ad info

 
CNN.com  technology > computing
    Editions | myCNN | Video | Audio | Headline News Brief | Feedback  

 

  Search
 
 

 
TECHNOLOGY
TOP STORIES

Consumer group: Online privacy protections fall short

Guide to a wired Super Bowl

Debate opens on making e-commerce law consistent

(MORE)

TOP STORIES

More than 11,000 killed in India quake

Mideast negotiators want to continue talks after Israeli elections

(MORE)

MARKETS
4:30pm ET, 4/16
144.70
8257.60
3.71
1394.72
10.90
879.91
 


WORLD

U.S.

POLITICS

LAW

ENTERTAINMENT

HEALTH

TRAVEL

FOOD

ARTS & STYLE



(MORE HEADLINES)
*
 
CNN Websites
Networks image


Group launches wide-ranging study on Internet attitudes

Industry Standard

June 13, 2000
Web posted at: 8:42 a.m. EDT (1242 GMT)

(IDG) -- So what do people think about the Internet, exactly?

That's what the Markle Foundation wants to know. The New York-based philanthropy has launched a summerlong study of American attitudes on privacy, security, governance of the Web and other online policy issues. To kick off the project, the foundation, along with Washington-based Greenberg Quinlan Research, held focus groups last month in Atlanta; Long Island, N.Y.; Omaha, Neb.; and Scottsdale, Ariz. The researchers are also conducting online and telephone surveys with the general public and "Internet experts," as well as interviewing government and corporate officials.

  MESSAGE BOARD
 

In September, Markle plans to issue what promises to be a massive report providing an "accountability framework" to serve as grist for the government and the Internet industry to find answers to thorny Internet policy questions.

While it's hard to remember life before the Net, widespread use of it is still in its infancy -- and so are the laws and regulations governing it. The Markle study comes as federal, state and local governments are grappling with whether and how to regulate the Internet on many fronts -- from privacy protection and data security requirements to guarding against illicit chat-room activity. Regulators are addressing issues like online dispute resolution, the legalization of electronic signatures and Web-based voting.

The industry is hoping, on many matters, for continued self-regulation. The Markle study intends to chronicle the expectations of the virtual silent majority and introduce those expectations into the debate.

The effort is part of the foundation's new concentration on Internet-related philanthropy. Formed in 1927 with an endowment from a Pennsylvania coal-mine family, Markle has been heavily involved for decades in mass-media projects, such as funding public television. Last year, Markle said it would spend $100 million -- more than half its endowment -- on Internet projects within five years. Zoe Baird, the foundation's president, says Markle had considered giving away all of its money to Net-related causes. But whether or not the foundation ends up closing shop, it's clear that it is serious about online policy.

MORE COMPUTING INTELLIGENCE
IDG.net   IDG.net home page
  The Standard.com
  TechInformer: The Thinking Internaut's Guide to the Tech Industry
  Three necessary principles behind privacy laws
  What that privacy policy really means
  Reviews & in-depth info at IDG.net
  E-BusinessWorld
  Industry Standard email newsletters
  Questions about computers? Let IDG.net's editors help you
  Industry Standard daily Media Grok
  Search IDG.net in 12 languages
  News Radio
  * Fusion audio primers
  * Computerworld Minute

In November, the foundation gave $200,000 to help fund the structuring of an at-large membership for the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, the nonprofit group charged with technical administration of the Internet. And Web White & Blue 2000, a Markle-funded nonpartisan political Web site, is trying to entice the major presidential candidates into a virtual campaign debate this fall.

"We're trying to get beyond the issue of privacy and into the issues of accountability and responsibility," says Julia Moffett, a Markle executive, about the new study. She adds that the foundation seeks to find out whether the "Internet elite is taking into account what the public wants."

Interestingly, one person that people want is Bill Gates. When asked to pick members for a hypothetical "Internet commission," Midwestern housewives and Georgian college students and businessmen alike point to the Microsoft chairman. As one middle-age Nebraskan put it: "You've got Bill Gates, who else do you need?"

But focus-group members observed by The Standard in Atlanta and Omaha think you need other people like Warren Buffett, Steve Jobs, a couple of hackers and other big names from the industry. But you don't need the government, which was pointedly left off of everybody's lists -- except for those of an Atlanta group of 18- to 24-year-olds, who named the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency to the commission.

Moreover, most of the participants approved of last month's Federal Trade Commission proposal for federal online privacy legislation. Aside from a linger-ing fear that government regulation inexorably leads to new taxes, the groups embraced the idea of mandating basic privacy protection. Everyone liked the FTC's "Kidz Privacy" Web page.

The five Atlanta and Omaha groups were surprisingly thoughtful about some of the nuances of Net regulation. During the sessions, which included surfing three mock sites, participants debated the proper balance of private-sector self-regulation and government-imposed rules, the ramifications of online security issues and the need for international cooperation among governments.

Many participants questioned the wording of the privacy policies on the fake sites, especially phrases like "trustworthy third party." The groups demonstrated a uniquely American attitude: Trust no one. Everyone was leery of surrendering his or her privacy. Few trusted the government to guard it and nobody trusted the industry. "Who knows if that's truthful or not?" asked one 20-year-old in Omaha, when confronted with a privacy policy on a mock Web site. "They're a business and they just want to sell."

Almost everyone missed a stipulation in a mock music site's "user agreement," which let the site debit their credit cards for $10,000 for legal expenses if a user sued. Most of the participants trusted the American Medical Association seal on a sham health-information Web site, but not the BBB Online and TRUSTe seals on the other mock sites. (This is likely because the AMA has offline name recognition; no one had heard of TRUSTe.)

In the free-association sequence, none of the participants responded to the word "Internet" with words such as "shopping" or "e-commerce." Everyone -- from 18-year-olds to 74-year-olds -- associated the Net with "information," "communication" and "encyclopedia." Also, the group was nervous about using credit cards online; few seemed to know that they are legally protected against fraudulent use of their card numbers.

None of the participants was familiar with ICANN. That's fine with many of those involved with ICANN, who see its mission as purely technical. But others point to ICANN's forays into areas like trademark law as evidence that it can't avoid a larger public scope. The Markle Foundation has been a vocal participant in establishing an at-large membership for ICANN. Besides last year's grant, the foundation gave money to a host of public-policy groups to monitor what has turned out to be a controversial process of establishing at-large membership and electing at-large representatives to ICANN's board.

It was tough for the focus-group moderator to clearly explain to participants what ICANN does. It's a safe bet that no one knew the meaning of "formed to assume responsibility for Internet address allocation, domain-name system management and system management functions."

The moderator told some of the participants that ICANN doesn't have to answer to the U.S. government, when in fact it does. Nevertheless, the concept of an international Internet governing body seemed to win favor among participants. Says one 75-year-old woman from Atlanta: "It's something somebody should be doing."




RELATED STORIES:
A low-cost utility that hides your tracks
June 8, 2000
A case of cyberstalking
May 31, 2000
Privacy fears prompt study, delay
May 22, 2000
Rewriting the fourth amendment
May 12, 2000
Should cyber ethics be taught at school?
May 9, 2000
Online child privacy act proves problematic for sites
April 25, 2000
More cops on the Net beat? Privacy groups say not so fast
April 10, 2000
Take Net privacy into your own hands
April 9, 1999
Internet crime report irks privacy groups
March 13, 2000

RELATED IDG.net STORIES:
Internet companies propose consumer protection guidelines
(Computerworld)
Three necessary principles behind privacy laws
(Network World Fusion)
Tech, gov't leaders debate e-gov privacy
(Civic.com)
Survey says workers unworried about e-mail privacy
(IDG.net)
Debate over privacy policies reaches fever pitch
(InfoWorld)
What that privacy policy really means
(The Industry Standard)
Survey to measure privacy concerns
(Civic.com)
Millions of dollars OKād for crime-fighting IT
(FCW)

RELATED SITES:
Microsoft
American Medical Association

Note: Pages will open in a new browser window
External sites are not endorsed by CNN Interactive.

 Search   

Back to the top   © 2001 Cable News Network. All Rights Reserved.
Terms under which this service is provided to you.
Read our privacy guidelines.