Works Cited

“About Identity Theft.” Fighting Back Against Identity Theft. October 31, 2007.


theft.html>.

Cauley, Leslie. “NSA has massive database of Americans' phone call.” Usatoday.com.

May 5, 2006. October 31, 2006.

.

Calvert, Clay and Don R. Pember. Mass Media Law. McGraw Hill. New York: 2005.

Garfinkel, Simson. Database Nation: The Death of Privacy in the 21st Century. Rpt. in

Living in the Information Age. Ed. Erik P. Bucy. Thomson Wadsworth. Belmonst:

2005.

LaRose, Robert and Joseph Straubhaar. Media Now. Thomson Wadsworth. Belmont:

2008.

“Poll: 74 percent of Americans say Congress out of touch.” cnn.com. October 18, 2006.

October 31, 2007.

.

“Virgin Sued by Texas Girl.” The Australian. September 21, 2007. October 31, 2007.

.

How can you change things?

Of course, all of this technology that is a threat to our privacy was at first invented to make our lives easier. Similar to Sun Passes in Florida, New York City has the Metrocard system. You can use this card to pay your subway and bus fare by simply sliding a magnetic card. Simple, right? Well, with both of those tools, the database they are connected to logs the time you use them and the place (Garfinkel 323).

That means that just like on TV, this man can find you wherever you are. But it also means that police have another tool in their arsenal to catch criminals. Similarly, if we constantly pay with things on a credit card or with a Sun Pass out of convenience, “we much accept the routine collection of our purchases and driving habits in a large database over which we have no control.” (Garfinkel 324) (Every time I type his name it makes me think of these guys.)

In my last post, I talked about things the government has done to protect you, but does that mean you can’t protect yourself? Of course not. It starts with you. By making purchases with cash and refusing to pay Social Security numbers, you quickly take your personal information out of circulation (Garfinkel 324). On Blackboard, head over to the Secure Apps page and you can change your privacy settings or find a student number that you can use in place of your Social Security Number. On Facebook and MySpace, you can set your security settings so that other people cannot see your profile and pictures unless they are your friends. But since people so freely accept friend requests, it's best to keep sensitive information off of such sites.

And then, there’s old-fashioned protesting. (Though, it didn’t always bring good results for these people).

- When Lotus and Equifax crated a CD-ROM with names, addresses, and demographic information on every household in the US to sell to business, 30,000 people demanded their name be taken off the CD-ROM, and the project was cancelled. (Garfinkel 324)

- When the Social Security Administration announced it was going to make tax information available, tens of thousands of people disagreed, the Senate investigated and the idea went the way of the dodo. The program eventually resurfaced, but you were not able to download the information. (Garfinkel 324)

- In 1996, Congress passed laws requiring Social Security numbers to be shown on driver’s licenses and that all medical patients in the US be given unique identification numbers. People protested and the program has since been delayed. (Garfinkel 325)

Just because government has taken steps to protect us, does that mean it’s enough? According to Garfinkel, no. He states that a government oversight committee should be created to monitor “the government tendency to sacrifice people’s privacy for other goals…enforce the few existing privacy laws [and] be a guardian for individual privacy and liberty in the business world.” (326)

He also suggests the Fair Credit Reporting Act should be updated to a Data Protection Act, effectively keeping business from selling or buying medical information, consumer firms from reporting unconvicted arrests (I think I just made up a word. Hey, it worked for this guy). Moreover, he states that when negative information is reported to credit bureaus, the subject of that negative info should be notified in writing. (326)

Finally, he states that the Office of Technology Assessment should be reinstated. Created in 1972, it was like the Geek Squad of the government policy. The OTA addressed the issue of law enforcement vs. civil liberties, publishing 175 reports about privacy (326). The OTA was dissolved when Republicans took over Congress in 1995, but reintroducing it would help monitor these issues, especially in today’s post 9-11 world.

So, now the onus is on us. The catalyst for change needs to come from the people. Increasingly, Congress is becoming further and further out of touch with its constituents. If we want to continue to enjoy the comforts that technology affords us without giving up more privacy, we need to speak up and make our concerns heard. With wars abroad and fires, droughts and elections at home, it might not seem like the most important thing at the moment, but we could pay the price in the future if we don’t act now.

Why should you care?

“Why do I care?” you ask. Because it affects you. Even if you’re not a terrorist, intelligence organizations are screening your phone calls and your e-mails. Your constitutional rights are being affected, thrown out the window, stomped on, . Pointing fingers at the federal government isn’t entirely fair though. It has tried to protect us.

- The Financial Modernization Act of 1999 protects financial privacy.

- The Fair Credit Reporting Act enforces accuracy in consumer reports and ensures the privacy of the information in them.

- The Federal Trade Commission provides the Do Not Call Registry, which lets you register your phone number as one telemarketers cannot call.

- The Child On-Line Protection Act of 1998 required that “web publishers notify visitors about their collection of personal information and restricts the gathering and use of personal information from children 12 and under.” (LaRose 441)

- The Health Insurance and Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 “set a national standard for electronic transmission of health data” (La Rose 441), though it brought up the issue of privacy and control of one’s own medical records.

- The 2001 Data Quality Act allows more scrutiny of government data and may be extended to private databases (LaRose 441).

But is that enough? Nope. As described by Straubhaar and LaRose, online banking becomes problematic. If someone has a similar name or social as a person with bad credit, they could find themselves rejected by the bank. Or, worse, what happened to my own brother could happen to you. Someone named Carlos Canon was accidentally allowed access to Carlos Cannon’s bank account (look closely, there’s only one “n” in the middle, instead of two, how we spell it. Canon vs. Cannon. If you noticed it, you’re smarter than the bank.) and Single N subsequently cleaned out Double N’s savings.

Identity Theft is an increasingly large problem as well. With cookies being able to track information between websites, and companies like LexisNexis P-Trak releasing information, it’s easier for your birthday, phone numbers, addresses, credit card numbers and Social Security numbers to get into the wrong hands. (Calvert 296) This means that even if you’re name isn’t remotely similar to another person’s they might have the information required to buy whatever they want, no matter how expensive, or strange, it may be.

And then there’s that pesky Facebook. Sure, if you look at my own profile right now, you might only be able to figure out that I used to work at the Leach and that I like The Shawshank Redemption, but allow me to give you two cautionary tales. One is of a friend and former RA. He went to a party one night and took a picture with two people who were under 21. What he didn’t know was that these two people were resident of the building he lived in, and, even though they weren’t his residents, when the picture was posted on Facebook, his bosses found it and he was quickly fired. Another friend, a freshman, lived in Kellum Hall and had put her cell phone number and room number on her profile. Someone saw her picture and thought she was attractive and friended her. Then he started calling her. Then one day he called and said “he was driving by Kellum” and wanted to say hello. Then the phone hung up and someone knocked on her door. Her Facebook stalker quickly became the guy who showed up uninvited, let himself in and vastly overstayed his welcome.

In my last post I mentioned text trackers that companies use. FSU Housing has recently installed "terminals" (a fancy name for computers) at the front desk of all of the residence halls. These terminals have text trackers installed. That means everything someone types when logged in is monitored by housing, including user names and passwords, Social Security and credit card numbers. So, anyone who uses these terminals leaves their personal information to be read by whoever is monitoring the network that day or night.

Those last two examples might seem like something you bring upon yourself and, in part it is. But remember that, even if you’re not a terrorist, your right to privacy may not seem as secure as you thought it did. It might not be the government that’s watching you; it could be your boss, your friends, or even that sweaty guy down the hall.

Right to Privacy

It used to be the only way you could invade someone's privacy was by doing this. Things are a little easier today. I remember when I was young people would joke that if you said “bomb” and “president” on the same phone call, the NSA, FBI, CIA, or whatever other government organization would immediately be listening in on your phone call. Thanks to the 2001 Patriot Act, this might actually be a reality. Except, instead of suddenly tuning in to your conversation, the NSA has simply “borrowed” your conversations from your cell phone company and has machines meticulously search for any hint of a threat, often without a warrant. And the federal government’s powers are only getting stronger.

The Homeland Security Act practically extended the Patriot act to the Internet, allowing officials to “track and locate users who pose an intimate threat to national security interests” (LaRose 443) and who may inflict harm upon government computers. More importantly, it protected companies from being sued for giving their user databases to the government, significantly hindering the ability of those being monitored to stop it. Furthermore, the FBI can use Carnivore, a system that monitor file downloads, chat rooms, and e-mail for illegal activity, though the G-Men actually need a court order before they do that.

Businesses are using new technology to amass information about people too. For example, cookies that websites leave on your web browser can track transactions and personal preferences and then match your personal information across different websites. This doesn’t implicitly affect your privacy, at first. But as time goes on, companies sell their databases to other companies, meaning your information gets into more and more hands (LaRose 441). According to Garfinkel, even if some online companies do have privacy policies, they don't necessarily follow them.

And now, if Big Businesses and Big Brother isn’t watching, your little brother is. With so many social networking sites around, it’s easy for friends, family, employers, stalkers, nemeses or whoever can access the personal information that people put on the Internet. Your boss can find video of you drinking last weekend online, your girlfriend can find pictures of you dancing with that girl at Yianni’s (this one, not this one).

And the problem is, even if users set their page to “super double secret privacy,” the Internet is still public domain, if that information is found, it’s still usable. Ad agencies are even getting wise to this, as we can see from when Virgin Mobile pulled a girl’s picture off of Flickr, taking advantage of Flickr’s Creative Commons policy, and put the girl on a billboard. And, while we’re on the subject, since the Internet is public domain, companies are putting text trackers on their computers, so everything you e-mail and type can be seen by someone in HR. Thought that video you watched on YouTube called “Bro Rape” was funny and harmless? You might not when someone comes asking you why you’re searching for something involving “rape” on line.

Is this stuff legal, scary, obliterating our right to privacy? Unfortunately, the answer to all three are “yes.”