the web was buzzing with commentary about Google CEO Eric Schmidt's
dangerous, dismissive response to concerns about search engine users'
privacy. When asked during an interview for CNBC's recent "Inside the
Mind of Google" special about whether users should be sharing
information with Google as if it were a "trusted friend," Schmidt
responded, "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know,
maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."

Unfortunately, Schmidt's statement makes it seem as if Google, a
company that claims to care about privacy, is not even concerned
enough to understand basic lessons about privacy and why it's
important on so many levels -- from protection against shallow
embarrassments to the preservation of freedom and human rights. In
response to Schmidt, Security researcher Bruce Schneier referenced an
eloquent piece he wrote in 2006 that makes the case that "[p]rivacy is
an inherent human right, and a requirement for maintaining the human
condition with dignity and respect." Schneier writes:
For if we are observed in all matters, we are constantly under threat
of correction, judgment, criticism, even plagiarism of our own
uniqueness. We become children, fettered under watchful eyes,
constantly fearful that -- either now or in the uncertain future --
patterns we leave behind will be brought back to implicate us, by
whatever authority has now become focused upon our once-private and
innocent acts. We lose our individuality, because everything we do is
observable and recordable.
Gawker was quick to point out the personal hypocrisy of Schmidt's
dismissive stance, noting that for about a year, Schmidt blacklisted
CNET reporters from Google after the tech news company published an
article with information about his salary, neighborhood, hobbies, and
political donations -- all obtained from Google searches. Techdirt
noted additionally that Schmidt's statement is painfully similar to
the tired adage of pro-surveillance advocates that incorrectly presume
that privacy's only function is to obscure lawbreaking: "If you've
done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to worry about."

In a talk about privacy given to the American Library Association, EFF
Fellow Cory Doctorow highlights the error in logic that leads to short-
sighted conceptions of privacy like Schmidt's:
We have an unfortunate tendency to conflate personal and private with
secret and we say, "Well, given that this information isn't a secret,
given that it's known by other people, how can you say that it's
private?" And we can in fact say that there are a lot of things that
are [not] in secret that are in private. Every one of us does
something private and not secret when we go to the bathroom. Every one
of us has parents who did at least one private thing that's not a
secret, otherwise we wouldn't be here.
So this decision — this determination — over when and under what
circumstances your personal information is divulged tracks very
closely to how free and how much power you have in a society. When you
look at really stratified societies, particularly the great
totalitarian empires of the last century, the further up the ladder
you go, the more raw power you wield, the more raw power you have over
this disclosure of your personal information. And the further down the
ladder you go, the less power you have.
The understanding that privacy is a key liberty informs EFF's many
privacy efforts, including to improve search engine practices and
policies, uncover details about snooping on social networking sites,
tighten up laws around behavioral tracking online, argue for better
reader privacy, and more. Google, governments, and technologists need
to understand more broadly that ignoring privacy protections in the
innovations we incorporate into our lives not only invites invasions
of our personal space and comfort, but opens the door to future abuses
of power.

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/google-ceo-eric-schmidt-dismisses-privacy

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Reply via email to