RHYS BOWEN: On Christmas Day I watched Edward Snowden on TV, saying that
a baby born today will have no concept of privacy—that his every move and thought will be tracked. 1984 come to reality. Big Brother really is watching us. What a frightening thought, isn’t it. And it really seems to be true. Amazon knows exactly what I have been searching and immediately shows it to me on my next start screen. The ads that show up around my emails are for sites I’ve recently visited.
And the thing that bugs me most of all—I visit a site and a little box springs up with a live person saying “Do you want to chat?”
No, I don’t want to chat. Actually I don’t want you to know that I’m checking out your site. In fact the more I think about it, the scarier it is. The sites I check are pretty harmless—Chicos and Hotels.com… but
what an opportunity for blackmail if someone checks the wrong sites! A politician visiting a porn site, for example.(—good plot for a future book??)
I suppose that by deciding to blog online I have freely and willingly given up much of my privacy. As a published writer I am a public figure. I have lots of followers on Facebook and Twitter and I share tidbits from my life with them. But what would I do if this magnified and grew into what Charlaine Harris experienced with strange fans with filed teeth showing up on her doorstep?
I wonder if privacy is not a normal human condition—the first humans huddled together in a cave. In China today there is little concept of privacy and the Communist governments around the world want every move of their citizens to be reported. But America was founded on the concept of freedom of the individual and now that is seriously threatened. So I’m interested in what the other Reds think—are we really in danger of giving up the concept of privacy? Is this necessarily a bad thing?
HALLIE EPHRON: I
remember when the House Unamerican Activities committee was in full throttle,
ferreting out the Communist menace, and my screenwriter father would say those
clicks we heard on the phone was them eavesdropping. I thought he was paranoid.
I also remember when, in the early 60s, the FBI arrived to investigate our
neighbor's oldest daughter who'd gone south as a Freedom Rider. They questioned
me. I was all of 13.
Now it creeps me out when I email someone with a note about something mindless
like the neat nail polish my daughter gave me for Christmas (metallic
lavender)... and right away nail polish ads start popping up on the side. That
feels invasive. I mean, they **are** reading my mail.
On the other hand, what do we expect for free? Which is what my gmail account
is. As is Google search. As is my web browser. It's their way of extracting
payment... information that can be turned into targeted ad revenue.
The NSA mining of all telephone calls? Way beyond reasonable. When will they
start opening our mail?
DEBORAH CROMBIE: This is such a tough question, and it's
something that Rick and I talk about all the time (although he's much more up
on it than I am.) As a culture, we are fascinated by spying--just look at a
list of movies in recent years, or TV shows--and yet WE don't want to be spied
on. Can you have it both ways? Data
mining has been going on in law enforcement for years, as in tracking regular
phone calls to certain suspect numbers, which then allows law enforcement to
get warrants to LISTEN to phone calls if it is judged there is probably
cause. And I'm okay with that. I think.
But then, I've been doing a lot of research this last year on white phosphorous
grenades--is the FBI going to show up at my door?
Now, with everything we do electronically, data mining is
inevitable. Just stay off the Internet,
you say? Your local grocery store tracks
your purchases. The only way to stay out of any database would be to make only cash
transactions in person, and I'm not even sure about that.
I do think there should be limits on how much access there
is to our emails, texts, and phone usage. But on the other hand, I think people
are incredibly naive about what they do make public--"I'm going to Belize
and my house will be empty for a week! The key is under the mat!" No
social media gives anyone a right to privacy!!! My personal motto is, "If
you don't want the world to know, don't put it out there!" Come on, folks.
Maybe we should all go back to writing letters... We still
trust the US Mail, right?
HANK PHILLIPPI RYAN: I remember,
several years ago, people started contacting me in my role as "Help Me
Hank" for TV. The emails would say--"Can you believe it??? You can go
on line and find out people's NAMES and ADDRESSES and phone numbers. You can
find out how much their homes cost, and who they bought them from. They're
invading our PRIVACY!"
Yeah, I would say. That name
and address thing, kind of like...the phone book? And the mortgage stuff..kind
of like the public info easily available at the registry of deeds?
But it's scarier, I think,
because it's so fast. And what if you're in NYC and don't have the LA phone
book? No problem. It's all so accessible. Not to mention the stuff we willingly
give on social media: "Went to Las Vegas for the weekend!" "Love
my new Uggs!" Those bits of info are incredibly valuable. And we've
given UP our privacy.
(And there's a bit of it
that's--good. I like to see the shoe ads on my page..not so much the
"anti-aging" ones, but it could be looked at as a...service.)
That said: The governent
listening to conversations on the phone? Of course that's invasive, and
terrifying, and those who say "if you don't have something to hide,you
shouldn't care" are missing something--like the constititional protecton
against illegal search.
On the other hand: When the
bad guys attack, we all say--why didn't our national security people know about
that?
But didn't the court just say
theres no proof there's ever been an attack stopped as a result of those
listeners?
What would you do, if you were
in charge?
Lucy Burdette: this
is a hard topic on all sides. Ever since the tragedy that occurred on 9/11, I
feel grateful that our security people (whomever they may be) are working to
keep a handle on the "bad guys." Remember how terrifying it was to
board a plane after 9/11? On the other hand, what sets our country apart from
other countries is our ability to maintain private lives. It's a very difficult
balancing act.
In the end, I am not a fan of Edward Snowden. I do think his acts have forced
us into some critically difficult conversations. But I can't help but think
that maybe there was another way to go about it. Oh and one more thing. I had
to stop watching the show Homeland, even though I think it was brilliantly
done. Because the crazy things that Carrie did, including bugging the Marine's
home while his family was out of the house, made me way too anxious. There's a
reason I write lighter mysteries:).
JULIA SPENCER-FLEMING: As a former lawyer, I'm a big fan of the constitution. It's not just the penumbral right to privacy being encroached upon. I think the protections the founding fathers wrote into the Bill of Rights - the right to speak and to assemble, the right to be safe from searches except on warrants obtained through reasonable suspicion, the right to a speedy and public trial, the right to hold property free from seizure except by due process of law - are all under attack. The problem is, they're under attack from us.
Maybe we, as United States Citizens, have lived so long in the safety of the world's most enduring democracy, we've come to take it for granted. We think we can give away bits and pieces of our freedoms - just a sliver, just under these circumstances, only to protect us from bad people. Forgetting the lessons of so much of history: once you surrender a little piece of freedom, it becomes easier and easier to surrender more. And oh, so very hard to get it back again.
SUSAN ELIA MACNEAL: I've put off writing on this because I really haven't made up my mind. While I'm not an admirer of Edward Snowdon's, he may have inadvertently all done us a favor by starting this conversation.
And I say that as someone who's researched anthrax online for THE PRIME MINISTER'S SECRET AGENT. Yes, Winston Churchill and his scientists were developing anthrax, along with mustard gas, during World War II — something not known to the British people then. How many things are going on in our name today? (And how many watch lists am I on for having done this research?)
In terms of censorship, though, both the U.S. and UK governments were upfront about it during World War II — people's letters were assumed to be read and sometimes passages considered sensitive were blacked out by censors. In many ways I think if this censorship had come publicly in the heels on 9/11, people wouldn't have minded. In some ways, I still don't mind.
But, still, I keep coming back to that quote of Benjamin Franklin's — those who sacrifice their freedom for safety deserve neither.
RHYS: So much food for thought here and something interesting...when I tried to link our various names to our websites Blogger allowed me to do Hank, Hallie and Lucy but not Deb or me. We're obviously on the wanted list because we write about a foreign country!
So do let us know what you think... is it worth giving up our privacy for national security?
