To the Editor:
In 1997, I signed up for my first AOL account and heard the familiar little jingle “You’ve got mail!” Now 14 years and several email accounts later, I receive more email than I really care to. According to research by the Radicati Group, the corporate user alone receives approximately 99 emails a day. That does not take into account any email you may receive at home. Now, The Charlotte Observer would like to add theirs to the list. (See Jan. 25, 2011, “Observer: We apologize, pledge not to send emails.”) The newspaper is using the North Carolina Public Records law in requesting information municipalities have on hand regarding citizens’ email, addresses, and telephone numbers.
The legislation was written to create transparency in government, making sure the media could serve as the “watchdogs” against government and the elected officials themselves operating outside of the lines of their jurisdiction; and to keep the citizenry informed. It was not, however, created for the private marketing use of the paper, or any business for its profit.
Observer Editor Rick Thames has defended the paper’s request and says the paper will not use the email addresses to spam citizens.
The Charlotte Observer’s request and the existing rule, while legal, makes possible for any business or organization to request the data for their own use. Anyone who has signed up for a town or city generated newsletter, Parks & Recreation bulletin, or other Town Hall email listcould have their private information turned over to anyone who requested it.
The Lake Norman Chamber of Commerce, representing more than 1,000 businesses members in the Cornelius, Davidson, Huntersville and greater Lake Norman region is opposed to releasing individual citizen data to any organization or business, regardless of its use. It is a violation of the trust between government and its citizenry.
Residents should feel free to contact City Hall or their elected officials, and enjoy communication without the fear that their private data will be used for commercial gain. While we encourage healthy business growth and the spirit of free enterprise, the Lake Norman Chamber supports legislation which safeguards the private citizen’s personal data.
If The Charlotte Observer feels that the newspaper itself cannot adequately serve as a vehicle to solicit reader and citizen opinion, then perhaps it should turn to the option other businesses use each week – taking out advertisements in their or another local paper, Internet media source, or magazine. There are several here in the Lake Norman region, with significant market penetration and readership, which would be happy to sell any business, organization, or competing newspaper, for that matter, an ad.
Bill Russell, President & CEO
Lake Norman Chamber of Commerce
Why is an e-mail address any different than a physical (i.e. “snail mail”) address? Will the Chamber support businesses not sending me any junk mail? I’d actually much prefer an e-mail, which I can automatically delete and which can be sent without the use of trees, gasoline and other limited resources.
Again, if our government has access to citizens e-mails, then everyone needs to have access to them. Open records laws were not set up to protect us from the good public servants we currently have in Davidson, but from nefarious ones that can pop up from time to time in any locality, including ours.
The Chamber feels our communications with public officials should be private? Really? They are public officials after all. Exactly what type of communication is a private citizen having with an elected official that they wish to keep private?
Usually if someone has something to hide, it’s not good. That’s why we have open records laws. We need to shine the light, so to speak, on the correspondence our public officials are having. This is how we avoid back room dealings and attempts to unduly influence the process or circumvent the law.
Just as Mooresville’s mayor is learning the hard way that his correspondence with a private citizen is public record if he is using public means for said communication, citizens need to know this is a two-way street. Don’t put in writing anything that might embarrass you if you’re sending an e-mail to a public official.
Perhaps the town of Davidson needs to put a notice on their website that says in clear, bold language that when a citizen has a contact with this public entity that contact will become part of the public record.
Rodney: As we reported Jan. 21 (“Town puzzles over Observer’s request for citizen emails”), Davidson has updated its eCrier email sign-up page with this warning message:
The “where required by law” is new.
The Charlotte-Mecklenburg government privacy policy also addresses the issue. It says, in part:
Also, just to make sure it’s clear what we’re talking about when we say “emails”:
The Observer has requested citizen email address lists. Legislation passed last year providing protections for governments in Wake and Yadkin counties refers specifically to email address lists. And new limits apparently being sought by the state’s municipalities also refer specifically to email addresses. The question here is whether citizen email lists are fair game for email-marketers, and whether they should be made available in a ready-to-use electronic form.
Email messages are a different story. News organizations – including The Observer, DavidsonNews.net and others – also from time to time request email correspondence, as a way of keeping up with what government officials are saying to each other and to constituents. (It was official emails that recently got the married mayor of Mooresville in hot water over supposed “intimate” emails with a female friend. See Joe Marusak’s Charlotte Observer article telling that story.)
As far as we know, there is no movement to restrict public access to email messages.
As I’ve written before, it’s a bit weird for journalists to be writing about this issue. DavidsonNews.net, like most news outlets, is a big supporter of Freedom of Information laws. They’re an important tool of democracy. However, we also have a strong privacy policy ourselves, and promise our own users that we won’t share their information or email addresses with anyone.
Rodney: I agree with you that unsolicited junk mail is a nuisance. You are also right in that people can simply delete unwanted email or “spam.” The biggest fear we have from a chamber of commerce perspective is the three towns of Cornelius, Davidson, and Huntersville have worked very hard to engage local citizens (residents) in planning charettes, public workshops, encouraging them to participate in parks and recreation events, and becoming more knowledgeable about their town through newsletters, emails, etc.
It would be a real shame if residents opted out of town newsletters, events, or elected official’s emails because they did not want to receive unsolicited emails, telephone calls, or mail simply because of this loophole in the legislation. The North Carolina Public Records law was intended to be a watchdog on government not our citizens.
We could debate the merits of whether an email from a citizen to an elected official should be private. I pretty much assume anything I send from my computer is subject to anyone reading it. However, that said, just because you sign up to receive a monthly town newsletter should not subject you to having your private email or telephone numbers available to anyone who wishes them for their personal gain.
Bill, thanks. I understand your points. My main point is that an e-mail address is effectively the 21st century version of one’s street (or PO Box) address, and those ‘old-style’ addresses are public record.
On rereading your letter I realize I was incorrect to imply that the Chamber wishes correspondence with public officials to remain confidential. I understand that you just wish such contacts to not be used for commercial purposes. My apologies for the incorrect assertion in my comment.