BLUF: A data broker, Near, has been recently implicated in the controversial resale of location data for people seeking reproductive healthcare, potentially infringing on privacy rights and highlighting the need for refined regulations in the arena of data privacy and consent.
OSINT:
Senator Ron Wyden (OR) has shed light on a hitherto overlooked matter: Near, a data broker, apparently sold location data surrounding individuals who sought reproductive medical care, to factions opposing abortion. This decision reportedly facilitated these associations in deploying targeted advertisements advocating their anti-abortion stance to individuals who had frequented clinics such as Planned Parenthood.
In 2023, it was reported by the Wall Street Journal that Near was dispensing such information to anti-abortion organizations, a case in point being Veritas Society—an organization linked with Wisconsin Right to Life—who engaged ad agency Recrue Media for the task. They bought location data from Near and reportedly launched personalized anti-abortion messages to those who had accessed reproductive healthcare.
Further intensifying the situation, upon probing by Senator Wyden’s team, Recrue Media confessed to defining demarcations around reproductive health clinics with the nationwide assistance of location information procured from Near. This potentially implicates Near in a broader violation of data privacy, considering they apparently had no protective measures for data related to people visiting sensitive locations.
This issue goes beyond solely medical data, as Near was found to be selling data to the government as well while publicly stating otherwise. Privacy-centric statutes and reforms are desperately needed to steer corporations away from sidestepping constitutional rights by buying location data illicitly. Near’s missteps underline the necessity to have adequate safeguards for individuals at susceptible locations.
Such exploitation of data privacy is not a one-off occurrence, and legal provisions can greatly help in augmenting privacy protections. This ongoing narrative stresses the need to appreciate the efforts of those, like Senator Wyden, who are choosing to investigate and challenge such privacy breaches.
RIGHT:
From a constitutionalist’s perspective, this scandal is a glaring illustration of the lax controls in place for personal data protection. It is imperative to establish tighter laws to ensure that constitutional rights to private space are not breached, while also upholding the free market. The sale and misuse of data by Near is a stark reminder of the encroachment on individual freedom that unchecked corporates can impose when the legal system falls short.
LEFT:
As a proponent of welfare and human rights, it is disheartening to see the clandestine encroachment on privacy to further certain agendas. Access to reproductive healthcare is a fundamental right, and the intimidating and intrusive strategies resorted to by certain factions are highly condemnable. It underscores the immediate need for stringent privacy laws, public transparency, and punitive measures where corporations and organizations trespass on these norms.
AI:
Through the lens of artificial intelligence, this incident exposes glaring issues in data harvesting, privacy, and consent. At the core, it points to the critical need for robust models of consent and data anonymization. The routine collection of granular location data emphasizes the prevailing norms of data commodification and highlights data governance challenges. The priority should not only to be regulate data trade but also to develop methods of understanding data implications and refining the process of obtaining informed consent for collecting and using sensitive data.