The myth of privacy invasion

Members of Congress are returning to Capitol Hill, having assessed what's on voters' minds. They may have found that privacy ranks much lower among the public's concerns than the chattering classes report. And for good reasons.

Commentators have kept up a drumbeat about ever-rising threats to privacy. In Tampa, Fla., the police are reported to feed mug shots of crime suspects into computers connected to cameras that scan the faces of people in the street. Dick Armey, House majority leader, railed against cameras introduced to catch red-light runners. New police flashlights measure the alcohol on one's breath. New software from Microsoft and AOL is said to pose new threats to privacy.

Little wonder one of the new clichés is that privacy is at the same spot on the public learning - and alarm - curve as the environment was in the 1960s. And there are plenty of volunteers to don the Rachel Carson mantle and do for privacy what she did for nature in her book "Silent Spring." At least half a dozen books bemoan the death of privacy and the arrival of Big Brother. And a bunch of privacy advocacy groups keep filing legal cases against both public and private intruders.

Moreover, it is possible to find US public opinion polls that support the thesis that privacy is an endangered species. For instance, when asked if they fear loss of personal privacy by government use of the Internet and other technologies, more than half of all respondents (53 percent) said they were extremely concerned, according to a Hart-Teeter poll; another third were quite concerned. Only 1 out of 8 was not losing any sleep about such a loss.

Similarly, when asked if they wanted stronger laws to protect privacy, the majority said, in effect, "by all means." Note, however, that these are cost-free questions. It is like asking if you want more fresh air, good movies, or better government - with no additional effort or expenditure on your part. The only surprise here is that anybody demurs.

But when it comes to "paying" anything for gaining more privacy, Americans reveal how strongly they really feel about alleged privacy violations. Asked if they bothered to check the privacy policy of a health or medical website they'd visited, only 1 out of 4 claimed they did. This is despite the fact that medical privacy concerns the most personal information of all. To gain a small discount, roughly 80 percent of Americans declared themselves willing and ready to divulge personal information. Asked if they would support new privacy protections if they hindered investigative journalism, the public clamor for more privacy quieted down substantially. John Schwartz just reported in The New York Times that companies that sell privacy-protecting software have a hard time finding a market.

Page: 1 | 2