This story from the BBC highlights the latest arguments that are raging over online information. Apparently, the Press Complaints Commission are to undertake consultation about whether newspapers should be able to re-print information that individuals have made available on sites like Facebook and MySpace.
The impetus for this seems to be that individuals who have seen their information re-used in newspaper stories about them are objecting; they say that this information is private and not for public consumption.
Which is crap. This isn’t (or shouldn’t be) a privacy issue – it’s a question of copyright. You’ve already made the information public by publishing it on a website; if it gets re-used by a newspaper then the best you can hope for is to sue them for infringement of your copyright – so if they re-publish your holiday snaps without your permission, you’ve got a case.
As far as privacy goes, if you don’t want people to know about something then don’t put it on a website. As I’ve said before (here and here), you’re just opening yourself up for trouble.
In a related story, you may have heard of the issues that are surrounding the “whistle-blowing” site, Wikileaks. Everyone seems to be up in arms because they’ve been closed down for making public some confidential documents owned by companies; this is being seen as stifling of freedom of speech. Um, no. What it is is stopping the illegal use of documents that are not owned (and may have been obtained illegally) by those people who are making them public. Freedom of speech is a great thing and if it’s being stifled then I’m ready to protest as loud as the next person – but that’s not what is happening here.
I agree with your take on this. Well said.