WE SHOULD REJECT PRIVACY AND EMBRACE THE TRUTH
THE ONLY WAY TO PROTECT PRIVACY IS TO HIDE THE TRUTH
Journal of Commerce, March 28, 2000, SECTION: EDITORIAL/OPINION; Pg. 4 TITLE: Data privacy deal // acs-VT2001
In the U.S. environment, the machinery of government is used to protect data privacy only when information-giving is unavoidable, such as when a citizen applies for a drivers' license, opens a bank account or files a tax return. Beyond that, individuals with something to hide should take the trouble to hide it themselves.
PUBLIC/PRIVATE DISTINCTION IS A MYTH
Anita L. Allen, Professor, University of Pennsylvania School of Law, "COERCING PRIVACY," William & Mary Law Review, March, 1999, 40 Wm and Mary L. Rev. 723, EE2001-hxm, P.
Some liberals continue to speak of "the public" and "the private" as if they were determinate, fixed categories constraining good government. One can argue, though still within the frame- [*750] work of liberalism, that public and private are contingent, transformable conceptions of how power ought best to be allocated among individuals, social groups, and government. It is not necessary to defend privacy and private choice on grounds that presuppose the existence of fixed, determinate, uncontestable Platonic realms. It is therefore not a devastating feminist challenge to observe that the public/private distinction is something of a myth.
PRIVACY MUST BE MADE BY SPECIAL ARRANGEMENT, THE DEFAULT MODE FOR HUMAN EXISTENCE IS FREE EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION
Solveig Singleton, director of information studies at the Cato Institute, 1999, " Self-Regulation: Real Markets Versus Regulatory Manias"http://www.cfp99.org/program/papers/singleton.htm // acs-EE2001
Furthermore, the default rules for how human beings exchange information about one another favor the freedom of information--with privacy being by special arrangement. Generally, human beings are free to make observations about other human beings, and record and report these.
IN CYBERSPACE THE NOTION OF "SPACE" AND "POSSESSION" WHICH UNDERLIE PRIVACY CONCEPTS DO NOT EXIST
Andrew J. Glass, The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, April 7, 2000, SECTION: News; Pg. 17A TITLE: Web complicating privacy debate; Experts at odds on updating laws // acs-EE2001
"New economy" companies are being caught in the middle of the struggle, said Nicole Wong, a lawyer who represents such clients as Dell Computer and Yahoo! on matters of Internet law.
"In cyberspace, we must recognize that the traditional notion of 'place' and 'possession' do not exist in a network of computers that function on the basis of sharing and passing along data," Wong said. "Most users would argue that the bank statements, personal correspondence, personal calendars and address books are personal and private and should be accorded the same degree of protection from government intrusion as if those 'papers and effects' were kept in the home."
MANY BELIEVE THAT PRIVACY IS OUTMODED AND COMPLETELY OPEN INFORMATION IS THE WAY TO GO
Jeffrey Rosen, associate professor at the George Washington University Law School, The New York Times April 30, 2000, SECTION: Section 6; Page 46; TITLE: The Eroded Self // acs-EE2001
Not everyone agrees that there is reason to resist the brave new world of virtual exposure. This is, after all, an exhibitionistic culture in which people cheerfully enact the most intimate moments of their daily lives on Web cams and on Fox TV. It is a culture in which Wesleyan students are offered a chance to live in a "naked" dorm and in which 2,000 confessional souls have chosen to post their most private thoughts on a site called Diarist.net, which boasts, "We've got everything you need to know all about the people who tell all." Defenders of transparency argue that there's no reason to worry about privacy if you have nothing to hide, and that more information, rather than less, is the best way to protect us against being judged out of context.