Science Daily reports on a new study by researchers at Duke University and Emory University concerning a possible targeted behavioral advertising tool.

So-called “neuromarketing” takes the tools of modern brain science, like the functional MRI, and applies them to the somewhat abstract likes and dislikes of customer decision-making.

Though this raises the specter of marketers being able to read people’s minds (more than they already do), neuromarketing may prove to be an affordable way for marketers to gather information that was previously unobtainable, or that consumers themselves may not even be fully aware of, says Dan Ariely, the James B. Duke professor of psychology and behavioral economics at Duke. [...]

Neuromarketing may never be cheap enough to replace focus groups and other methods used to assess existing products and advertising, but it could have real promise in gauging the conscious and unconscious reactions of consumers in the design phase of such varied products as “food, entertainment, buildings and political candidates,” Ariely says.

Slate has an interesting story about how improved DNA testing has made it more difficult for sperm donors to remain anonymous:

In an age of sophisticated genetic testing, the concept of anonymity is rapidly fading. With some clever sleuthing—tests that can track down ancestral origins, donor numbers, and bits of biographical information—parents and offspring can find out the donors. “With DNA testing and Google, there’s no such thing as anonymity anymore,” says Wendy Kramer, the founder of the Donor Sibling Registry. “Donors are choosing anonymity because they’re not educated,” adds Kramer. “If they were properly educated on the consequences, then many would choose not to donate.” [...] Read more »

ABC News has an update on the “Clear” airport program. To recap: Clear was the leading company in the Transportation Security Administration’s Registered Traveler program, which offered dedicated security lines for travelers who paid an annual fee, passed a background check and submitted biometric data such as iris scans and fingerprints. Clear announced in June that it had gone out of business. A judge later ordered the company not to sell the biometric data it collected from its more than 250,000 customers.

Now, ABC News reports: “One group of members filed a class action lawsuit earlier this year. In the suit, attorneys say that weeks before closing, CLEAR continued to sell memberships and collect dues and then abruptly shut down and didn’t offer refunds.” ABC News says a company is seeking to restart the Clear trusted-traveler program sometime this year.

Henry, Inc.’s site says:

Henry, Inc. is an investment group formed to restart Clear, the fast pass through airport security. Founded by a former Clear member, Henry, Inc. is focused on providing the same streamlined and consistent experience through airport security that Clear members enjoyed before the program ceased operations.

Henry is working with new and old Clear investors and partners to restart the program in Winter 2009/2010. Henry will honor the terms of existing Clear members when they choose to join the new program.

Lisa M. Austin and Trudo Lemmens at the University of Toronto have written, “Privacy, Consent, and Governance.” The abstract:

Many discussions of health information privacy in relation to biobanks focus on the question of informed consent and, in particular, on why the future of biobanking likely requires the acceptance of some derogation from the traditional standard of informed consent to medical research. Following Neil C. Manson & Onora O’Neill’s recent work on informed consent as a “waiver,” we argue in this paper that the role of consent can be thought of in a narrower but still highly principled manner which is consistent with how consent is dealt with in tort law. Using this conception, we defend the position that the traditional standard of informed consent to participate in a biobank can be met but only where there is a governance structure ensuring consistent information practices and policies across multiple future research projects. We also argue that specific research uses of research samples and associated data in the biobank do not necessarily require informed consent but do require a governance structure that can regulate privacy risks such as the risk of re-identification. We thus distinguish consent at the outset of the collection and no-consent for future use, with both requiring a governance structure in order to protect the important interests at stake. In our conclusion we suggest that the legal and ethical debates regarding biobanking must shift from an obsession with consent and focus more closely on the elements of good governance in order to move away from compromises and back to the principled protection of research subjects.

Wired looks back nine years to Jan. 28, 2001, when facial-recognition technology was used at the Super Bowl in an attempt to pick out criminals among the crowd. (Read more about facial-recognition technology and its privacy implications in law enforcement and marketing after the jump.):

Cops and engineers from Graphco, the company that built the FaceTrac system, huddled in the control room, as the system scanned the faces of ticket-holders, looking for known troublemakers and bombers. The system set off alarms in the press before the big game, which one magazine called the Snooper Bowl, and the technology set off quite a few alarms on the big day, when the system decided it had found its man at Raymond James Stadium.

But there were no touchdowns for facial recognition that day, with not a single bad guy caught. Undeterred, Tampa Bay police deployed the system on a popular street, until they were forced to admit to the American Civil Liberties Union a year later that they’d mostly given up on the multimillion-dollar system without having snagged a single fugitive. Read more »

January 28 is Data Privacy Day. Take the time to think about how privacy is important in your life and how you can protect your rights from being infringed upon. Also, please donate to any number of organizations out there trying to protect your rights generally.

Visit the official site to find events near your area. Here are a few highlights in the United States and internationally:

United States:

On January 28, 2010, the FTC will hold the second of three roundtable discussions exploring the privacy challenges posed by the vast array of 21st century technology and business practices that collect and use consumer data. The event will be held at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law, Booth Auditorium, Boalt Hall, in Berkeley, CA and will be viewable via webcast. Questions for comment in advance of the second roundtable have been posted at the Roundtable webpage. The Commission requests that comments for the second roundtable be submitted by December 21, 2009, to ensure ample time for consideration.

The American Conference Institute presents its 9th Annual Advanced Forum on Privacy and Security of Consumer & Employee Information: Protecting and Managing Sensitive Data in an Increasingly Portable and Changing Marketplace, January 26-27, 2010, at The Madison, a Loews Hotel, in Washington, D.C. The Forum will feature the following speakers from the federal government: Cora Tung Han, an attorney with the FTC’s Division of Privacy and Identity Protection; William H. Henley, Jr., Director of IT Examinations for the Office of Thrift Supervision; Alain Sheer, Senior Attorney with the FTC’s Division of Privacy and Identity Protection; and John Walsh, Chief Counsel for the SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations. Register for the event; view a complete list of excellent speakers drawn from private industry, state and federal governments, the financial sector, and law firms; and access the Agenda at the forum webpage.

Here’s a listing of state government events. Read more »