1
Bobby Nieves
Analysis doc.
September 17, 2011
“Take my privacy, please” Analysis
Privacy as Public Domain
Ted Koppel uses his authority as a seasoned journalist to incite his audience to be specifically
aware of whom and what holds knowledge of us, and how they might use it. He does this by using
specific examples within this text to trigger alarm in anyone concerned with the security of their private
data. He cites the “Patriot Act” and its power of usage to inform and educate people of their
vulnerabilities.
Koppel begins “Take my privacy, please” with similarities between “The brilliant Patriot Act,"
with what he sees as an Enhanced Snooping Library and Hospital Database Seizure Act. When he talks
about naming, claiming, and framing he may be targeting primarily the baby boomer generation
because during the Bush Administration when this was possibly written they were primarily the voter
population. Koppel follows it up with the “OnStar” mission statement that insures “Safety, security and
peace of mind for all its drivers and passengers, always there, always ready." This mission gives the
sense of trustworthiness to its customer. It appeals to the audience’s sense of safety and well-being
during an emergency since it goes so far as to provide specific details and location that only the involved
party could possibly know other than OnStar. This solidifies Koppel’s ideas of what society is willing to
pay for and endure when it comes to enhanced security. Koppel’s appeal is sound when describing
OnStar’s policy about disclosure in the event that the vehicle is stolen, or worse. They can only disclose
information with a signed criminal court order, which may appeal to the customer. Koppel’s use of
2
critical thinking is effectively cynical here when he suggests that Dwight may know where he is anytime
he is traveling in his car.
Koppel makes reference of keeping track of our movement when people use the “Convenience
of E-ZPass” through Radio Frequency Identification Technology which tells exactly when a motorist
passes through a toll booth. The “VeriChip” within the E-ZPass can also be used as a means of reuniting
pets with their owners. Following the passage of the Patriot Act the Food and Drug Administration has
then approved the VeriChip for use in humans. The article states the VeriChip is currently only used for
health care records, in Alzheimer’s patients, and some trendy Spanish nightclubs. Koppel expands on
this idea by suggesting that one day we could all have a VeriChip routinely implanted into our triceps.
The use of this technology Koppel states is “staggering”, this suggests to the reader that this technology
is for the greater good of society, if not misused.
When and exactly what we watch on “TiVo” is next on Koppel’s report. He cites that all of our
favorite programs and how many times we watch them are now monitored and possibly tabulated.
What, when, and how frequently we view TiVo is the subscribers own business, or is it? The admission
of TiVo that “Your privacy is important to us” is clear, however due to factors beyond their control they
are unable to ensure that your user information won‘t be disclosed. This confession challenges the
audiences to ask themselves why they are unable to secure private information.
In his account Koppel invites the audience to explore what we perceive as benign public
information and how and when it may become a matter of invasion of privacy. His analysis suggests
that human error may play a significant role when private information becomes publicized. Koppel
continues with further evidence of human error with “unexpected and unfortunate” events that have
happened such as the “Bank of America” corporation’s loss of 1.2 million Federal Government
employee’s personal information, “LexisNexis” giving outsiders access to some extremely important
3
personal data, and “Time Warner’s” debacle when an outside storage company apparently misplaced
the sensitive information of 600,000 people. The computer tapes according to this report still have not
been recovered. Koppel states that “CitiFinancial”, the consumer finance subsidiary of “CitiGroup”
correctly informed their customers, but adds “would they have done so entirely on their own”? This
appeal is targeted at one of the deepest held values of American society, honesty.
Koppel also brings to the table California’s legislation requiring companies to inform customers,
with respect to breaches in the security of their personal information. According to the “Security Breach
Notification Laws”, it is their objective to seek to provide such persons with a warning that their
information has been compromised, giving them the opportunity of taking steps to protect themselves
against the consequences of identity theft. Security Breach Notification Laws apply to all sensitive
personal information in a companies’ possession or control (except in the case of the Federal
Interagency Guidance); they are not limited to only customer information. Both the House and the
Senate are now considering similar legislation. He adds that in addition to the mandatory clarity and
transparency of the law, the ways companies share and hold private information should be more closely
scrutinized.
Ted Koppel is able to pinpoint many aspects of our personal data, from what we buy to who we
marry that could affect the significance of society’s most valued principles of honesty and security. He
uses our uncertainties to invite the reader to actually think of who is really benefitting from it, them or
us. His audience may then be anyone who is or ever was concerned about personal privacy and how
that could affect their rights in the future.
Additional research gathered from compliance with California Privacy Laws.