Depersonalization as a method of representation and protection of Research Paper

Depersonalization as a method of representation and protection of personal data - Research Paper Example Computers and the Internet paved the way for more efficient and fast methods to gather, store and organize personal information. Since the 1970s the number of computer data banks or databases became staggering. There are the databases from Social Security Administration, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Medical Information Bureau, state criminal justice systems, municipal data systems, credit card companies, telephone companies, Medicaid, and, recently, Google, Facebook and so much more. The huge amount of information that governments and businesses collect from individuals have become a cause of concern. Personal data collection encroaches on the individual’s right, particularly as it invades privacy or the right to control information about ourselves; there is a disclosure of private personal facts; and, the information can be used in such a way that a person is cast in a bad light or in a case of identity theft. The method of personal data collection, its use and security, hence, necessitate citizen protection. Through the years, laws have enacted that aim to protect personal privacy but they appear to be insufficient. This paper will explore depersonalization as an effective method of personal data collection, where privacy is still protected. ... 3. Access or the level of access provided to individuals on the gathered data about them. 4. Security or the responsibility of data gatherers to provide adequate protection for the information collected (Bidgoli 2004, 98). Based from these principles, a number of laws were enacted covering individual privacy across different sectors. For instance, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act protects personal banking information; the Fair Credit Reporting Act provides the framework for handling personal credit data. There are also laws that cover the collection and use of medical and health data, government records, children’s privacy, and so forth. Laws are also enacted in other countries such as the European Union Data Protection Directive, the OECD privacy guidelines adopted by countries such as Mexico, Australia, Japan and Czech Republic (Conrad, Misenar and Feldman 2012, 401). But these laws and even some ethical guidelines (see Kluge 2000), no matter how specific and comprehensive, still fail to address privacy issues. Neubauer and Kolb (2009), for example, noted that approaches and methods for protecting privacy often do not comply with legal requirements or basic security requirements without suffering any penalty, (7). Szeto and Miri (2007) revealed the same findings when they studied the Canadian experience. According to Hildebrandt and Gutwirth (2008), this is because most statutes builds on traditional ways of thinking data, personal data and their abuse, without understanding or recognizing the new type of knowledge that result from modern data processing (321). It was further argued that even when recent or updated laws were effective regarding personal data, they are still not equipped to deal with correlated data, which is persistent today