NET RESULTS: During the week, I received an unusual press release, writes Karlin Lillington.
One of the world's largest privacy advocacy groups, the Electronic Privacy Information Centre (EPIC) in Washington, DC, announced that it, and 10 consumer groups, would file a formal complaint to US regulator, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
The complaint? According to the release, it would "allege that a major internet retailer has illegally collected and disclosed children's personal information in violation of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act \". The investigation of a second internet firm for changing its privacy policy was also to be urged.
Journalists were told they could go to EPIC's website for a copy of the letter at 9 a.m. and could join a conference call to discuss the issues at 11 a.m.
Turns out the "major internet retailer" is Amazon - which I learned from the story on the issue at News.com. The problem is that children can post reviews of toy products on the Amazon website and could include names and addresses or phone numbers and there's no definitive way of preventing this.
The groups mentioned no specific instances of a child being harmed, though the consumer groups offered a single instance in which a review, allegedly by an 11-year old, was posted with a name and city identifier. Amazon, in its defence, said its site was intended for adults, not for children. But the issue gets stranger. On the one hand, it seems the challenge made by the consumer groups is actually intended to force the courts to define the boundaries of COPPA.
In general, most privacy groups have actually opposed COPPA because it places what they believe are unworkable restrictions on internet activity.
Adults find material censored or restricted on the assumption that a child might be able to gain access to a website, while the protections in place actually provide no real protections. In other words, the privacy and consumer groups are in a sense playing devil's advocate here to force the issue to be examined more closely by the FTC.
My problem is not with this confusing approach though the way in which the event was reported by News.com suggests the organisations did not make their own perspective or motivations clear to reporters. I read the report several times and was none the wiser. My difficulty lies in the way the event was publicised.
The early tip-off that a name would be announced (generating anticipation that it might be a really big one, like Amazon), and the promise of a name at 9 a.m. the next day, followed by a conference call, seemed unduly tabloidesque. It's a strategy companies use to make a big product announcement - build interest and excitement around a promised revelation. But we're not talking about a new model of an Apple computer or wireless device here. We're talking about very serious concerns about children's privacy rights, possible commercial exploitation and free speech issues.
The announcement seems demeaned and unprofessional. I hope these worthy and important groups - EPIC in particular has been a brave and crucial advocate for privacy rights - choose another approach to press announcements in the future.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
As some readers will know, I've been keeping a weblog - or a "blog", as they are more commonly known - since last August. It's a kind of online commentary space where I like to throw out links to stories I find interesting, or add a bit of personal opinion. Mostly it's tech-related, but not always.
Blogs moved more into the public eye, at least in the States, during the war in Iraq as they began to provide running commentary, links to international coverage and stories that perhaps weren't getting mainstream coverage. But a wide range of people - not just the politically inclined - have jumped into blogging, from professional writers to software developers to academics, idiots and the kid next door (sometimes rolled into one, it seems!).
One of my favourite blogs to read since its launch in January is from writer William Gibson. (I've written up a deliciously long interview I was granted with Mr Gibson elsewhere in the section today.)
I was eager to hear how he found the whole blogging experience because the immediacy of posting to this very public internet medium, and the quick feedback you get from readers has, at least in my case, caused me to write and indeed, think, in new ways.
I wondered what the experience might be for a writer of fiction with a huge, very tech-savvy following (his site has its own online discussion area - now that's one for the brave of heart, as his fans pick apart his writing and ruminate about his life online. Yikes).
You can read his take on blogging in the interview. I just wanted to note here that I was sorry to be told that he'll be ending his blog very soon, as soon as his book tour on behalf of his latest novel, Pattern Recognition, is over.
I can understand his reason - he fears the constant interaction with readers and the temptation to discuss the ideas going through his head as he contemplates his next novel might be damaging to his own creative process. I think that must be true for a fiction writer or poet. Giving too much away, overworking the ideas, doesn't let them ferment in the creative darkness they need.
This fascinated me as I've found the opposite holds true for my journalistic writing. The blog is a fabulous place to work out ideas that often become future columns or feature stories. Sometimes I don't know what I think until I write a swift reaction to something I stumble across. Sharing that reaction on the cool glow of the computer screen with readers who often respond with their own comments is, for me, extraordinarily fruitful for my own writing process - probably because I need to let light in on topics I'm going to tackle swiftly, which will go to print right away.
Karlin's tech weblog: http://radio.weblogs.com/0103966/
