From: judic@netcom.com (Judi Clark)
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 93 18:53:40 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: reporter seeking interview subjects
Message-ID: <9309230151.AA05313@netcom.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>In <93Sep17.230857pdt.14382-4@well.sf.ca.us>, Matt Binder wrote...
>> Hi, my name is Matt Binder.  Please help me...
>>         I'm a radio reporter in the SF Bay area working on a series
>> of pieces about invasions of privacy in the computer age.  I'm
>> looking for interesting "case studies" that I can use to horrify
>> my listeners out of their complacency.  
>
>I think it's really important that if you're looking to shock your audience
>that you also show a glimpse of not only the "light at the end of the
>tunnel" but also a glimpse of the reasons that people would be better off
>making a dash for the end of the tunnel than trying to run back to the
>tunnel's start.  Otherwise, you're just fueling the anxieties of countless
>luddites and techonophobes.  
>
>> My most immediate need is
>> to find someone whose medical records were used (perused!)
>

Thanks, Stig, for forwarding this for my "more immediate <ahem> attention."

Matt, I agree with Stig that it's important not to horrify anyone out of
anything unless you also give them something concrete that they can do
about it. In most cases, invasions of privacy aren't something empowering,
nor can most people do anything about them but know and worry. I don't
find this too constructive.

There are a couple of stories that you might be interested in, in any case.
One is that San Francisco (and other counties across the state) is testing
a plan to fingerprint all General Assistance recipients. You can get
testimony from hearings conducted earlier this year from a friend of mine,
Jim Davis <jdav@igc.apc.org>. I know that CPSR in Berkeley is planning on 
holding a meeting in late October to explore and talk more about this issue.
Fingerprinting will be on the November ballot, btw.

Second, the state has had a database system designed to track all recipients
of state money. That is, if a day care center receives any state aid, all
the kids go into the database. (They can't be removed, once added, until 
they turn 18 and file a petition with the state.) State aid is another
part of this package, as are jail participants, and other state-oriented 
program participants. You can see this is just a short step from adding
tax-payers, businesses, and everyone else that has anything to do with
the state...

The scary part of the above story, in case that wasn't enough, is that
state hospitals and medicaid recipients are also in the database. The idea
is that if a patient goes to another county, they can get consistent care,
and not be able to "double-dip" from state agencies. Of course, that also
means that many state agencies have access to confidential medical info
about a lot of people (who, by nature of their being on the state's
systems, are powerless). Furthermore, the designer of this system hasn't
shown any priority or sophistication in creating levels of security
so that people that aren't supposed to have access really don't.
A friend just reminded me that there was a radio program on recently,
This Week in California (KQED) which talked about the Alameda Co. system.
This is an expensive system, and they didn't find any evidence of fraud.

Good luck with your stories. I hope this gives you something to start
with.

  yours in scary things,
  judi