Another problem with the open sites is that the students are posting personal information with the result that they are accessible by a nefarious element. Students' cell phone numbers, addresses, whereabouts, and other information is easily obtained from these sites and can enable stalkers and identity thieves.

The New York Times reported that a 24-year-old law student from Salzburg, Austria, requested his Facebook file. \({ }^{63}\) In response, he received 1,222 pages of information that included Facebook posts he had deleted, old messages, and disturbing tracking of where he had been, probably gleaned from his cell phone.

His discovery has been published throughout Europe with the result being that Ireland (the country where Facebook has its center for European operations) is conducting an audit of Facebook's data retention practices.

That data retention, something that is critical for Facebook's survival through its advertising revenue, is controlled by privacy laws in all the EU nations, Canada, Australia, and some of the countries in Latin America. For example, those laws often control how long Facebook and Google can keep information on file. These laws have consent as their foundation; users must give explicit consent to use of their online data, posts, and so on. One EU proposal would allow users to demand deletion of their online information forever. In the United States, no statutes control general Internet data, but separate laws provide privacy on a piecemeal basis. For example, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) provides protections for our medical records. The Fair Credit Reporting Act provides protection for our credit information. The Red Box and other movie rental services are prohibited from disclosing information about our movie rentals.

However, no general Internet privacy law has been passed in the United States. There have been legislative proposals in Congress, but they have never gained traction.
Admissions officers indicate that they are turning to Facebook and Google. A recent survey by Kaplan Test Prep offers some insight into how widespread the practice is. In \(2012,27 \%\) of admissions officers said that they had googled an applicant, and \(26 \%\) indicated that they had visited applicants' Facebook sites. Thirty-five percent of the admissions officers say that they have found negative information on the site that affected the admissions outcome. The kinds of negative information admissions officers uncover include incidents of bullying or use of alcohol or drugs or inappropriate types of posting (language and content). \({ }^{64}\)
What the admissions officers did was legal, with some caveats. In 2012, California passed a statute that prohibits admissions officers from asking applicants for access to their Facebook pages. The legislator who drafted the bill indicated that applicants' refusals to allow access might be held against them, so he zeroed in on prevention. Applicants also argued that they should have the right to keep their personal lives personal. There is similar legislation pending around the country, with additional proposed laws on employer use of such resources, as well as legislation that would prohibit employers from requesting Facebook access of job applicants.
Another caveat is the danger in selective checking. Some admissions officers only use Google or Facebook when there is something suspicious about an application. Such an approach can be discriminatory - checking all applicants on the Internet would be necessary to avoid allegations that might result from selective searching and checking. Because of the legal parameters and potential discrimination issues, colleges and universities are now developing policies for the use of Google and Facebook and other Internet tools in admissions processes. Currently, \(15 \%\) of colleges and universities have a policy on admissions use of the Internet tools. About \(66 \%\) of colleges and universities indicate that they will not use the tools.
There are also concerns about how such widely available information is used for other purposes. For example, some lenders are using information from Facebook to determine whether to extend credit or the amount of credit limits. Experts have said that some creditors are now engaged in what is called "weblining" \({ }^{* 5}\) Borrowing from the old mortgage lending practice of "redlining," the term means that lenders draw a red line around certain Internet activities and then deny loans or credit based on assumptions about that activity. Creditors will base decisions on aggregated data or which groups you fit into in terms of your online activities. Advertisers will also select targets for their ads based on assumptions about web activity. The New York Times noted that trade school Internet ads are geared toward a certain cross section of young people and that their access to information about colleges may be limited. Another concern is that the information could be used by stalkers or perpetrators of domestic violence in order to determine their victims' locations............

 Discussion Questions
1. Discuss privacy rights and whether there is an issue of privacy when information is posted voluntarily on the Internet.
2. Would using these sources for background checks involve any sort of discrimination?
3. Professor Harold Abelson has explained rights, privacy, and the Internet as follows: "In today's online world, what your mother told you is true, only more so: people can really judge you by your friends. "56 In which school of ethical thought would you place Professor Abelson in relation to his views on this question of the Internet and privacy?