Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]

[Kursk]

Life can be cruel Simon. Phorm are paying you and you will, I'm sure, cry all the way to the bank.

[Pasanonic]

Might I just add...

I'm not at all a privacy nutjob. I know where some things are just not possible in this day and age.
I'm not fond of CCTV because it works outside of the areas it was brought to protect us in. I would not have it removed though, just better policed.

I would welcome biometric identity cards for all citizens within certain parameters and correctly manage it could only help protect our society from people not entirely intent on helping our society progress.

I am totally against anyone forcing advertising on me. This should be as much of a choice as I am able to make. I'm certainly not happy to have my browsing habits, however saintly, to be profiled purely for the monetary gain of a third party and even my ISP whom I already pay plenty of money to for an access point to the internet.

Craig

I have to agree with Simon here - let's wait to see the final PIA before condeming.

[Pasanonic]

Originally Posted by JohnHorb

I have to agree with Simon here - let's wait to see the final PIA before condeming.

I totally agree here. Yet it does no harm to try and get some issues clarified whilst the gentleman is online and prepared to talk.

I'm a businessman. I'd not condemn him anyway if he is working on behalf of Phorm. Everyone has to make a living. I'd just be a little disappointed that he did not feel morally obligated to remain neutral.

Originally Posted by Pasanonic

Might I just add...

I'm not at all a privacy nutjob. I know where some things are just not possible in this day and age.
I'm not fond of CCTV because it works outside of the areas it was brought to protect us in. I would not have it removed though, just better policed.

I would welcome biometric identity cards for all citizens within certain parameters and correctly manage it could only help protect our society from people not entirely intent on helping our society progress.

I am totally against anyone forcing advertising on me. This should be as much of a choice as I am able to make. I'm certainly not happy to have my browsing habits, however saintly, to be profiled purely for the monetary gain of a third party and even my ISP whom I already pay plenty of money to for an access point to the internet.

Craig

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by JohnHorb

I have to agree with Simon here - let's wait to see the final PIA before condeming.

Evidence indeed that PR spin works.

The PIA is a document bought by Phorm; it cannot be perceived as a document that will validate anything.

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by 80/20Thinking

Alexander. You should know that in life you have to make choices that others don't necessarily approve. I've pioneered almost every privacy issue of modern times, and your generous remarks reflect that. But do I cease exploring new avenues because some people disagree? Sometimes, but by and large I have to use all my powers of instinct and reflection to figure out where to place my scarce energies and resources. All I ask you to do is wait until the final PIA is published before you rush to judgment.

As for what people think about me or my reputation. Well, I remember from 15 years ago being the first serious campaigner against CCTV and much the same was said about me. Same when I started the fight against the ID card or - in the US - when we launched our action against US VISIT.

Hate me all you want, but also remember that it was only two weeks ago that my actions stopped fingerprinting at Heathrow. And tomorrow there'll be an equally important strike in another area. Just because my approach to issues does not always resonate with yours should not lead you to outright condemnation.

I don't hate you Simon, I would like to think I don't hate anyone, I am a better human being than that. Your work (and others) with regards to privacy inspired me to leave a 15 year career in IT with very lucrative remuneration and return to University in order to carry your flag. All my work has revolved around privacy and technology issues.

For years as a child I was told I was one of the brightest people the country had to offer, I was shipped off to a government boarding school for precisely this reason. Now as an adult, I am known to be a pain in the ass with my relentless attempts to educate people on issues of privacy and my attempts to try and cure the country of this disease of apathy we suffer from to prevent the situation going from bad to worse.

With regards your final PIA, I can't really see it making any difference as the draft ignores the "operations" being carried out on the traffic data with regards the DPA.

I even emailed you several weeks ago asking for your advice on how I could focus my studies with a goal to working with groups like Liberty, PI, ORG etc., yet to date you have not replied. I would have hoped that given your previous 20 years work on these issues you would welcome interest from fresh blood and do everything you can to try and encourage and mentor people like myself to carry on the sterling work you have done.

But irrespective of all the good, as Panasonic stated in his post above, you now seem to be just a new addition to the PR from Phorm. Whether it is true or not, that is how it looks.

Alexander Hanff

Originally Posted by Kursk

Evidence indeed that PR spin works.

The PIA is a document bought by Phorm; it cannot be perceived as a document that will validate anything.

I didn't say 'accept the PIA in advance'. I said let's wait and see what it says before making a judgement. If anything, the 'evidence that PR spin works' is that you seem to have accepted Phorm's 'spin' that the initial PIA was fully supportive of Phorm's POV.

[lucevans]

Originally Posted by 80/20Thinking

Alexander. You should know that in life you have to make choices that others don't necessarily approve. I've pioneered almost every privacy issue of modern times, and your generous remarks reflect that. But do I cease exploring new avenues because some people disagree? Sometimes, but by and large I have to use all my powers of instinct and reflection to figure out where to place my scarce energies and resources. All I ask you to do is wait until the final PIA is published before you rush to judgment.

As for what people think about me or my reputation. Well, I remember from 15 years ago being the first serious campaigner against CCTV and much the same was said about me. Same when I started the fight against the ID card or - in the US - when we launched our action against US VISIT.

Hate me all you want, but also remember that it was only two weeks ago that my actions stopped fingerprinting at Heathrow. And tomorrow there'll be an equally important strike in another area. Just because my approach to issues does not always resonate with yours should not lead you to outright condemnation.

I have the utmost respect for both Alexander and Simon.

Now is not the time to appear to be fractious in the eyes the enemy - yes, I know that there may appear to be a conflict of interest regarding 80/20 and PI with respect to Phorm, but I also acknowledge Simon's contribution to The Greater Good over the years, and I certainly appreciate Alexander's tireless efforts - without his focus on this issue, I doubt we would have been so coherent as a protest group.

Like it or not, pragmatism is far more productive than idealism, and it is results that we need here. At the risk of sounding like a political dilettante, engagement is better than indignant isolation, so even though we may detest what they stand for, we need to debate with Phorm and the ISPs and persuade everyone in this country why what they want to do is wrong.

I wait to be proved wrong...

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by JohnHorb

If anything, the 'evidence that PR spin works' is that you seem to have accepted Phorm's 'spin' that the initial PIA was fully supportive of Phorm's POV.

How so? I regard the PIA in any guise to be completely irrelevant. But let's not squabble, it gets in the way of the purpose.

[lucevans]

Originally Posted by Kursk

How so? I regard the PIA in any guise to be completely irrelevant. But let's not squabble, it gets in the way of the purpose.

Whether you consider it irrelevant or not, the PIA is a necessary part of the process as defined by the ICO. Better that we have some input and influence over it's content than boycott it and allow Phorm to dictate it's tone 100%.
We live in a bureaucratic society, and if you want to get something done, you either play the game or overthrow the government. Sulking silently just doesn't cut it.

[CaptJamieHunter]

Originally Posted by 80/20Thinking

But, just for the record: I affirm that no staff member or director of Privacy International, past or present, has either worked for Phorm or is now working for Phorm or has any financial interest whatever in Phorm. We as 80/20 Thinking are contracted as a third party to provide an independent assessment of Phorm.

Thank you for making that statement Simon. Is the same true of the staff of 80/20 Thinking as well? I'm just trying to get as clear a picture as I can here.

Perception can be a difficult issue to handle sometimes. Often it's caused by behaviours (Phorm PR comes to mind as an excellent example), other times it is caused by confusion over who is connected with which organisation. That, as we know can happen through *ahem* "overzealous" PR or unclear reporting, or even comments made in an online forum.

The companies I've worked for have never gone out and funded any assessments, discovery reports, etc without first being pretty confident of what they're going to get as the end product (ie: no nasty surprises or critical content in the final document).

With that in mind, what exactly is Phorm's involvement with the PIA? Who generated the terms of reference? Will 80/20 Thinking be publishing the final PIA to everyone at the same time or do Phorm get it first so their PR can spin it?

I prefer to read the PIA for myself rather than assume it's going to be a pro-Phorm whitewash. That's not saying I've been brainwashed by Phorm's PR - anyone looking through this thread can see I've berated Phorm's PR every chance I've had. Those who know me will tell you I don't brainwash.

Being clear on the reasons, companies, people and circumstances behind the PIA will help me to judge the PIA when it is published.

I'm with lucevans. Nothing has changed about what we are working for here. Prejudging something before it has been completed isn't my way of analysing things. Saying "It will be this or that so I'll have nothing to do with it" achieves nothing either.

Let's positively contribute to the PIA. That doesn't mean we can't be passionate about it but we should be professional and positive. We should count ourselves lucky we've got two people here with knowledge, experience, presence and reputation to highlight this issue.

Engage with the process, read the finished PIA then judge. That's what I'll be doing.

[lucevans]

Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter

Engage with the process, read the finished PIA then judge. That's what I'll be doing.

[dav]

Apologies, Simon. It seems I've opened up a real can of worms here. Not my intention at all. We need true privacy advocates like PI and your good self, but having two hats with one of them saying, "Will approve for cash" doesn't do you any favours.
Yes, you need to make a living, but the thing we need to realise is that the nature of your PI work doesn't put food on the table and that maybe we should support the actions of groups such as PI more. After all, it's you fighting "the man", not us. You have the experience, contacts and reputation to get things done far better than most of us could. Maybe it's time the people you are representing via PI contributed more than just giving a well meaning, "Thank you." In that way, you wouldn't have to compromise your position by accepting payment from people who expect you to sign off on their system. It smacks of "oldest profession" connotations.

Anyway, this is all detracting from the main issue of stopping Phorm dead in their tracks and is probably best saved for another day.

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by lucevans

Whether you consider it irrelevant or not, the PIA is a necessary part of the process as defined by the ICO. Better that we have some input and influence over it's content than boycott it and allow Phorm to dictate it's tone 100%.
We live in a bureaucratic society, and if you want to get something done, you either play the game or overthrow the government. Sulking silently just doesn't cut it.

I think you'll find that it is not a legal requirement to undertake a PIA and is not a 'necessary' part of the process but an 'advisable' one. For example, you might use it to illustrate 'openness'. If you feel a process that is being bought by 'the other side' to be of value, fair enough. I don't.