Nowadays, practically all new cars are equipped with sophisticated GPS navigation systems that provide drivers with maps, turn-by-turn directions, and real-time traffic information, making it easier for them to get to their destination as quickly as possible. Of course, drivers get a lot of use out of these features, which can help them save a lot of time, and money, by showing the most fuel-efficient routes. But, there is another side to navigation systems, one that will likely stir controversy and is expected to raise a few red flags with privacy advocates, as it recently became clear that car makers and navigation companies use them to collect data related to drivers’ location and movement, and store them for an unspecified period of time.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) announced recently that it has conducted a study on how data gathered through in-car navigation functions are being kept and what they are being used for. The study was commissioned by Senator Al Franken (D-Minn.), chairman of the privacy, technology and the law subcommittee, in an effort to obtain as much relevant information as possible regarding location privacy, which he could use to support his new location-privacy bill.
What the GAO report highlights is that navigation providers are not transparent enough when it comes to notifying consumers about how they use and share location data. The study reviewed the way several carcompanies, including Ford, General Motors, Chrysler, Toyota, Honda, and Nissan, as well as some of the most prominent portable navigation device manufacturers, such as Garmin and TomTom, obtain car-related data, and whether they comply with existing guidelines regarding data protection. The report shows that while these companies that provide in-car location-based services do obtain consent from their customers before they collect their data, they don’t give any information as to how they plan to use and share that data and for how long they intend to store them. They also don’t inform users about whom they share the data with, and don’t allow them to delete the information they have collected after a certain period of time.
Another important finding this study has discovered is that almost all companies share data with third parties, but they don’t specify exactly with whom the data is shared, which gives cause for concern. Privacy advocates are concerned that location data could be shared with law enforcement agencies, telecommunication companies, or even insurance providers. If this is true, it means that the government, or various private companies can monitor your movement and know where you are at all times via GPS systems and V2V technology, which is obviously an invasion of privacy. Also, someone can use the data to steal a driver’s identity, committing all sorts of crimes or running up debts using someone else’s name.
Even though companies providing in-car location services are claiming that they take all necessary steps to make sure they protect the privacy of consumers, they still don’t give any firm evidence that they won’t try and sell the data they collect to third parties, which is highly likely to occur, considering how lucrative it could be for them, as mobile advertisers, as well as insurance companies, are certainly willing to pay a lot of money to get their hands on such important information, that could help them promote their products and services to a wider audience and enhance customer loyalty. That’s why Senator Al Franken is adamant that a strict location privacy legislation has to be put in place, in order to preserve consumer privacy rights.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.