The old-fashioned newspaper, long maligned for its
stodginess and sagging profits, has one advantage over high-tech
alternatives: You read it. It never reads you.
The digital sources that increasingly dominate our news
consumption, by contrast, transmit information across the fundamentally public
sphere of the Internet, leaving trails visible to anyone with the right
monitoring tools — be it your employer, your Internet provider, your government
or even the scruffy hacker sitting next to you at the coffee shop, sharing the
WiFi signal.
This is why privacy
advocates have begun pushing news organizations, including The Washington
Post, the New York Times and the Guardian, to encrypt their Web sites, as many
technology companies increasingly do for e-mails, video chats and search
queries.
The growing use of encryption — signaled by the little
lock icon in your browser’s address box — has emerged as perhaps the most concrete
response to Edward Snowden’s revelations about the ability of the National
Security Agency to collect almost anything that exists in digital form,
including the locations, communications and online activities of people
worldwide.
It’s only fair, say privacy advocates, that The Post and
other news organizations that broke these stories heed their key lesson: Online
surveillance is pervasive and voracious, especially when data is unprotected.
Among the issues potentially illuminated by what you
choose to read, advocates say, are your health concerns, financial anxieties,
sexual orientation and political leanings. A single article might mean little,
but Big Data companies constantly collect and crunch a broad range of personal
information to produce profiles of each of us.
“You could paint a pretty detailed picture of a person —
their likes and dislikes — if you could see the articles they’re reading,” said
Trevor Timm, executive director of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, one of
several groups pushing for wider use of encryption.
Encryption may seem a stretch as a press freedom issue,
far from what concerned the Founding Fathers when they enshrined the First
Amendment in the Bill of Rights. Yet a free press operates best when the public
can make reading decisions without fear that their government — or anyone
capable of doing them harm — is looking over their shoulder.
Encrypting something as complex as a news site is
enormously difficult, according to technical experts within the industry.
Several major news organizations offered encryption for some elements of their
sites in recent years but largely stopped when problems arose in displaying
content quickly and cleanly to readers, said Peter Eckersley, technology
projects director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which tracks the use
of the technology.
Continue reading at The
Washington Post
0 comments:
Post a Comment