Despite its huffy, self-righteous editorial page, the New York Times never has been anywhere close to a paragon of moral consistency. The latest example of the Grey Lady's hypocrisy is on the subject of data-mining, a subject which the editorial side of the paper repeatedly condemned last year. Data-mining is basically a fancy way of compiling user data in an advanced manner. According to the Times, data-mining is wrong when it is done to help fight terrorism. When it's done to fatten the wallets of fatcat liberal newspaper execs then it's ok.
The left-wing Village Voice caught the Times:
Barely a year after their reporters won a Pulitzer prize for exposing data mining of ordinary citizens by a government spy agency, New York Times officials had some exciting news for stockholders last week: The Times company plans to do its own data mining of ordinary citizens, in the name of online profits.
The news didn't make everyone all googly-eyed. In fact, some people at the paper's annual stockholders meeting in the New Amsterdam Theatre exchanged confused looks when Janet Robinson, the company's president and CEO, uttered the phrase "data mining." Wasn't that the nefarious, 21st-century sort of snooping that the National Security Agency was doing without warrants on American citizens? Wasn't that the whole subject of the prizewinning work in December 2005 by Times reporters Eric Lichtblau and James Risen?
And hadn't the company's chairman and publisher, Pinch Sulzberger, already trotted out Pulitzers earlier in the program?
Yes, yes, and yes. But Robinson was talking about money this time. Data mining, she told the crowd, would be used "to determine hidden patterns of uses to our website." ...
Do readers really want data-mining behavior from their newspapers—not just the Times but every other big media outlet? Do they want newspaper databases to store reading histories, minute by minute, until one day the government shows up to examine ordinary citizens' shopping and viewing and chatting habits in detail? If you think it can't happen, ask the librarians who've been told to hand over readers' checkout records under the Patriot Act.
Truth be told, there is nothing inherently unconstitutional about data-mining. It's been going on since Clinton presidency at least within a communications context.
—Matthew Sheffield is the creator of NewsBusters and its Executive Editor.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Data Mining and 1984 and stupidity raised to a new level.
May 9, 2007 - 18:36 ET by acaiguanaData Mining and 1984 and stupidity raised to a new level.
Thank you very much. No one talking about this subject has any idea what they are discussing; have any idea about data and 'mining' which is basically querying the database for data.
Everytime you use your Debit Card, your bank account is 'mined' to determine if you have enough funds or overdraft protection to approve the charge.
Same with credit cards.
Same with Google.
Same with Ask.com
Same with any query into any database.
Duh...
Great mountains of molehills.
And to believe that consumer behavior can be determined and predicted through queries of the NYT's data storeage is to believe that pigs can fly.
ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana Notes from the Bomb Shelter' (soon to be a movie at theaters near you)
Good job clearing that up, A
May 9, 2007 - 19:03 ET by zfGood job clearing that up, Acaiguana. It's a typical liberal scare tactic to make something sound more sinister and worse than it really is especially when it's a little understood technology. It's also a time honored NYT tactic to be flaming, lying hypocrites.
Wrong. Data mining is extraci
May 10, 2007 - 09:05 ET by Evil CapitalistWrong.
Data mining is extracing data about A unrelated to direct actions of A. Querying the account balance to determine if the transaction is going to be approved is not data mining. If the bank scanned historic transactions of A and used that data together, say, with the transactions that B performed in the same place and to determine if the transaction should be approved -regardless of the balance on A's account, then it would be data mining.
The largest problem with data is that data just refuses to go away. Data mining is an extremely thing if done correctly.
Given sufficiently large data set, statistical behavior can be predicted via data mining. Google's profits are direct result of it. So is Obama's growing internet cash pile. Time for GOP to wake up and smell the coffee.
What readers?
May 9, 2007 - 19:36 ET by Gat New YorkWhat readers?
There they go again!
May 10, 2007 - 09:08 ET by atlasragingJust another example of lying liberal hypocrisy!