Privacy Related Sites

Here are some privacy related websites:

www.privacyrights.org

www.healthprivacy.org

www.junkbusters.com

Surveillance: Good or Bad?

Here are five issues about surveillance posed by Eugene Volokh, Professor of Law at UCLA, and author of “The First Amendment” who observes that “surveillance is not inherently good or bad.”

In any given surveillance situation, he says, one has first has to determine:
* What concrete security benefits will the proposal likely provide?
* Exactly how might it be abused?
* Might it decrease the risk of policed abuse rather than increase it?
* What control mechanisms can be set up to help diminish the risk of abuse?
* What other surveillance is this proposal likely to lead to?

“Such analysis suggests that traffic cameras are a good idea at least as an experiment. Cameras at public places from ATM machines to convenience stores are probably worth trying.”

Each situation needs to be evaluated independently to determine whether Breathing Space is curtailed or enhanced.

Check out the Story

Before you relay potentially bogus information to others, check out the story on your own:

http://urbanlegends.about.com/
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/
http://www.quackwatch.org/
http://www.straightdope.com/

http://www.snopes.com/
http://www.truthorfiction.com/
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/
http://www.skeptic.com/

Unscientific Americans

From a National Science Foundation's biennial report on the state of science understanding, research, and education, of 1,574 adults surveyed:

* 54% knew long it takes the Earth to orbit the sun. In other words, 46% did not know.
* 51% knew that antibiotics kill bacteria but not viruses.
* 48% knew that the earliest humans didn't live at the same time as the dinosaurs. So, an astounding 52% did not know.

What kind of information are Americans likely to know? The name of Tom Cruise’s baby and who Brad Pitt was married to before Angelina Joli… makes me weep for the state of our collective intelligence.

Great Expectations

"Technology reduces the amount of time it takes to do any one task but also leads to the expansion of tasks that people are expected to do." --Juliet Schor

NY Times: Serial Malpractice

“There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.” - Benjamin Disraeli, cited by Mark Twain.

Peter J. Smith, writing for LifeSiteNews.com, explains how The New York Times, with a rich tradition of misconstruing data “has once again published another 'hit piece' on the institution of marriage, alleging that for ‘the first time more American women are living without a husband than with one.’ However, US census data for 2005 shows that the January 16th front-page story in the New York Times is just another disturbing showcase of the Times’ tolerance for ‘journalistic malpractice’.”

First, a look at the offense: “For what experts say is probably the first time,” writes New York Times writer Sam Roberts, on the front page, “more American women are living without a husband than with one, according to a New York Times analysis of census results.” …“In 2005, 51 percent of women said they were living without a spouse, up from 35 percent in 1950 and 49 percent in 2000,” Roberts writes. He then states that married couples now represent a minority of all American households and “the trend could ultimately shape social and workplace policies, including the ways government and employers distribute benefits.”

Smith counters emphatically: “The plain truth is that Roberts’ findings are at variance with U.S. census reports for 2005, which demonstrate a far different picture from the profiles selected by Roberts of single women ‘delighting in their new found freedom.’”

“According to the 2005 report ‘Marital Status of the Population by Sex and Age’, the United States is not yet a culture that has discarded the institution of marriage, where 60.4% of men and 56.9% of women over 18 years old are married.

Smith points out how Roberts created his own “analysis” by using the Census Bureau’s “Living Arrangements of Persons 15 Years Old and Over by Selected Characteristics”, by including in his 51% figure of women living without a spouse: unmarried teenage and college girls still living with their parents, women whose husbands work out of town, are institutionalized, or are separated from husbands serving in Afghanistan and Iraq!

Smith offers the facts: “Among marriageable women over 18 years old, 56.9% of women are married, with 53% having a spouse present, 1.4% with a spouse absent, 9.9% widowed, and 11.5% divorced. Yet, 67.3% of women 30-34, and 70.5% of women 35-39 are married, a far cry from the profiles of women offered by the Times of women finding fulfillment outside marriage.”

“It’s one of a series of articles the New York Times has run… playing games with numbers in a misleading and dishonest way, each one of them having the same point: marriage is over, marriage is finished, nobody wants to get married anymore, people are happier not getting married,” talk show host Michael Medved told his radio audience, accusing the Times of committing “journalistic malpractice”

“…97% of women between the ages of 15 and 19 are never married!” observes Medved. “What does it tell you when he’s including girls living home with their parents as single women and then uses that to create this lie that the majority of women are unmarried?”

My take on all this? Managing information and communication is tough enough these days without purported trusted news sources like the New York Times publishing erroneous reports.