Quote:
Originally Posted by 80/20Thinking
But, just for the record: I affirm that no staff member or director of Privacy International, past or present, has either worked for Phorm or is now working for Phorm or has any financial interest whatever in Phorm. We as 80/20 Thinking are contracted as a third party to provide an independent assessment of Phorm.
|
Thank you for making that statement Simon. Is the same true of the staff of 80/20 Thinking as well? I'm just trying to get as clear a picture as I can here.
Perception can be a difficult issue to handle sometimes. Often it's caused by behaviours (Phorm PR comes to mind as an excellent example), other times it is caused by confusion over who is connected with which organisation. That, as we know can happen through *ahem* "overzealous" PR or unclear reporting, or even comments made in an online forum.
The companies I've worked for have never gone out and funded any assessments, discovery reports, etc without first being pretty confident of what they're going to get as the end product (ie: no nasty surprises or critical content in the final document).
With that in mind, what exactly is Phorm's involvement with the PIA? Who generated the terms of reference? Will 80/20 Thinking be publishing the final PIA to everyone at the same time or do Phorm get it first so their PR can spin it?
I prefer to read the PIA for myself rather than assume it's going to be a pro-Phorm whitewash. That's
not saying I've been brainwashed by Phorm's PR - anyone looking through this thread can see I've berated Phorm's PR every chance I've had. Those who know me will tell you I don't brainwash.
Being clear on the reasons, companies, people and circumstances behind the PIA will help me to judge the PIA when it is published.
I'm with lucevans. Nothing has changed about what we are working for here. Prejudging something before it has been completed isn't my way of analysing things. Saying "It will be this or that so I'll have nothing to do with it" achieves nothing either.
Let's positively contribute to the PIA. That doesn't mean we can't be passionate about it but we should be professional and positive. We should count ourselves lucky we've got two people here with knowledge, experience, presence and reputation to highlight this issue.
Engage with the process, read the finished PIA then judge. That's what I'll be doing.