[ACT is a free-market leaning group, probably the only one exclusively focused on general tech policy here in DC. You may disagree with ACT's political views -- and I have on occasion -- but Jonathan is doing his best to represent his members' needs by advocating a hands-off approach. You can see some of his previous Politech contributions here: http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=zuck --Declan] ********** Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 16:19:34 -0400 To: declanat_private, politechat_private From: "Robert (Bob) J. Aiken" <raikenat_private> Subject: Re: FC: ACT poll of 1,001 voters says no new privacy laws, please In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010627150823.021238c0at_private> This survey is meaningless. Why are the questions not all posted? Even a high school kid of today would be askin questions about how the "poll" was taken - was it truly random? Also - everyone knows that you can easily rig a poll result through the choice of the questions - for instance - "- 71% of respondents agree that educating users and giving them tools to protect personal information is better than having one-size-fit-all government rules" How many people will choose a "one size fits all government rules" against anything else- when asked this way ? They would rule against the FAA and air traffic control with a similar comparison - BUT if you asked them would they want a consistent and enforceable set of privacy policies nationwide (or in case of Air traffic - a nationwide system that ensured safety) you will get a different set of results. These questions were obviously worded to get a certain result. And then this email subject line - - it says no new privacy laws please, but they really were saying enforce the ones we have 1st which are NOT being enforced - I bet you that when they don't work they will want something later and it will be to late. Another view - think about if we decided to put safety belts in cars based on a survey like this but in lieu of asking about new laws for privacy you asked about new laws to mandate seat belts. The public would have chosen everything else above seatbelts then and maybe even now with the wording chosen in this "poll". this poll is a joke. bob aiken CISCO SYSTEMS Bob Aiken, Manager : : University Research, Office of the CTO .:|:...:|:.. 6519 Debold Rd., Sabillasville, Md. 21780,USA 1-301-271-2919(v),1-240-461-1744 (mobile), raikenat_private http://www.cisco.com/go/research Be the Packet! ********** From: "Ben" <bmwat_private> To: <declanat_private> Subject: Re: ACT poll of 1,001 voters says no new privacy laws, please Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 16:38:58 -0400 People are supposed to trust these results, when they come from an organization comprised of businesses that can profit from lack of privacy regulations? An organization who's goal isn't to show any objectivity, or to protect peoples' rights -- who's own about page states that "ACT members share a preference for market-driven solutions over regulated ones", and that their purpose is to shape their future by lobbying on capitol hill. The specific survey isn't even shown as far as I can see, so how am I or anyone else to know how the issues were represented, or misreprestented. You know, why don't the guys at ACT just spit in consumers' collective face? It would be a lot more straightforward. ********** Subject: A few words from an unashamed champion of businesses and market based solutions From: "Jonathan Zuck" <jzuckat_private> To: "Declan McCullagh" <declanat_private> Bob and Ben raise some interesting points and some legitimate concerns so I'm happy for the opportunity to address them. First on the poll itself, I agree that there are lots of bad polls. We made an effort at least to be different here. We all saw the reference to Solveig Singleton and Jim Harpers excellent critique of polling on the privacy issue and are sensitive to those concerns (see http://www.cei.org/PRReader.asp?ID=1525) . So, for your reading pleasure, here are some links to the actual poll questionnaire, answers to our unprompted questions, and some interesting stuff like crosstabs. Survey topline results: http://www.actonline.org/pubs/polls/toplines.pdf Q11 verbatim responses: http://www.actonline.org/pubs/polls/q11.pdf Q18 verbatim responses: http://www.actonline.org/pubs/polls/q18.pdf CrossTabs: http://www.actonline.org/pubs/polls/crosstabs.pdf I'm anxious to receive feedback on better wording for a future poll that helps to eliminate bias from either direction. Second, to Ben's observations about the source, I'm forced to agree that we are an organization that represents IT businesses. Where we don't agree is that the interests of businesses and consumers are necessarily mutually exclusive or that the government has the answers. With the almost clandestine passage of the Children's Online Privacy Protection ACT (COPPA) and subsequent interpretation by the FTC, a situation was created where compliance costs forced companies with legitimate children's content out of business (yes, two ACT members) while providing questionable protection of children's privacy. In fact, in most cases, compliance required collecting MORE information from users than before, making it easier to sign up for an adult site than a children's site. Accordingly we feel it is legitimate to assess the cost we pay for regulation in the context of the protection we ultimately receive. The completely SPECIOUS distinction being drawn by many between the online and offline collection of data is just such an example. It will take one of our little online retailers a hundred years to collect as much information on consumers as Sears has already collected . Who exactly are we trying to protect? Consumers or big offline companies, worried about the competition brought by the Internet? As Ben reported, ACT member support market based solutions over regulatory ones. If consumers put our member companies out of business because they don't like the way they do business, you won't hear a peep from us. If the government puts our members and others out of business because of the self interested advocacy of a few lobbyists, thereby removing the choice from consumers, we will indeed scream and yell. That IS what we have been charged to do. ********** ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Jun 27 2001 - 16:12:51 PDT