Privacy in the Information Age: A Wider Perspective
Mark Hellmann
Some two decades ago, a government commission completed a study on an issue that potentially affects every individual
in the United States --indeed -- in the world. After studying the implications of the issue, this commission came to a somber
conclusion. Interestingly, experts in the field had reached similar conclusions years before the study was released, but little
action was taken by either public or private authorities, and the situation worsened. Only recently did significant numbers
of people realize the relevance of these matters and begin to discuss and formulate ideas to address the situation. No...
this was not the Surgeon General's report on the dangers of smoking, although it followed a similar historical path. This
often cited study, which in its own way is as meaningful as the Surgeon General's report, was written in 1977 by the U.S.
Privacy Protection Study Commission. Specifically, it concluded that in terms of the information age The real danger is the
gradual erosion of individual liberties through the automation, integration, and interconnection of many small, separate record-keeping
systems, each of which alone may seem innocuous, even benevolent, and wholly justifiable.
Over the past few years, concern about privacy matters has expanded and intensified. The advances
in technology that the study saw as inevitable have arrived. Today, much has been explored, written, and discussed about privacy
issues. However, most of the public and private discussion has centered on the provocative, somewhat emotional nature of the
subject matter, including the loss of individual civil rights and the constitutional search and seizure aspects of the issues.
Until recently, there has been little discussion about the broader implications of these issues.
For example, the increased ability to access and interconnect both private and public information databases permits anyone
with simple computer equipment to create and develop a detailed dossier on any individual. While public and media attention
is focused on matters like the placement of advertising on the Internet, a more subtle but far-reaching issue like the potential
abuse of information by both government and corporate users is not "hot copy", and therefore is not widely reported.
The fractious and somewhat superficial nature of the privacy discussion coupled with the widely
divergent opinions of legal experts and regulators is indicative of a more serious societal dynamic. In our system the promulgation
of laws and regulations usually represents a consensus within the society that embraces commonly held objectives and goals.
For example, the Uniform Commercial Code, which regulates commerce, was specifically written to bring business law into line
with modern day business and technology practices.
The problem with the information age is that no such public consensus exists. In fact, blatant
inconsistencies exist within the government's behavior on these issues. For example, on the one hand, the Clinton administration
has been a strong advocate for building the so-called "Information Super Highway" that will link information among large numbers
of people and institutions. Al Gore and his technology team encourage citizens to plug into the Internet, send E-Mail to each
other, and become proficient with the technology.
At the same time, however, the government is also recommending that it be allowed access to
the clipper chip and its skipjack algorithm which would encrypt every piece of digitally transmitted information. In other
words, the government wants the ability to monitor any voice, data, video, or other digitally transmitted information at any
time for law enforcement activities.
The same government that claims to safeguard individual liberties and champions civil rights
also wants to create a network of electronic records on every student in the country. Such records would begin in kindergarten
and would be updated regularly through the student's higher education, military, and workplace experiences. Not only would
they contain academic information, but they could also include other developmental, psychological, and health data on every
American student.
Essentially, these contradictory activities attest to the absence of mutually agreed upon goals
and objectives in accessing and managing the "information age". Technology has outpaced the public's ability to understand
it. As a society, we simply haven't figured out what the "rules of the road" should be on the information highway.
However, there are some actions that should be taken while those rules are defined. In the
same way that the federal government has recently revealed that certain individuals were subjected to excessive radiation
during post-war nuclear tests, the government should begin to make a full disclosure on their information gathering activities.
Individuals have the right to acquire the records and details of the information that is kept about them. That right includes
knowing what information is being collected, which agencies share that information, where the information is located, who
has access to that information, and how individuals can access their own records.
The private sector also needs to adopt such a mechanism. In an arena where information is traded
for a profit and is considered a core business for the future, a system guiding the appropriate use and dissemination of the
information must be created. Furthermore, a reparations system based on a concept similar to the purposes of product liability
law must be established to compensate parties for the misuse of information in a commercial and consumer setting.
It should be noted that the creation of guidelines to govern the Information Age can occur
without the promulgation of new laws. There is sufficient basis in common law and statutory law to address the issues surrounding
privacy. What is required is focus. A common agenda must be created, perhaps similar to the work done by the Uniform Commissioners
with the UCC. A new privacy commission, combining the "best of the best" in terms of business people, lawyers, government,
and technocrats could help frame and define the possibilities and the limitations of the "Infobahn" in ways that are acceptable
to most parties.
Over a century ago, Henry David Thoreau lamented that "men have become the tools of their tools".
As we begin our journey through the Information Age, it's time to put a stop to that.
