December 18, 2004
PUBLIC ISN'T PRIVATE:
A.C.L.U.'s Search for Data on Donors Stirs Privacy Fears (STEPHANIE STROM, 12/18/04, NY Times)
The American Civil Liberties Union is using sophisticated technology to collect a wide variety of information about its members and donors in a fund-raising effort that has ignited a bitter debate over its leaders' commitment to privacy rights.Some board members say the extensive data collection makes a mockery of the organization's frequent criticism of banks, corporations and government agencies for their practice of accumulating data on people for marketing and other purposes.
Daniel S. Lowman, vice president for analytical services at Grenzebach Glier & Associates, the data firm hired by the A.C.L.U., said the software the organization is using, Prospect Explorer, combs a broad range of publicly available data to compile a file with information like an individual's wealth, holdings in public corporations, other assets and philanthropic interests.
Not that there's any such thing as a right to privacy to begin with, but there's obviously none in terms of your dealings with non-governmental entities. If you're afraid of having the ACLU know who you are, don't join. Posted by Orrin Judd at December 18, 2004 12:09 PM
Another excellent reason not to join the ACLU.
Posted by: Brandon at December 18, 2004 3:32 PMAccording to another blogger, the ACLU aided in a lawsuit in Virginia to allow a nudist camp for children.
Posted by: Sandy P at December 18, 2004 7:30 PMIf nudist parents send their kid to nudist camp, what is your problem?
Posted by: Bart at December 19, 2004 6:42 AMIf pedophile parents rape their children what's your problem?
Posted by: oj at December 19, 2004 8:31 AMRape is different from nudity. Rape is a violation of another person's rights by the forcible penetration of that person for sexual purposes, nudity is merely a choice to be clothing optional in a private environment.
Posted by: Bart at December 19, 2004 11:48 AMChildren aren't competent to choose either.
Posted by: oj at December 19, 2004 11:56 AMParents are entitled to choose to send their kids to nudist camp though.
By definition, nobody chooses rape.
Posted by: Bart at December 19, 2004 2:16 PMBy definition the parents do.
Posted by: oj at December 19, 2004 4:46 PMHuh? If you cannot have privacy in private dealings, when could you have it?
I agree there is no legal right to privacy.
Our understanding of privacy is one of those social capital things you were talking about the other day.
We have conflicted ideas about privacy, as you nearly understood when you praised us as a nation of busybodies.
But we do have some ideas of privacy.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at December 19, 2004 4:49 PMOnly as between the contracting parties. We expect privacy as regards third parties.
It isn't law, it's standards of decency.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at December 20, 2004 12:52 AMHarry:
No rational person expects public information to be kept private.
Posted by: oj at December 20, 2004 8:20 AMI thought you were opposed to rationality.
However, in my business, lots and lots of superficially (at least) rational people do expect public information to be kept private.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at December 20, 2004 10:42 PM