On the Media: The
Privacy Show
How do you balance convenience with privacy? How do we live with the idea that we are
always being watched?
The internet is a copy machine – anything you put online can
be copied and circulated indefinitely.
We are very vulnerable to government surveillance and
for-profit investigation. This may be the defining bargain of our times.
Facebook users talking about “copyrighting” their own
content – turned out to be a hoax. Trying to be hopeful – not doing too much
work to protect one’s privacy.
Far less than 1% of users actually voted on the Facebook
privacy policy when asked for their input. People tend to think they are in
control (in the case of the “copyright” hoax). When we use Gmail (or any third
party provider) Google owns that data. Their terms and conditions say they
won’t use it for ill, but they are not held to hard laws.
Email is subject to search without warrant after 6 months?
We have no control over our data once it’s on the internet –
chats, Facebook statuses, emails, etc. Your online life could be targeted for
any number of reasons.
Password is a dangerous illusion – a single point of entry
can be attacked from many different points.
Convenience over security – that is the trade off we make
online.
Eric Schmidt (Google) – “if you’re doing something you don’t
want anyone else to see, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it”
-
Grossly underestimates the need for privacy –
not just about keeping “secrets”.
Fear that data mining may unearth data that could be used to
discriminate against groups. However, some believe that this risk is worth
taking to prevent terrorism. It seems that laws should be put in place to keep
companies/government from using this information for ill – but how could this
be done? Does this require too much trust on part of the individual? How can we
be confident that our information won’t be abused?
Kind of frightening that after receiving a subpoena for
releasing information to the government (under the Patriot Act) one can’t even
talk to a lawyer!
License plate readers – your whereabouts at any point in
time could be logged.
My Turn: Protecting
Privacy Rights in Libraries
Respect
for patron privacy is a fundamental value long recognized in the library code
of ethics
-
This
is something I think it vital to the mission of libraries but is becoming more
difficult to uphold under the Patriot Act. This reminds of an article I read
about a library in my former home of Bellingham, WA. The library there was
approached and demanded to release information about people who checked out
books about Osama Bin Laden.
But
sometimes children and youths must deal with serious issues -- like child
abuse, alcoholic parents, or health questions -- and they need good
information. We want them to be comfortable getting that information in the
library. That's why the Vermont Library Association advocated for privacy
protection for patrons of all ages.
-
very
interesting – protect the library records of children from their parents?
The
Bennett case raises important questions: Why didn't the officer obtain a court
order before going to the library? Why did five police officials waste valuable
time trying to intimidate librarians into violating a legally binding policy?
And after leaving the second time, why did it take the police so long to secure
a court order when a judge is always available?
-
These
are very valid questions. I hope I don’t face anything like this when I’m a
librarian!
Individuals
must be able to seek information about any subject without fear of judgment,
criticism or scrutiny of others. Freedom of speech is meaningless without the
freedom to receive information; they are the underpinnings of a healthy
democracy.
Immersion: Metadata
and its role in privacy
This tool is a very interesting way to visualize your email
network and see whom you communicate with most. If this metadata is open to
anyone they could paint a very clear picture of the people you are closest to,
even if they can’t read the contents of the emails.
No comments:
Post a Comment