Abstract
Emerging discussion asks whether it makes sense to speak of animal privacy and how information technologies might increasingly affect it. In an excellent recent article, “Digital Platforms, Privacy, and the Ethics of Wildlife Information Sharing,” Alan Rubel and colleagues defend the idea and ethical importance of animal privacy. Though their argument is compelling, some readers may still worry that the language of ‘animal privacy’ is problematically anthropomorphic. This reply piece examines scepticism about animal privacy, offers suggestions for full or partial acceptance of this term, and mentions some interesting ways that contemporary technology might affect the ‘privacy’ interests of animals.