Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The Dangers of Corporate Wi-Fi

By Jeffrey Chester, TheNation.com. Posted March 28, 2006.


Google and other telecom giants are wooing cities with offers of public Wi-Fi grids -- but online privacy could be lost in the process.
Advertisement

The digital gold rush is on across America, as cities scramble to develop free or low-cost Wi-Fi zones. These public on-ramps to the Internet are designed to provide every citizen with a form of always-on, high-speed Internet access -- at the playground, in the office or at home -- at low or no cost.

Dozens of communities large and small, in red states and blue, are either planning or currently constructing Wi-Fi systems. Community leaders -- from Philadelphia; Houston; Columbia, South Carolina; and San Francisco, to name a few -- recognize that creating a citywide Wi-Fi zone is not only vital for economic development and public safety but helps insure that Americans who can't now afford digital communications on their own can also tap in to the riches and convenience of the Internet. But there is no such thing as a free digital lunch.

Consumers and public officials should have no illusions that what is being touted as a public benefit is also designed to spur the growth of a mobile marketing ecosystem, an emerging field of electronic commerce that is expected to generate huge revenues for Google, Microsoft, AT&T and many others. Soon, wherever we wander, a ubiquitous online environment will follow us with ads and information dovetailed to our interests and our geographic location.

Unless municipal leaders object, citizens and visitors will be subjected to intensive data-mining of their web searches, e-mail messages and other online activities are tracked, profiled and targeted. The inevitable consequences are an erosion of online privacy, potential new threats of surveillance by law enforcement agencies and private parties, and the growing commercialization of culture.

Mining your data

Consider the application submitted to the City of San Francisco in February by search giant Google and its partner, the Internet service provider Earthlink. One of six Wi-Fi bids being considered by the City of San Francisco, the Google/Earthlink plan has attracted the most attention. Under this proposal, Google would provide a free but relatively low-speed Internet service available throughout the city (Earthlink would operate a higher-speed service on the same system charging users $20 a month). The costs of operating the "free" service would be offset by Google's plans to use the network to promote its interactive advertising services.

Everyone who uses the Google network would first be directed to a portal page, where they would be offered an array of what Google terms "personalized consumer products." Through those products and other technologies, Google plans, according to its proposal, to "target advertisements to specific geographical locations and to user interests."

What this means is that Google and Earthlink plan to use online files (known as cookies) and other data-collection techniques to profile users and deliver precise, personalized advertising as they surf the Internet. (Earthlink is working with the interactive ad company DoubleClick, which collects and analyzes enormous amounts of information online to engage in individual interactive ad targeting.)

Not everyone is enthused by the Google/Earthlink model. San Francisco was advised by a trio of privacy advocates to develop policies that would respect personal privacy. In letters to the city, the ACLU of Northern California, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) urged the adoption of a "gold standard" for data privacy, insuring that its Wi-Fi system would "accommodate the individual's right to communicate anonymously and pseudonymously." The groups also suggested that the city require any Wi-Fi company to allow users to "opt in" to any data-collection scheme. [Full disclosure: I rent office space in Washington, DC, from EPIC].


Digg!

Jeffrey Chester is executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy (www.democraticmedia.org).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
It's Time for a CHANGE
Posted by: thinkverybig on Mar 28, 2006 1:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The United States immigration policy needs a complete overhaul. My question is this. Why are Cubans allowed to come ashore to the U.S. and Haitians are sent back at sea? This blatant act of racism is shameful and disgraceful and should be changed immediately. The United States is so set on trying to maintain control of its super power status that it doesn’t care who it tramples on the keep it. But what is the reason for not allowing people of color to enter into the U.S. other than racism? What is the reason it has allowed illegal immigrants to enter into the U.S. and work for wages well below minimum wage? For businesses to continue to prosper while keeping the bridge wider between the rich and the poor, which is a new form of present day slavery by big business with the U.S. Government’s approval. Haven’t we had enough of free labor? I think 400 years of it is quite enough and by the way, where is that 40 acres and a mule you promised those slaves?

While the republicans were spending millions of dollars of tax payers money to investigate and impeach President Clinton, we could have been focusing on issues such as illegal immigration, poverty, jobs for Americans, campaign finance reform, political corruption, the outsourcing of jobs to other countries, the environment, overpaid CEO’s, outlawing lobbying, outlawing monopolies, corporations taking advantage of citizens with ridiculous late fees on credit cards, bank teller fees and more

It’s time for a change in our political, social and judicial system. The time has come. I’m ready, are you?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's Time for a CHANGE Posted by: ethanay
» RE: It's Time for a CHANGE Posted by: andrewgirma
» RE: It's Time for a CHANGE Posted by: thinkverybig
cheap Wifi broadsband is a MUST for America
Posted by: cry0fan on Mar 28, 2006 3:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only thing that can save America is widespread and cheap broadband. Unti we get that, then the mass media will continue to maintain an ideological grip on America via tv and radio.

Break the grip of ideology the elite have on America by getting cheap broadband for most of America. Do it ASAP!

Cheap broadband at ANY cost? YES!

Is this article criticizing muni wifi a product of telecom propaganda?

Did SBC, ATT, Verizon pay to have this article printed in The Nation magazine and on Alternet?

Inquiring minds want to know.....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Oh, puhlease Posted by: anothername
How about the facts Jeffrey?
Posted by: AlienSlave on Mar 28, 2006 5:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Jeffrey paints the worst case WI FI experience on privacy and security there is. I’ve been using WI FI Internet daily or the past three years and have had no trouble at all. Encryption, the right web browser and a few added extensions to that browser and you are more secure than a cell phone in Dick Cheney’s bedroom. Me thinks Jeffrey is on the payroll of the corporations trying to stop public free WI FI. I belong to a small group of hackers that spend a lot of free hobby time researching and trying to hack into wireless Internet and then build new security extensions. It’s just not that easy to do. Yes you can pick up the signals but you then need to tune them in so to speak. Granted you could have a system that is fully open like the old party line phone system but you would have to deliberately work at setting it up as well or the local police patrol cars computers. Wireless public Internet is just one more nugget of worldwide communication scary as hell to those who don’t understand or to those who want control. Jeffrey would do the public better if he spent his time alerting people to the very open and unsecured cell phone system and the ID tracking chips built into them.
AlienSlave

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

icky.
Posted by: bettsoff on Mar 28, 2006 6:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sounds like Minority Report, quite frankly. I'll be tuning out.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I feel like I read a different article than other commenters
Posted by: eringhorm on Mar 28, 2006 7:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I didn't see this article as being anti-community WiFi at all. What I read is that it's anti-corporate-owned community WiFi. It doesn't matter if you've got a hyper-secure, 1,024 bit-encrypted, triple-password-protected system if the ISP you're going through (and this is what we're talking about, the ISP for these WiFi networks) is collecting your surfing info. No amount of encryption is going to stop the ISP from seeing which webpage you visit, or which WiFi tower you're picking up. And that's where the advertising comes in. If you search for coffee, you aren't just going to get a Starbucks ad, you're going to get an ad for the Starbucks 2 blocks from where you're sitting. If you're okay with that, fine. If not, there are non-commercial, privacy-friendly options out there, or at least that's what I understand from this peice.

RTA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A better idea: public internet cafes (anonymous, that is)
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Mar 28, 2006 7:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In some other countries (South Korea), you can simply walk up to a computer, log in, use it for a search or for whatever else you need, and walk away. Why is there a need to track every user in cyberspace? Why is there this desperate desire on the part of governmental authoritarian control freaks to keep a dossier on every American citizen? Making money off people is also another major motivating factor. Of course, one answer is that 'they might be up to criminal activity'? Personally, I feel it is more likely that our government 'agents' are up to criminal activity - but they aren't wiretapping themselves, are they? The Constitution is still the basis of the USA, and it does have this little notice:

Amendment IV:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Note the word 'effects' which should be interpreted to include online cyberspace activity.

Of course this is supported:

Amendment I:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Bill Of Rights

Just say "NO" to the rise of corporate fascism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

privacy fetish...
Posted by: ethanay on Mar 28, 2006 8:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think a lot of our pro-privacy fundamentalism stems from individualism implanted and inspired (or at least encouraged) by corporate capitalism..."individual units" can be sold more product at higher prices for more profit, and this is the way capitalism naturally tends to push society...to individually hord w/o sharing. Individuals aren't necessarily "independent"--it's just shifting our dependencies from the social sphere to the commercial sphere...i.e., the expanding use of psychotherapists when some research shows that just having a really good friend who you can regularly depend on has about the same effect.

Privacy and freedom, and especially privacy and democracy, are NOT necessarily correlated, no matter how much America wants to believe that they are. In fact, at a certain point, I think privacy becomes antithetical to both, and I think America is a bit past that threshold. It's a downward spiral...because we've been conditioned to equate privacy and freedom, we think "We're losing privacy, we need to fight for it" and we continually lose more social comfort and freedom, which makes us more anxious about privacy, etc.

Getting rid of our rampant privacy fetish would allow us to surface and confront more directly with issues of corporate power and social behavior...I know a lot of people might agree with the former but get suspicious about the latter...but every society has to figure out how to deal with social norms and deviancies. When the people don't do it openly, then the corporations will happily instead, in the form of the culture industry, which is probably why we have so many damned homo and metrosexual stereotypes.

I'm not saying we need to encode matters of social and cultural norms or even corporate behavior into law or anything, we just need to make them more accessible for discussion and deliberation...instead of just trying to avoid them by sticking our "individual heads" in the sand. Privacy schmivacy...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: privacy fetish... Posted by: nergohs
» RE: privacy fetish... Posted by: bettsoff
» RE: privacy fetish... Posted by: andrewgirma
Airport Wifi
Posted by: Artkansas on Mar 28, 2006 1:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've noticed that some airports offer wifi services to travelers. They wouldn't monitor all the traffic on their wifis would they??? Nah!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Opt Out
Posted by: TagsNOLA on Mar 28, 2006 2:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wouldn't mind it if there were an "opt out" button that went along with corporate subsidized public access wifi. As long as the notice were prominently displayed and the "opt out" easily accessable and by opting out, there were no significant degradation in service. But I don't see any laptop user smart enough to establish a wifi connection overlooking an 'opt out' feature if it were conspicuously offered and easily accessable. I am skeptical that this scheme could work though because almost everyone would opt out, wouldn't they? Then what would be the profit motive behind corporate sponsorship? What am I missing here?
TagsNOLA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

rover
Posted by: Roverton on Mar 29, 2006 9:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It would be naive to think that they're not listening to everything, stated or otherwise.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]