The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewTed Rall Archive
Make Text Messages Private
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Nearly a decade ago, the Edward Snowden revelations prompted a national debate about data security. Polls show that a growing number of Americans take data security precautions such as choosing different passwords for online accounts and using encrypted communications platforms such as Signal. Eight out of 10 people believe companies should be required to obtain direct consent to collect or sell their data.

But there still hasn’t been any meaningful discussion about data privacy. Text messages, particularly one-on-one exchanges as opposed to group chats, feel as intimate as whispers across your pillow. Do you expect your text messages to remain private? I bet you do. Most people do. Why am I so sure? Because so many people mouth off in text messages that get them into trouble.

The law, on the other hand, does not codify the reasonable expectation of privacy to the dispenser of digital diarrhea. Either the sender or the recipient of an SMS may publish it anywhere she likes, including a public forum such as social media. And that’s scary. If you’re honest with yourself, there’s probably at least one text in your history that you hope never sees the light of day.

In a high-functioning society, laws and social mores are aligned. It is time to close the yawning gap between our privacy-be-damned laws and Americans who behave, and obviously believe, as though their texts were as private as a verbal chat between friends or lovers.

Crystal Clanton provides a high-profile case in point. Six years ago, in late 2015, she was a 20-year-old college senior and an employee of Turning Point USA, an organization that promotes conservative politics on college campuses. According to Jane Mayer at The New Yorker, Clanton sent a text message to a fellow Turning Point employee, John Ryan O’Rourke, while the two of them were attending a conference in D.C. “I HATE BLACK PEOPLE. Like f—- them all,” Mayer reported that Clanton wrote, with the expletive spelled out. The context of the leaked conversation suggests that she was reacting to some sort of run-in on the street or in a store.

Clanton was fired by Turning Point after Mayer’s piece about the incident was published in 2017. Now The Washington Post is reporting that Clanton, “a student at the Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University, (has been) selected for a coveted clerkship with William H. Pryor Jr., the chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit” and “appears well on her way to the ultimate credential for a young lawyer, a Supreme Court clerkship.”

Clanton questioned the authenticity of the dialogue, pointing out — reasonably, in my view — that an easily manipulated digital screenshot proves nothing. The Post ridiculed that defense and criticized such well-connected Washingtonians as Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas for supporting her.

Setting aside issues of evidence, racism and whether one ought to be subjected to career cancellation over a years-old rant, let’s assume that Clanton actually texted those toxic words. Obviously, Clanton never assumed that her texts might someday be made public, much less reprinted in a major magazine and discussed in the pages of one of the most prestigious newspapers in the United States. If her smartphone warned before hitting the “send” paper-airplane icon — “You are about to send a public message. Privacy not guaranteed. Are you sure you want to send?” — she might have thought twice. But smartphones are engineered for impulsivity, not second thoughts.

Clanton has company. Police officers in California, North Carolina and Texas have been fired and/or prosecuted for sending racist texts. An Alabama sorority ousted its chapter president for texting that Black students smelled bad. A quarterback for the Buffalo Bills had to apologize for texting “guns are good,” followed by, “Just make them very expensive so only elite white people can get them haha.” The term “elite white people” triggered outrage. Elizabeth Holmes, founder of Theranos, was hung on the petard of her texts to former Theranos President and COO Sunny Balwani.

Particularly in the case of the police, people shouldn’t think such things, much less say them. But that’s not the point. The point is, Holmes assumed that her “on route to dentist my king” text was private, just between her and Balwani. We don’t live in a surveillance state like East Germany under the Stasi because Americans intuitively understand that having the right to say stupid, insensitive, unpatriotic, even bigoted garbage behind closed doors, in private, with your confidantes — to make mistakes, to be a jerk, to blow off steam, to try scummy name-calling on for size — is an essential part of freedom of speech.

Congress ought to pass a law guaranteeing the confidentiality of text messages unless both parties waive their privacy rights or the communications are relevant to a criminal investigation or lawsuit, in which case they would be subject to subpoena.

Such a reform would not represent a major expansion of privacy rights under American law. If I send you an old-fashioned letter by snail mail, you own the physical letter, but I own the copyright of its contents. As per the 1986 case Salinger v. Random House, in which the reclusive author sued a biographer to avoid the publication of his personal letters, you might be able to reproduce a small excerpt in your no-doubt incredibly flattering biography of yours truly. But you will need my express written permission in order to publish my letter in its entirety or, after I die, that of my estate. There are exceptions for criminal and civil-court matters, such as the use of my letter to defend yourself against any allegations I may have made against you.

A 2010 case, United States v. Warshak, expanded the reasonable expectation of privacy to email communications. Federal law and those of 11 states, including such populous jurisdictions as California and Florida, bans the recording of phone conversations without the consent of the other party.

ORDER IT NOW

Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court has not yet weighed in on the issue of privacy expectations concerning Americans’ text messages. And rationality has been in short supply in lower court rulings. “Any purported expectation of privacy in sent text messages of this type is significantly undermined by the ease with which these messages can be shared with others,” Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Justice Frank Gaziano wrote last year in a ruling against implied privacy rights for texts. By Gaziano’s reasoning, the ability to photocopy or cut and paste should also abolish privacy expectations for letters and emails.

Americans who text only to later find themselves exposed to public ridicule or worse clearly expect their messages to remain private. If their expectation is unreasonable, it’s incumbent upon telecommunications companies to tell their customers that everything they say can and will be used against them in the court of Twitter.

Ted Rall (Twitter: @tedrall), the political cartoonist, columnist and graphic novelist, co-hosts the weekly DMZ America podcast with conservative fellow cartoonist Scott Stantis.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Censorship, Judicial System, Privacy 
Hide 10 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. meamjojo says:

    Congress ought to do a lot of things. I can guarantee that the privacy of texts is not anywhere near the top of their to-do list.

    What’s your next brainstorm, Rall?

  2. Contrariwise, type “I hate white people” and the world becomes your oyster!

    • Agree: R.G. Camara
  3. No message is private and everyone should assume that any message, other than one whispered into a friends ear next to a waterfall, is intercepted by someone else. The woman is a racist and is disqualified from being a law clerk. We should find such messages to expose people for who they really are.

    • Troll: R.G. Camara
    • Replies: @jsinton
    , @ruralguy
  4. jsinton says:
    @Harry Huntington

    Orwell would have called your post “dickspeak”.

    • Agree: Bro43rd
  5. jsinton says:

    The Fonz jumped that shark many years ago on this issue when they were debating privacy in email and the government position was that it was like reading “postcards”. If you want to send a message and be reasonably sure it’s private, take the time to write a message on paper and snail mail it. Privacy, truth, and the “American way” is the enemy in the dystopian Globohomo world of our small minded NWO rulers.

  6. How is “on route to dentist my king” offensive and to whom is it offensive?

    I checked the urban dictionary for a meaning of “dentist” as a verb without success.

    Just more confirmation that Lizzie is a nut job.

  7. Cancel culture comes for text messages.

    It used to be that “private conversations” were verboten from being used in political dogfights.

    • Replies: @HammerJack
  8. ruralguy says:
    @Harry Huntington

    America is filled with repulsive woke Red-Guard monsters. Like the Red Guard in China in the 1960s, leftist woke idiots will cancel you, fire you, and try to humiliate you in public. You lefties point accusatory fingers at everyone, calling everyone who disagrees with you “racists,” using this word like a club to beat people with, just like the communist Red Guard. You leftists propagandize our children in schools, tear our culture apart, erase our history, and imported tens of millions of third-world rejects to replace us.
    Leftists are disgusting and vile creatures, having murdered 100 million people in communist countries. When you gain control here, you will not stop with canceling people, you will continue this grisly murdering spree. That’s who you are. You leftists have shown your true colors in every communist country you’ve controlled.

    • Replies: @GeneralRipper
  9. @R.G. Camara

    It used to be that “private conversations” were verboten from being used in political dogfights.

    It used to be — before the advent of electronic communications — every conversation was private.

  10. GeneralRipper [AKA "BlockadeRunner"] says:
    @ruralguy

    Great, truthful and inspiring post.

    Thank you.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ted Rall Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Becker update V1.3.2
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World