| Login |

Privacy goes mainstream

January 29th, 2007 by Adam

Hillary Clinton - Privacy as election issueWell, it seems that the issue of privacy is becoming more important. Perhaps to set herself as far from the Bush administration as possible, Hillary Clinton has announced that she intends to introduce a “Privacy Bill of Rights” to protect the privacy of American citizens in light of the many surveillance issues introduced during the Bush presidency. I’m not going to take a stance on the forthcoming election and push my political opinion on you all – not being from the USA kind of disqualifies me from doing so anyway! However, this is something that I thought was extremely interesting in terms of global privacy issues. It is a fact that recent “counter-terrorism measures” and other surveillance practices have been steadily eroding the privacy of the general public, and personally, I was worried that once lost, we would never regain our right to privacy in today’s digital world. A recent article I wrote discussed the effects of these new “security” measures and how they have actually taken away our right to privacy. I find it extremely interesting (possibly even heart-warming) that I’m not the only one thinking like this.

Hillary Clinton’s new “Privacy Bill of Rights” is covered in detail in this Wired News article, but it brings up the issue of “opt-in” as opposed to “opt-out” when it comes to privacy: Why should your details be given to just anyone unless you specifically object? In my opinion, your details should be kept in strict privacy until you give permission for them to be given to specific parties.

The actual address to the senate can be seen here, and this gives you a more in-depth view of the proposals. All I can do is hope that now the privacy issue has been brought up in America, politicians in the UK follow suit. As I stated previously, it is a real worry that once certain privacies are removed from you, you will never get them back. Quite often when I speak or write about privacy issues, the standard response is “I don’t have to worry about privacy because I have nothing to hide”. While this is (on the surface) a reasonable point to make, it is the bigger picture that concerns me. Everyone has a right to privacy. Fact. Everyone has issues or secrets that they don’t want just anyone to know, and they always will. It worries me that if we continue with the current attitude towards privacy, it will no longer be possible to keep some things sacred. This may seem like an extreme example, but this rings of ancient practices like witchcraft. Then: This woman can do something we can’t… burn her! Now: This person wants the right to privacy, so they must be up to something… burn them!
With ever-increasing numbers of articles on Slashdot regarding privacy, it’s clear that there are a growing number of internet users who are unhappy with the current state of privacy in the digital age. While this represents a primarily American demographic, there is clearly growing concern in Europe over privacy. For example, there was a political party that ran for office in a European country who had one political standpoint: they would reverse the EU Data Retention laws. Despite citing “no opinion” on other issues, they still managed to get at least some of the vote.

All that we can hope is that by bringing the issue of privacy into the “mainstream”, many more politicians and voters alike will begin to think about privacy and begin to reverse the trend that we are currently experiencing.

Posted in Privacy | 3 Comments »

3 Responses to “Privacy goes mainstream”

  1. Adam Says:

    On the same vane as the above article, Slashdot recently described the new Strong Privacy Bill that was introduced by the US Senate. It “protects protects the privacy of citizens’ personal information in the face of data security breaches across the country”, but interestingly enough, hidden right at the bottom of the bill is this:

    …the provision in the measure that strengthens oversight of the government’s use of commercial databases to collect information about citizens.

    This is very interesting, and suggests a fundamental change in the way the public and the Senate look at the Government saying “we can do what we want – your privacy isn’t important as far as we’re concerned”. Now all we need is this kind of change in the UK…

  2. Gurdit Says:

    I don’t know whether she’s really concerned about privacy, or whether she’s taking advantage of the fact that Bush’s approval ratings fell drastically when the lack of privacy issue was brought up in the news.

    However, bottom line is that privacy is improving, which is a good thing.

  3. Adam Says:

    I agree completely. Having a natural distrust of politicians is definitely a good habit. As you say, the improvement in terms of privacy is a good thing whether it was Hillary’s primary aim or not.

Leave a Reply

captcha service