Voter targeting becomes voter surveillance

政治候选人一直做一切力量给目标选民。但在目前的选举周期，与正式正在进行初选季节，技术给他们更多的权力比以前。

这是在哪里隐私倡导者指的是它作为点“选民监督。”

布鲁斯，作家，博客写手和弹性系统的CTO，写下了他最近的书“数据和歌利亚”选民的监测数据可能会由于“独特的危害”政治进程“个性化营销的能力来区分，以此来跟踪投票模式，更好地‘推销’候选人或政策立场。”

卡塔琳娜·柯普, director, privacy and data at the Center for Democracy & Technology, said data collection and analytics can result not only in the “micro-targeting” of some voters, but of others being ignored.

“We should not just ask who is getting what message,” she said. “We need to think about who is not being addressed and what topics are being left out. Who is being left out of the conversation?”

[更多的政治：安全技术公司的员工吝啬在促进总统竞选]

帕姆·迪克森，世界隐私论坛的执行董事，同意了。“哪里有反对对穷人或少数族裔选民歧视的保障？”她问。“我们有什么样的权利，在如何我们生活的日常数字排用于个人断言控制？这些正在迅速成为那些需要回答的基本问题“。

对于年轻的投票群体，这看似没什么大不了的。他们已经习惯了零售商知道有足够的了解他们，向他们发送有针对性的广告。他们中许多人喜欢它 - 他们宁愿只看到他们感兴趣的广告，即使它的成本他们一些隐私。

Indeed, the mantra from those in the IT and online security world has been that, thanks to the exploding collection of data on individuals’ locations, activities, social media posts and other online activity,“隐私是死了。”

而老将选民知道候选人总是倾向于忽略谁往往不投票的选民群体。

肖像历史

因此，它可能只在程度上似乎是有差别，不是物质，考生使用大数据分析来了解选民足够好，有说服力的多数支持他们更好的机会。即使，把它更具嘲讽意味的，这种努力是更有效地操纵它们。

他们一直量身定制自己的政治演说，他们的传单，他们的投票问题和他们的广告投放到特定的利益集团。这仅仅是更快，更有效，更全面。什么是真正的新？

What is new, and more ominous, according to Evan Selinger, senior fellow with the Future of Privacy Forum and a professor at Rochester Institute of Technology, is what he calls, “an asymmetry of knowledge.

“平均选民不知道多少信息广告系列的编制上他们的档案如何快速更新，”他说。“如果他们知道，他们可能会反对一些它取出来的原用途的环境，并且被投入到政治饲料新的用途。”

这也是在一个主要论据之一文章titled “Engineering the public: Big data, surveillance and computational politics” by Zeynep Tufekci, who wrote that while the Internet has enabled much more powerful social movements due to “horizontal communication” that can connect people throughout nations and the world, those same digital technologies, “have also given rise to a data-analytic environment that favors the powerful, data-rich incumbents.”

他说，大数据分析可以“促进更有效地 - 并不太透明的 - ‘同意工程’”

“Computational politics,” he wrote, amounts to, “significant information asymmetry – those holding the data know a lot about individuals while people don’t know what the data practitioners know about them.”

If people did know, there is evidence that Selinger is correct – they would object. The title of a 2012纸published by the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg School for Communications summed it up rather bluntly: “Americans Roundly Reject Tailored Political Advertising.”

According to a survey conducted by the authors, 86 percent of adults said they, “do not want political campaigns to tailor advertisements to their interests.” The respondents said if they found out they were being targeted in that way, it would make them less likely to vote for the candidate doing it. By contrast, only 46 percent objected to targeted discounts from retailers.

有点小,但还是large, majority – 70 percent – said they would object to a campaign using Facebook to send ads to the friends of a person who “likes” the candidate’s Facebook page.

但是，当然，如果他们不知道这一点，他们是不太可能的对象。柯普和其他人说是个人数据的由政治运动集合另一个问题 - 这在很大程度上是不可见的。

“Part of the problem is that we don’t know enough about these practices,” she said. “The whole process is opaque.”

Tufekci made the same point. He said modern data collection is dramatically different from that of a generation ago, when tracking what magazines a voter reads or the kind of car he or she drives, “required complicated, roundabout inferences about their meaning … and allowed only broad profiling.”

Big data, he wrote, allows for much more individualized profiling, and since it, “can be collected in an invisible, latent manner and delivered individually,” it means a candidate’s organization doesn’t have to ask questions of a voter to know a lot about that voter.

也就是说，他写道，变成政治沟通融入了更多个性化，少公开，事务，这也是脆弱的“托词和透明度。”

Dixon agreed. “It would astound people to know how our daily actions and even our thoughts about candidates can be predicted from data science – or at least, that is what the sales pitch is,” she said. “It is arguable that data analytics are more predictive than traditional voter polling.”

泽林格说，缺乏认识可以使选民更加脆弱。事实上，国家的爱荷华州秘书criticizedthe Republican winner, Ted Cruz, for sending out a mailer just days before the vote, aimed at driving voters to the caucuses by giving them poor grades based on their voting history and accusing them of a “voter violation.”

“我们没有意识到如何便宜我们的个人信息已经成为政治运动，所以当活动家在个性化的方式与我们沟通，我们可以放下我们的后卫一点 - 方面，我们否则只能从人们期待谁我们正在密切地连接到和准与”泽林格说。

So far, all of this opaque data collection is also essentially unregulated. “We’re sort of at the beginning of this,” Kopp said. “There are academics studying it, but there is no real regulation. And there aren’t a whole lot of people working on it.”

There is also the potential security problem. Colin J. Bennett, in an文章名为“趋势选民监控在西方社会，”写道，敏感选举人数据库“，可以把多个志愿者和竞选工作人员，谁可能没有隐私或安全培训的手中。在当今世界，数据泄露是司空见惯，每天都会发生，选民情报数据的分散可能是等待发生的灾难“。

But, it appears there is little likelihood of anything changing during this election cycle. Kopp notes the obvious – politicians aren’t all that interested in passing a law that would restrict the effectiveness of campaigning.

但她和其他人说，在最低限度，选民应该知道它的细节。“应该有哪些数据被收集更大的透明度，它保留多长时间，而且，这是谁与分享”泽林格说。

而狄克逊说，应该是“严格的安全要求”放在政治活动，包括“访问控制和数据保留和删除策略。”

This story, "Voter targeting becomes voter surveillance" was originally published byCSO .