Computer Matching Versus Privacy

2152 Words5 Pages

Computer Matching Versus Privacy

Introduction

With the advent of new computer technologies, the ease with which new information can be discovered from aggregating data sources is astounding. This technique is called computer matching. When it comes to doing research this can be an incredible source of new ideas and correlations between sets of data. However, this same technique can be applied to information about individual people. Suddenly, by pulling together disparate sources of data, private information can be learned about an individual without their knowledge or consent. If the organization that is capable of computer matching is a government, it places a lot of information in the hands of a powerful entity. A question of whether the government should have this new information is a significant one.

What if the government were not allowed to ask you for information that is discoverable through computer matching? Should the government be allowed to use this technique to yield the same information? This ethical dilemma is covered in this paper. Relevant information will be used from the laws in the United States and the European Union to illustrate the different perspectives on the privacy of citizens and the approaches each government takes to it.

Letter of the Law or Spirit?

Many countries around the world have laws on what information a government can ask from its citizens. These laws typically focus on protecting the privacy of individual citizens and preventing discrimination based upon the collected information. Computer matching could place this same information in the hands of the government.

In the United States, US law prohibits the direct collection of certain information. This includes, but not limited to information about ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc1. The European Union (EU) has set guidelines for members of the union. These guidelines set strict rules for the “processing” of personal information. The EU defines processing as collection, use, storage, retrieval, transmission, destruction, and other actions2. The rules also provide provisions requiring the consent of the individual person before this “processing” can occur.

It is apparent that the intentions of the laws for the United States and the EU are to protect the privacy of their citizens. However, loopholes exist in these laws that allow the governments to bend these laws. In the United States, the law prevents the government from asking for certain information, but it does not prevent it from purchasing this information or using matching techniques to discover it.

Open Document