Remember the concept of data mining, where vast stores of data are sifted for information about customer spending habits. A retailer could notice that a certain credit card is often used to purchase product X, cross-reference the name on the card with the address in the retailer's catalog mailing list, and send the customer a customized flyer when product X goes on sale.
For some people, this sales tactic would be a case of excellent customer service. Many customers, however, do not want their spending habits analyzed in this way. Some feel that this smacks of being watched by "Big Brother," from George Orwell's novel 1984. They don't like records of their purchases being stored forever in some digital vault, and consider this kind of tracking an invasion of their privacy.
People do not necessarily object to a company making secondary use of data they have provided, usually to improve the marketing of products and services. But they do object when data is shared among companies or linked to other data. For example, a bank stores data on all its depositors.
From the amount of deposits, the bank can make some assumptions about the overall financial status of the depositor and may target offers based on these assumptions. To most people, this practice crosses no boundary. If, however, someone receives a mailing from Big Lots because the bank has identified him or her as a small depositor and passed this information on, the person may feel that a trust has been violated.
Laws exist to protect direct transfers of sensitive data like financial information, but with computers, data can also be acquired indirectly. EPIC, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, uses the term reidentification, described as "the process of linking anonymous data to the actual identity of an individual."
Suppose a political pollster conducts a phone interview with a voter. The voter does not give his name, but in response to the demographic questions, indicates he is a Hispanic man, born in 1968, owns three cars, and lives in the zip code 35243. He then answers a series of questions regarding his political beliefs in which he expresses left-of-center attitudes regarding gun control and taxation. The poll provides its data in both aggregate and raw form. It does not identify any voter by name, address, or phone number, only by the demographic data.
However, the voter turns out to be the only Hispanic man born in 1968 in that zip code with three cars. He can be reidentified by any data miner who has already connected him with his demographics. The previously anonymous data becomes "Mr. Hernandez is a liberal," and two weeks later Mr. Hernandez wonders why he is receiving a complimentary subscription to Mother Jones.
Some believe the government should step in and prevent any exchange of personal data between companies, even in aggregate form, without the explicit consent of the consumer whose data is being exchanged. Many companies have adopted their own policies in this direction, but these policies may only require that the consumer be notified when the data is exchanged, or the policy itself may become void if the company is merged with another.
The Web is a fantastic resource, but it is also awash in pornographic and violent images that many parents don't want their children exposed to. These parents have often banded together to call upon the government to help protect children from inadvertent viewing of objectionable Web sites.
Lawmakers are willing to help, but it has proven difficult to craft laws that will actually help protect children without running afoul of the U.S. Constitution. The situation at first seems the same as with pornographic magazines, but the reality is quite different. Laws exist in municipalities that prevent the sale of "adult" material to minors. This is fair to shopkeepers because they can require a driver's license or other form of identification as proof of age before selling the adult material, the same way they check for proof of age before selling alcoholic beverages. The Web has no equivalent to "carding" someone at the corner store, however.
One law the U.S. government enacted in this area is called CIPA, or the Children's Internet Protection Act, which specifically targets "adult-only" material on Web-enabled computers in libraries. This law requires libraries to install filtering software on publicly accessible computers to receive federal library grant money.
The filtering software is intended to prevent access only to objectionable Web sites, but no filtering is perfect. Some filters that work through automated examination of a Web site's contents can be overzealous and block access to a site that frequently uses the word "breast," even though the site may be offering information on breast cancer prevention instead of erotica. Others use manually chosen lists of objectionable sites, but these lists can fall out of date.
It is important to note that CIPA does not require a library to do a specific level or type of filtering, and that it allows for the filtering to be bypassed for a library patron who asks a librarian to do so. Even so, the law is controversial. Some have argued that any intentional abridgement of information is counter to the spirit and purpose of a public library, and that filtering software is so unreliable that patrons with legitimate research needs will have the sites they needed to access blocked. The law was challenged in court, with the case eventually reaching the U.S. Supreme Court, which upheld the constitutionality of the law in a 6–3 decision.
Our website is not responsible for the information contained by this article. Articleinput.com is a free articles resource thus practically any visitor can submit an article. However if you notice any copyrighted material, please contact us and we will remove the article(s) in discussion right away.
Note: This article was sent to us by: Nelson G. Hill at 02132011
1. The influence of social networking on self identity
All articles are property of their respective authors. Please read our Privacy Policy!
© 2009 ArticleInput.com.
Partners: Damenmode