Privacy Matters
I'm continually trying to encourage people to take their own privacy seriously. From what I've seen, most don't. Unfortunately, people seem complacent about the fact that for the first time ever, companies and governments are creating cradle-to-grave databases that potentially track every purchase they make with a plastic card, every telephone # called or received, every medical procedure, every email, every movement you've made (car, foot, etc.) in your life, etc.
Admittedly, the concept of mega databases being sold for pennies that reveal everything about you has a sci fi aire about it. But the stories coming forward about the flagrant disregard about who gets access is seems startingly.
Day after day, I'm stumbling upon crazy story after crazy story. Take the example of 47 year old Beverly Dennis from Ohio who filled out a customer survey so she'd be eligible to receive product coupons. Unforuntately, the direct-mail giant conducting the survey was using Texas prison labour to enter the data into computer banks. The survey landed in the hands of a convicted rapist and burglar. Armed with all of her personal information - including her home address, the fact she had hemmoroids, the sort of lotion she used, etc - he wrote her sexually explicit letters threatening to visit her following his release. Although she and other harrassed woman won a class action lawsuit, the outcome could've been far grimmer.
Beyond threats to safety, there are broader implication too. Below is a snippet from an article describing the social importance of privacy.
SOCIETAL IMPORTANCE OF PERSONAL PRIVACY
The importance of privacy has been the subject of much study in recent years (Post 1989; Wacks 1989; Trubow 1990; Rotenberg 1991 and 1993; Reidenberg 1992; Tuerkheimer 1993). Privacy advocates argue that personal privacy is essential to preserving constructive social and community interactions and will be critical to maintaining tenable democratic societies in a modern world (Post 1989). Some argue that social control through information systems is indeed a real threat and that extensive collection of personal data is likely to lead to a society that promotes homogeneity by discouraging actions that are perceived negatively by the majority. The rampant collection and use of personal information by government and commercial institutions substantially increases the likelihood of a "...conformist, robotic public seeking to avoid exposure to the risks inherent in functioning in society" (Trubow 1990). Detailed information gathering on all individuals in society by the commercial sector and government and the ability to quickly construct dossiers on individuals will have a 'chilling effect' on our willingness to deviate from the norm and on our willingness to question authority. The purpose of such compilations is to manipulate the individual, not to improve the ability of the data subject to act and decide (Simitis 1987, 733). Awareness that minute records of activities are being recorded is by itself probably enough to influence behavior and hinder the discourse of individuals (Ibid, 723). Social worth becomes increasingly measured by data profiles rather than through personal interactions and human dignity is lost. Diversity in opinions, perspectives, and experiences promotes innovative ideas and yet the productivity resulting from diversity decreases in a society in which detailed databases have the effect of decreasing risk taking by individuals. Over time, inability to control information about ourselves will make us passive citizens rather than active participants in society. Thus, in order to maintain viable democratic societies in a modern world, information privacy is the price that must be paid to secure the ability of citizens to communicate and participate (Ibid, 746).
The claim is made that the commercial sector in the U.S. already has "..become heavily intrusive, gathering and exchanging personal information about individuals without regard to the harm it may cause" (Graham 1987, 1395). Individuals that do not want their every purchase, movement, hobby, or political beliefs known already are being forced to resort to efforts to conceal their lives and beliefs. Privacy advocates further argue that those who lack the resources, knowledge, or will to conceal their private and financial lives will be coerced into a position of avoiding controversial or unpopular activities (Graham 1987, 1396) or, based on their unfavorable recorded profiles, will be excluded from sharing in certain economic and social benefits. Because government is increasingly able to purchase address lists and other personal data collected by the commercial sector, the boundaries between public and private collection of personal data have also become very blurred. Privacy advocates argue that democratic principles of governance will increasingly suffer as information surveillance becomes the order of the day and improper uses of personal information increase.
Those opposed to expanded privacy rights for individuals argue that the dangers of detailed databases are greatly exaggerated, far-fetched, and unlikely to effect the fabric of American democracy. The benefits to be gained through responsible use of databases containing detailed personal data far outstrip the largely subjective and non-quantifiable rights in personal privacy. Abuses in use should be controlled but not data collection itself. They further argue that it is far more beneficial for society to deal with privacy abuses on a case by case basis than to restrict database building and the economic efficiency benefits deriving from expanded databases. Regardless of how the debate is eventually resolved concerning the best means of protecting information privacy, the underlying social reasons for protecting personal privacy are probably as valid today as they have ever been.
Admittedly, the concept of mega databases being sold for pennies that reveal everything about you has a sci fi aire about it. But the stories coming forward about the flagrant disregard about who gets access is seems startingly.
Day after day, I'm stumbling upon crazy story after crazy story. Take the example of 47 year old Beverly Dennis from Ohio who filled out a customer survey so she'd be eligible to receive product coupons. Unforuntately, the direct-mail giant conducting the survey was using Texas prison labour to enter the data into computer banks. The survey landed in the hands of a convicted rapist and burglar. Armed with all of her personal information - including her home address, the fact she had hemmoroids, the sort of lotion she used, etc - he wrote her sexually explicit letters threatening to visit her following his release. Although she and other harrassed woman won a class action lawsuit, the outcome could've been far grimmer.
Beyond threats to safety, there are broader implication too. Below is a snippet from an article describing the social importance of privacy.
SOCIETAL IMPORTANCE OF PERSONAL PRIVACY
The importance of privacy has been the subject of much study in recent years (Post 1989; Wacks 1989; Trubow 1990; Rotenberg 1991 and 1993; Reidenberg 1992; Tuerkheimer 1993). Privacy advocates argue that personal privacy is essential to preserving constructive social and community interactions and will be critical to maintaining tenable democratic societies in a modern world (Post 1989). Some argue that social control through information systems is indeed a real threat and that extensive collection of personal data is likely to lead to a society that promotes homogeneity by discouraging actions that are perceived negatively by the majority. The rampant collection and use of personal information by government and commercial institutions substantially increases the likelihood of a "...conformist, robotic public seeking to avoid exposure to the risks inherent in functioning in society" (Trubow 1990). Detailed information gathering on all individuals in society by the commercial sector and government and the ability to quickly construct dossiers on individuals will have a 'chilling effect' on our willingness to deviate from the norm and on our willingness to question authority. The purpose of such compilations is to manipulate the individual, not to improve the ability of the data subject to act and decide (Simitis 1987, 733). Awareness that minute records of activities are being recorded is by itself probably enough to influence behavior and hinder the discourse of individuals (Ibid, 723). Social worth becomes increasingly measured by data profiles rather than through personal interactions and human dignity is lost. Diversity in opinions, perspectives, and experiences promotes innovative ideas and yet the productivity resulting from diversity decreases in a society in which detailed databases have the effect of decreasing risk taking by individuals. Over time, inability to control information about ourselves will make us passive citizens rather than active participants in society. Thus, in order to maintain viable democratic societies in a modern world, information privacy is the price that must be paid to secure the ability of citizens to communicate and participate (Ibid, 746).
The claim is made that the commercial sector in the U.S. already has "..become heavily intrusive, gathering and exchanging personal information about individuals without regard to the harm it may cause" (Graham 1987, 1395). Individuals that do not want their every purchase, movement, hobby, or political beliefs known already are being forced to resort to efforts to conceal their lives and beliefs. Privacy advocates further argue that those who lack the resources, knowledge, or will to conceal their private and financial lives will be coerced into a position of avoiding controversial or unpopular activities (Graham 1987, 1396) or, based on their unfavorable recorded profiles, will be excluded from sharing in certain economic and social benefits. Because government is increasingly able to purchase address lists and other personal data collected by the commercial sector, the boundaries between public and private collection of personal data have also become very blurred. Privacy advocates argue that democratic principles of governance will increasingly suffer as information surveillance becomes the order of the day and improper uses of personal information increase.
Those opposed to expanded privacy rights for individuals argue that the dangers of detailed databases are greatly exaggerated, far-fetched, and unlikely to effect the fabric of American democracy. The benefits to be gained through responsible use of databases containing detailed personal data far outstrip the largely subjective and non-quantifiable rights in personal privacy. Abuses in use should be controlled but not data collection itself. They further argue that it is far more beneficial for society to deal with privacy abuses on a case by case basis than to restrict database building and the economic efficiency benefits deriving from expanded databases. Regardless of how the debate is eventually resolved concerning the best means of protecting information privacy, the underlying social reasons for protecting personal privacy are probably as valid today as they have ever been.