Well, at Least Your Dignity Will Be Intact

Are you fed up with all those online advertising companies knowing so much about you? Me neither! But that's not going to stop the Obama administration from cracking down. The new head of the Federal Trade Commission's Bureau of Consumer Protection, David Vladeck, is a guy who spent the previous 26 years suing people for Ralph Nader, so he's not just standing there, he's doing something! The New York Times reports:

In an interview, Mr. Vladeck outlined plans that could upset the online advertising ecosystem. Privacy policies have become useless, the commission's standards for the cases it reviews are too narrow, and some online tracking is "Orwellian," Mr. Vladeck said. […]

"The frameworks that we've been using historically for privacy are no longer sufficient," Mr. Vladeck said.  […]

The Sears case suggested that Mr. Vladeck had adopted a new approach. Sears had offered customers $10 to download software onto their computers, saying it would track their browsing. The commission said that the software also collected information like prescription records and bank statements. Sears settled with the commission in June.

It wasn't a case that caused economic harm, though. Rather than taking money from consumers, Sears was paying them for the tracking. "Under the harm framework, we couldn't have brought that case," Mr. Vladeck said….Now, Mr. Vladeck indicated, the commission would begin considering not just whether companies caused monetary harm, but whether they violated consumers' dignity.

"There's a huge dignity interest wrapped up in having somebody looking at your financial records when they have no business doing that," he said.

The Sears case also signaled a departure from what the commission's presumed position that as long as marketers wrote detailed privacy policies, they were protected. Sears had included information about tracking in its user license agreement, but that wasn't good enough anymore, Mr. Vladeck said.

"I don't believe that most consumers either read them, or if they read them, really understand it," he said.

Declan McCullagh's classic June 2004 Reason cover story on "the upside of zero privacy" here.

Comments

[Art-P.O.G.]

Vladek's comments remind me of that episode of The Simpsons where Milhouse's dad tries to draw 'dignity' during a game of Pictionary.

[Xeones]

But if you're a participant in politics these days, you pretty much have forfeited all dignity anyway. I'm glad Vladeck is out there doing the Lord's work, protecting people from having to read or take responsibility for even the smallest choices they make.

[Nipplemancer]

Government: Protecting you from You.
isn't it nice how much he cares about me?

[kilroy]

When asked about the massive legislation packages distributed weekly in congress, Mr. Vladeck had this to say:

"I don't believe that most consumers congressmen either read them, or if they read them, really understand it," he said."

[JD]

This bureau offends my dignity. I demand it sue itself out of existence.

[Michael]

This is mighty presumptuous, is it not?

"There's a huge dignity interest wrapped up in having somebody looking at your financial records when they have no business doing that," he said.

Since I can't see any way in which a private company could do harm to an individual by merely knowing their finances (as opposed to having access to their actual banking information), I believe Mr. Vladeck is implying that some people should be ashamed of the amount of money they earn. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[TrickyVic]

"""(as opposed to having access to their actual banking information),"""

Is your bank statement not your actual banking information?

[Pro Libertate]

I got that issue with my home pictured on the cover. Very cool. Little does Reason know that I've since moved.

[Michael]

Is your bank statement not your actual banking information?

By actual banking information I meant account numbers, passwords and anything that provides access to making transactions in my name versus simple data indicating how much money passes through my hands in any given time period. If it's the former that they're privy to, then I'll concede that's a big problem.

[Art-P.O.G.]

Is your bank statement not your actual banking information?

I don't know enough about this particular situation, but I guess it depends how much information is displayed.

[R C Dean]

Privacy policies have become useless, the commission's standards for the cases it reviews are too narrow, and some online tracking is "Orwellian," Mr. Vladeck.

By using the epithet "Orwellian" to refer to private activities, Mr. Vladeck demonstrates his ignorance and illiteracy.

[The Angry Optimist]

Nineteen-Eighty Faux!

[Hugh Akston]

If only there were some way to browse the web with anonymity. No, not just anonymity, but Ultimate Anonymity.

There they go againLOL!

RT
http://www.anon-web-tools.net.tc

[Xeones]

Hugh, turns out all it takes is a lil' horse in the morning.

[Tomcat1066]

...and some online tracking is "Orwellian," Mr. Vladeck said.

And frankly, the government doesn't like the competition, damn it!

[Hugh Akston]

I find it disturbing that the anonymity bot demonstrates a better grasp of political issues and a deeper sense of self awareness than does a department head at the FTC.

[Fluffy]

The logical conclusion to draw from Vladeck's argument is that no one has any privacy unless Mr. Vladeck is allowed to dictate when, where, how, and to whom every one of us shares any information at all.

We only can experience privacy if Vladeck is given total control of all data about us.

[Shannon Love]

I am very upset about advertisers knowing what demographic I belong to. As a consequence, I am continually bombarded with information about products I might actually like to buy instead of the old glory days of being bombarded by information about crap I couldn't care less about. This in turn leads me to make better purchasing decisions and makes me happier in the long run.

I don't understand why I am so upset about all this but everyone tells me I should be so I am.

[Pro Libertate]

Hugh,

Which is why the commission will be replaced by a computer. With the following four laws built into it:

0. A business may not harm the government, or, by inaction, allow the government to come to harm.
1. A business may not injure a consumer or, through inaction, allow a consumer to come to harm.
2. A business must obey any orders given to it by a consumer, except where such orders would conflict with the Zeroth or First Laws.
3. A business may protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the Zeroth, First, or Second Laws.

[Pro Libertate]

Shannon,

I'd agree with you, except that the information gathered by the private sector appears to be easily obtainable by the not-private sector.

Tangentially related, I recently ran across an article pointing out problems with cloud computing, and one of the things highlighted was the substantial difference in legal privacy protection between your home computer and a network controlled by a company (or other entity).

[ds]

"There's a huge dignity interest wrapped up in having somebody looking at your financial records when they have no business doing that," he said.

Unless it is the IRS, I guess.

[R C Dean]

the commission would begin considering not just whether companies caused monetary harm, but whether they violated consumers' dignity.

I'm still trying to figure out how having ads targeted to me harms my dignity. A little help, here?

[Pro Libertate]

I think we need to revisit the Privacy Act. You know, the law that restricts what the government does with personal information.

All these breach notification laws--do they apply to government actors?

[domoarrigato]

these are the same people who want to visually scan me through my clothes in order to allow me into an airport - dignity is now a concern? what a joke.

[Rich]

"There's a huge dignity interest wrapped up in having somebody looking at your financial records when they have no business doing that," he said.

From Webster -- Dignity: high rank, office, or position.

[Astro]

I'm still trying to figure out how having ads targeted to me harms my dignity. A little help, here?

It's like netflix asserting that you'd enjoy that POS movie 'Fargo' because you also enjoyed the Coen Brothers movie 'Oh brother, where are thou?'
That's really insulting.

[Tulpa]

Sears had included information about tracking in its user license agreement, but that wasn't good enough anymore, Mr. Vladeck said.

"I don't believe that most consumers either read them, or if they read them, really understand it," he said.

Cheese N Crackers, here we go again with voiding any agreement where the poor consumer failed to read what (s)he was agreeing to. Have these fucktards ever considered what would happen to our system of contract law if that becomes grounds for voiding?

If only we could void laws that Congresspersons failed to read.