashing have profound consequences. They shape collective memory and identity, influence public policy, and contribute to the continued marginalization of already oppressed communities. When the truth is hidden or distorted, injustices are perpetuated, critical perspectives are suppressed, and the public’s ability to engage thoughtfully with the past is compromised. As Haitian anthropologist and historian Michel-Rolph Trouillot argued in Silencing the Past (1995), history is inseparable from power; those who control historical narratives often shape how societies understand themselves and others. Addressing these practices requires recovering suppressed narratives, teaching multiple perspectives, confronting uncomfortable truths, and critically engaging with historical sources. This is not about rewriting history, but rather about telling a more complete, honest, and inclusive version of it.

 

Confronting historical erasure and whitewashing requires a deliberate effort to acknowledge and preserve marginalized histories that have long been silenced or distorted. Historical erasure often manifests in the exclusion of nonwhite, Indigenous, and women’s narratives from educational curricula, public memorials, and media portrayals. Whitewashing involves the reinterpretation or sanitization of history to favor dominant cultural perspectives, often minimizing or ignoring systemic injustices (Brown & Brown, 2010). These practices not only obscure the lived experiences and contributions of historically oppressed communities but also hinder our collective ability to understand and address contemporary social inequalities. Education plays a pivotal role in reversing these trends by promoting inclusive histories and encouraging critical inquiry that challenges dominant narratives (King et al., 2021).

 

Efforts to confront historical erasure must extend beyond the classroom to encompass broader societal commitments, including public policy, museum representation, and media accountability. For instance, community-led initiatives to rename buildings, revise school curricula, or commission public art that reflects diverse histories are essential in reshaping public memory and identity (Tuck & Yang, 2012). Additionally, resisting whitewashing means engaging with uncomfortable truths, including colonization, slavery, and racial violence, rather than erasing or downplaying them for the sake of national unity or convenience. Through active remembrance and inclusive storytelling, societies can strive toward a more equitable and truthful historical record, one that honors all voices, fosters social healing, and promotes civic engagement.

 

References

Brown, K. D., & Brown, A. L. (2010). Silenced memories: An examination of the sociocultural knowledge on race and racial violence in official school curriculum. Equity & Excellence in Education, 43(2), 139–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665681003719590

Cox Richardson, H. (2025, June 27). Blogpost. https://www.facebook.com/heathercoxrichardson

King, L. J., Swartz, E. E., & Campbell, A. (2021). Teaching Black history as Black liberation. Theory & Research in Social Education, 49(4), 526–553. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2021.1946365

Kwong, E. (2025, March 29). Scholars say Trump administration is trying to erase America's non-white history. https://www.npr.org/2025/03/29/nx-s1-5333846/scholars-say-trump-administration-is-trying-to-erase-americas-non-white-history

Stanley, J. (2024). Erasing history: How Fascists Rewrite the Past to Control the Future. Atria/One Signal Publishing.

Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 1(1), 1–40. https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/des/article/view/18630

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Trouillot, M.-R. (1995). Silencing the past: Power and the production of history. Beacon Press.

VanSledright, B. A. (2008). Narratives of nation-state, historical knowledge, and school history education. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 109–146. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X07311065

Walk, T. (2025, April 6). The Trump Administration’s assaults on Black history:

Curtailing truth obscures racism’s historic legacy. Human Rights Watch. https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/04/10/trump-administrations-assaults-black-history