THE 2002 BIG BROTHER AWARDS -nominations
privacy international | 27.02.2002 10:05
The judges of the 4th annual Big Brother Awards have announced the shortlist for this year's awards, which will take place at the London School of Economics on March 4th.
THE 4th UK BIG BROTHER AWARDS
MEDIA RELEASE
PRIVACY INTERNATIONAL ANNOUNCES SHORTLISTED CANDIDATES FOR THE 2002 BIG BROTHER AWARDS
The judges of the 4th annual Big Brother Awards have announced the shortlist for this year's awards, which will take place at the London School of Economics on March 4th.
The awards were established in 1998 as a means of recognising both the villains and the heroes of privacy. They are hosted each year by the LSE, and are presented by Channel 4's Mark Thomas.
The following shortlist has been culled from more than 150 nominations. The judges felt that the following candidates represented a particularly potent threat to privacy and liberty in Britain. Some candidates have been shortlisted in more than one category.
WORST PUBLIC SERVANT
Sir Richard Wilson, Cabinet Secretary For his long standing commitment to opposing freedom of information, data protection and ministerial accountability
David Blunkett MP, Home Secretary For his astonishing and multi-skilled disregard for privacy and for his patronage of the proposed national ID card
Michael Cashman MEP, For his unrelenting opposition in the European Parliament to controls over email spam see report at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4251962,00.html
MOST INVASIVE COMPANY
The Countryside Alliance (CA) For registering themselves with the Information Commissioner as holding data on (among many other categories) sexual, political, religious, health, intelligence and lifestyle information on a vast range of individuals. The CA registration on the Information Commissioners site is 27 pages in length, and contains almost every conceivable category of personal data. See http://www.dpr.gov.uk/cgi-bin/dpr98-fetch.pl?source=DPRdocid=217833
The Internet Watch Foundation For actions which judges regarded as unnecessary, disproportionate and hostile to the rights of Internet users. See http://www.cyber-rights.org/watchmen-ii.htm and
http://www.liberty.org.uk/cacib/iwfresignation.htm
Norwich Union For using unapproved genetic tests for potentially fatal diseases when assessing whether to offer life cover. See
http://www.gefoodalert.org/News/news.cfm?News_ID=2676
MOST APPALLING PROJECT
The Electoral Reform Society For its patronage of a report by the Independent Commission on alternative voting methods. The report provides a woefully scant assessment of the substantial privacy and security threats arising from electronic voting. See www.electoral-reform.org.uk
The National Criminal Intelligence Service (NCIS) For its 2001 proposal to archive and warehouse all email, internet and telephone call traffic records for the entire population. See
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2001/nov/17ukdata.htm
MOST HEINOUS GOVERNMENT ORGANISATION
The Department of Education and Skills For removing anonymity in the 2002 national schools census and for creating a student tracking system. See
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/education/newsid_1732000/1732488.stm
The Home Office (see above)
The Internet Watch Foundation (see above)
LIFETIME MENACE
Sir Richard Wilson (see above)
The national Identification and data sharing scheme Proposals for a comprehensive data sharing scheme between government agencies and the private sector have in recent years become a fixed component of government thinking. These proposals, whether they are marketed as a national ID card or an entitlement card, constitute the greatest ongoing threat to privacy. This nomination goes to the concept.
Privacy International's Director, Simon Davies, said "The judges have been appalled at the depths to which this year's candidates have sunk."
"During the judging process, it has become clear that government agencies and companies have stooped to an all time low in the wilful violation of our privacy"
"We have been almost overwhelmed this year by a flood of new entries, many of which involve technologies and techniques that are beyond the control of law, and outside the comprehension of policy makers"
JUDGES OF THE 2002 AWARDS
Karen Banks, Co-ordinator, GreenNet
Caspar Bowden, Director, Foundation for Information Policy Research
Dr Ian Brown, University College London
Tony Bunyan, Editor, Statewatch, London
Duncan Campbell, Freelance film and television producer,
Simon Davies, Director, Privacy International
Dr Fleur Fisher, Ethics and healthcare consultant, London
Wendy Grossman, Author Net.Wars
Gus Hosein, London School of Economics
Malcolm Hutty, Internet Vision
Dr Stephen Saxby, Law School, University of Southampton
Dr Edgar Whitley, London School of Economics
Dr Steve Wright, Director, Omega Foundation
NOTES FOR EDITORS
The Big Brother Awards are now in their fourth year, and have been established in the UK, the US, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Hungary, France, Denmark and the Netherlands. Further information can be found at www.bigbrotherawards.org and on the PI website at http://www.privacyinternational.org/bigbrother/
The initiator of the awards, Privacy International, was founded in 1990, and campaigns on a wide range of privacy issues across the world.
The 4th UK awards will take place in the Hong Kong Theatre of the London School of Economics on Monday March 4th at 7pm. This will be preceded by a reception from 6pm.
Simon Davies can be reached on 07958 466 552 and on
simon@privacy.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MEDIA RELEASE
PRIVACY INTERNATIONAL ANNOUNCES SHORTLISTED CANDIDATES FOR THE 2002 BIG BROTHER AWARDS
The judges of the 4th annual Big Brother Awards have announced the shortlist for this year's awards, which will take place at the London School of Economics on March 4th.
The awards were established in 1998 as a means of recognising both the villains and the heroes of privacy. They are hosted each year by the LSE, and are presented by Channel 4's Mark Thomas.
The following shortlist has been culled from more than 150 nominations. The judges felt that the following candidates represented a particularly potent threat to privacy and liberty in Britain. Some candidates have been shortlisted in more than one category.
WORST PUBLIC SERVANT
Sir Richard Wilson, Cabinet Secretary For his long standing commitment to opposing freedom of information, data protection and ministerial accountability
David Blunkett MP, Home Secretary For his astonishing and multi-skilled disregard for privacy and for his patronage of the proposed national ID card
Michael Cashman MEP, For his unrelenting opposition in the European Parliament to controls over email spam see report at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4251962,00.html MOST INVASIVE COMPANY
The Countryside Alliance (CA) For registering themselves with the Information Commissioner as holding data on (among many other categories) sexual, political, religious, health, intelligence and lifestyle information on a vast range of individuals. The CA registration on the Information Commissioners site is 27 pages in length, and contains almost every conceivable category of personal data. See
http://www.dpr.gov.uk/cgi-bin/dpr98-fetch.pl?source=DPRdocid=217833 The Internet Watch Foundation For actions which judges regarded as unnecessary, disproportionate and hostile to the rights of Internet users. See
http://www.cyber-rights.org/watchmen-ii.htm and http://www.liberty.org.uk/cacib/iwfresignation.htm Norwich Union For using unapproved genetic tests for potentially fatal diseases when assessing whether to offer life cover. See
http://www.gefoodalert.org/News/news.cfm?News_ID=2676 MOST APPALLING PROJECT
The Electoral Reform Society For its patronage of a report by the Independent Commission on alternative voting methods. The report provides a woefully scant assessment of the substantial privacy and security threats arising from electronic voting. See www.electoral-reform.org.uk
The National Criminal Intelligence Service (NCIS) For its 2001 proposal to archive and warehouse all email, internet and telephone call traffic records for the entire population. See
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2001/nov/17ukdata.htm MOST HEINOUS GOVERNMENT ORGANISATION
The Department of Education and Skills For removing anonymity in the 2002 national schools census and for creating a student tracking system. See
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/education/newsid_1732000/1732488.stm The Home Office (see above)
The Internet Watch Foundation (see above)
LIFETIME MENACE
Sir Richard Wilson (see above)
The national Identification and data sharing scheme Proposals for a comprehensive data sharing scheme between government agencies and the private sector have in recent years become a fixed component of government thinking. These proposals, whether they are marketed as a national ID card or an entitlement card, constitute the greatest ongoing threat to privacy. This nomination goes to the concept.
Privacy International's Director, Simon Davies, said "The judges have been appalled at the depths to which this year's candidates have sunk."
"During the judging process, it has become clear that government agencies and companies have stooped to an all time low in the wilful violation of our privacy"
"We have been almost overwhelmed this year by a flood of new entries, many of which involve technologies and techniques that are beyond the control of law, and outside the comprehension of policy makers"
JUDGES OF THE 2002 AWARDS
Karen Banks, Co-ordinator, GreenNet
Caspar Bowden, Director, Foundation for Information Policy Research
Dr Ian Brown, University College London
Tony Bunyan, Editor, Statewatch, London
Duncan Campbell, Freelance film and television producer,
Simon Davies, Director, Privacy International
Dr Fleur Fisher, Ethics and healthcare consultant, London
Wendy Grossman, Author Net.Wars
Gus Hosein, London School of Economics
Malcolm Hutty, Internet Vision
Dr Stephen Saxby, Law School, University of Southampton
Dr Edgar Whitley, London School of Economics
Dr Steve Wright, Director, Omega Foundation
NOTES FOR EDITORS
The Big Brother Awards are now in their fourth year, and have been established in the UK, the US, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Hungary, France, Denmark and the Netherlands. Further information can be found at www.bigbrotherawards.org and on the PI website at
http://www.privacyinternational.org/bigbrother/ The initiator of the awards, Privacy International, was founded in 1990, and campaigns on a wide range of privacy issues across the world.
The 4th UK awards will take place in the Hong Kong Theatre of the London School of Economics on Monday March 4th at 7pm. This will be preceded by a reception from 6pm.
Simon Davies can be reached on 07958 466 552 and on
simon@privacy.org --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
privacy international