Layer 8

We want YOUR information to be free.

Attended a talk today given by Dr. Larry Ponemon of the eponymous Institute. His name aside, he looks just like what would happen if Mr. Rogers spent some time in the intelligence arena and then became a professor at MIT (two of these three are true). His excellent talk about responsible information management made me think more about the challenges of information management, which encompasses more than just protection.

The trust given to an organization depends not only on how well it protects information, but also on how transparent it is. This sounds like a contradiction in terms, but it isn’t. People want a company to be forthcoming with information about itself: clear reporting on finances, admitting mistakes in an open fashion, and so on. They just don’t want the company to be forthcoming with their information. Nowhere is this more prevalent than in government, where you have to walk a fine line between releasing all data that you MUST release, and protecting all data that you MUST NOT release. Identifying which data is which is vital; Ponemon gave the example of a recent snafu in Massachusetts where an agency accidentally released Social Security numbers on CDs in response to a public information request. Companies are being penalized in court for not producing records upon request. Not only do you have to protect your information, but you also have to know where it is, keep it the right length of time, and be able to tell which parts are appropriate and required to be shared.

In a nutshell, when people want information to be free, they’re NOT talking about their own. They’re talking about non-personal institutional information, or they’re talking about someone else’s information (which is how The Smoking Gun makes its bread and butter).

Is this really any different from the past? I don’t think so. The only difference is, the issue has become intensified due to the volume and speed of information now available. Years ago, your reputation might be ruined if a lie were printed about you in the hometown newspaper, but now it can happen several times a day, all over the world, for little to no reason at all. Our information is much freer than it ought to be. I suspect that there will be a backlash at some point and the graffiti party that is currently the World Wide Web will settle down into consolidated media outlets and tamer public forums.

(I know, who am I to talk? I’m posting this, aren’t I? )

Posted by shrdlu on Wednesday, October 10, 2007
(2) Comments • Permalink •

Next entry: Do we make a difference?

Previous entry: Teach your children well.

Comments

Alex

on 10/11 at 09:01 AM:

I used to think that information was like liquid. I think these days it’s more like a gas - it expands to fill whatever space it can. We *think* we have control over data, but in reality we only control it insomuch as we have an airtight container to store it in.

LonerVamp

on 10/11 at 10:27 AM:

Yes! You know I harp on how efficient technology is today compared to years past.

“Years ago, your reputation might be ruined if a lie were printed about you in the hometown newspaper, but now it can happen several times a day, all over the world, for little to no reason at all.”

And when something happens in Bumsville, Idaho (badly overdubbed, but you know what R-rated place was originally meant), someone in New York City will suddenly make it their business and get in the middle of it, especially if there is any political, ethical, religious, or racial implications.

However, I’m not so sure that this will all settle down. I think people have always desparately wanted their own soapboxes and creative (or not so creative) outlets. Even us INFPs still have some desire to communicate abroad. I think all of these graffiti parties will become more and more accepted as sources of news. Even Wikipedia will get cited more, although it can be ill-informed, defaced, and basically means the majority rules and will write history as they see it.

A second however...I think there is a market for “tamer” news sites. Even CNN is senationalist anymore...but I guess that’s what gets hits these days (on the other end of the spectrum, the hits that Fark gets for outrageous “news"). I still think there is room for legit news that isn’t so sensationalist. Then again, maybe that is only realized in smaller niches. For instance, I can find solid, non-sensationalist, mature (sort of) sites for my gaming news and security news.

It would be interesting to be an anthropologist or socialogist during these times, especially 25 years from now when they can write huge books about their observations and theories on all our recent changes.