Jim Young was a technical editor at Pulp & Paper magazine from 1989 to 1995. We worked together those six years of my long stay with that magazine. I've been thinking about Jim lately for a couple of reasons.
First, this is the spring (April/May) issue of PaperAge, which was an important time of year in relation to Jim. He came with us from Tappi Journal in April 1989, first appearing on our masthead that May. In April the following year he became executive editor of the magazine.
Jim did not like working at Tappi Journal, although he had a high regard for most of the people who worked there (especially the "TAPPI women") and was openly supportive of TAPPI's purposes and functions. It was just that he didn'tor couldn'tfit well into the structure and discipline of an organization such as TAPPI. He was very happy working in the relaxed, creative environment at Pulp & Paper in those days.
In early 1995 Jim volunteered to help Pulp & Paper's sister publication Pulp and Paper International in Brussels work through an editorial bind, and was there for a few months, returning to Pulp & Paper in late April. During a much-deserved vacation, while snorkeling off the western tip of Florida, he drowned on May 16. He was an expert swimmer and an accomplished diver, which made no sense at all.
Digital Dangers
The other reason for thinking about Jim has to do with his views on computers and electronic communications in general, and specifically the Internet (more commonly known as the Information Highway in the mid-90s). Jim once wrote a column in Pulp & Paper (his last one, in fact) titled "The Information Highway to Hell."
In that column, he criticized the U.S. government's potential use of Clipper chip technologies to infringe on the "constitutionally-guaranteed privacy of its citizens." His primary concern was efforts by government law enforcement agencies to get these encoding devices "installed in every U.S. telephone, computer modem, and fax machine," as well as cable TV/satellite tuner boxes and Smart Cards with computer databased health or financial information.
Jim would be happy to know that during the past eight years the use of Clipper chip technology has not progressed nearly as fast and as far as he feared, even with the added stimulus of September 11. But perhaps as frightening, and certainly more invasive, is the rapid and widespread commercialization of public and, in some cases, private records of U.S. citizens (and probably citizens of other countries) these days.
While recently searching for a company's address and phone number on the Internet, I was hit with at least 25 pop-up ads offering all kinds of information on practically anyone, anywhere, anytime, beginning at just $1.95. I had been seeing these pop-ups for a while, but this was the first time I really checked them out. .
For $2.95 to $ 24.95, premium dirt and very private information could be purchased—traffic tickets, military records, court records, criminal offenses, alimony, FBI files, current and past employment, buying habits, Internet browsing preferences, race, religious practice, credit and financial records, medical history and data, voting trends, insurance, professional associations, social security number, license plate, drivers license data, tax info/records, spouse, children (and their grades in school), parents, next of kin, etc., etc.
For just a few bucks, enough information can be dug up from the Internet to seriously injure friends, enemies, neighbors, family, acquaintances, employees, bosses, teachers, etc. Hopefully, private data such as voting and medical records or tax information are not so easily attained. But it's apparently open season on public records. All you need is a computer and a desire to sell information for profit.
The Safety of Paper
This brings up the question of why public records are on the Internet to begin with. Who physically puts them there, and why? Converting paper forms to digital files makes sense, but is it really necessary to provide access to them via the Internet? Public records have always been accessible to anyone who wants to go to a county courthouse, municipal building, or state and federal records depositories and dig through them. .
There's something safe and secure in the sound of a file cabinet sliding shut. Only one person at a time can dig through paper records in a file cabinet, and the process is slow and tedious, probably as it should be. Also, someone usually watches over these paper records, and generally a sign-in log is kept of who has searched through what for how long.
Except for realtors, land surveyors, lawyers, private detectives, and subdivision residents squabbling over covenants, not too many people will spend the time and copier costs to build data files from public records. The effort, particularly considering work needed to convert photocopied material to digital, is just not worth the potential smut value.
In regard to controlling (but not limiting) access to public records, paper forms are obviously much safer than electronic data that can be so easily collected and spread like digital confetti around the world for a buck-ninety five a piece. This might not be in the true spirit of the Internet, but perhaps access to public records should be restricted on the web.
Maintaining most public and all private information only on paper would assure a reasonable level of privacy for everyone. It also wouldn't be bad for the forms bond market. Maybe it's time to write my congressman.
I don't know how many readers knew and might still remember Jim Young. If you do, please send me an email, with a few lines of memory. He was a very memorable person and a good friend.
