I have to admit I was depressed at the “doctoring” of the interview between the presenters of Good Morning Britain and Sir Keir Starmer MP by the Conservative Party in the first week of November. In a general election, voters need information not disinformation.
For those not familiar with what I am talking about, an edited recording of an interview with the Labour politician was used in a political advert. However, a long pause was edited into the recording just after a question on Brexit policy was asked by a presenter; this gave the impression that Starmer was totally stumped to provide a credible answer.
The unedited recording of the interview showed the MP providing an immediate answer.
No doubt this many saw the edited clip as an example of modern-day political cut and thrust which made valid political points; many forwarded this clip one this basis to their contacts. On the other hand, many saw it as an example of the diminishing standards of political discourse; and also distributed it on this basis. So, whatever your views on the clip, it was widely distributed – which of course was the point of producing it.
I have to confess I am in the latter group. This kind of advertising was endemic in the Brexit debate will continue unabated during this and future campaigns. This is confirmed by yesterday’s Sunday’s Observer; headlines such as “Voters ‘used as lab rats’ in political Facebook adverts” and analysts warn “all Parties are all involved in a targeted experiment that campaigners warn lacks transparency and could harm democracy”.
So, as a follow up to the last blog, I have drafted a letter for data subjects to send to the various political parties (and supporting groups as appropriate) so they can opt-out of all political adverts; each voter can protest at the misinformation endemic in current political debate by exercising their GDPR rights.
In general, controllers who send targeted adverts by social media will be taking a risk if they have not implemented procedures to satisfy the rights of data subjects (especially if it is in the thousands of data subject). This is true for all social media adverts but the advantage of applying this to political parties first, is that these parties will unambiguously have your personal data (e.g. electoral roll details).
The political parties might argue that they have a month to deal with rights and this takes us over the December 12 deadline. This is half true: the rights have to be satisfied “without undue delay and in any event within one month of receipt of the request” (so a month is the maximum) so they could be vulnerable (e.g. failure to remove your details from the copy of the Electoral Roll they have obtained should not take a month).
But the target here is not really the current Election – it is to ensure that in ALL future elections, political parties have to implement procedures to deal with rights.
The draft letter below is addressed to the Conservative Party (as they produced the clip about Sir Keir Starmer MP), but clearly it can be edited and sent to any party. If a group “Friends of Party X” use targeted ads, the letter can be used (but you will need to edit it).
DRAFT LETTER
Dear Conservative Party,
I draw your attention to the “doctored” recording, produced by the Party, of the interview between the presenters of Good Morning Britain and Sir Keir Starmer MP that was circulated via social media on 6th and 7th November.
This is my personal protest at the standard of your political advertising material being sent to voters which is deliberately harming democracy and political debate.
I am exercising the following rights under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA2018) and Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations 2003 (PECR).
I am withdrawing any consent you believe you have that justifies the processing of my personal data. This withdrawal of consent extends to any processing of personal data, or where the activity is subject to PECR, that results in political advertising messages sent by me (e.g. by email or as a result of any social media targeting), or sent to me on your behalf (e.g. by your contractors or supporters). The withdrawal of consent includes any processing that results in a profile being applied to me which is intended to reveal my political opinions.
I also exercise the right to erasure to my personal data; this applies to all personal data held by you except those personal data that you are required by law to process or which are needed for a suppression list (see below).
I draw your attention to the fact that, although your Party has the statutory right to obtain personal data from the Electoral Register, this does not extend to all the subsequent processing of personal data so obtained.
If you are of the view that the lawful basis for some processing is “legitimate interests” (Article 6(1)(f) of the GDPR) or “democratic engagement” (Article 6(1)(e)), I also exercise the right to object to such processing. The grounds relating to my situation is that are that there is considerable risk that I will be sent misleading political marketing material similar to the doctored Keir Starmer clip.
I am therefore exercising my right to object to this processing of personal data under these two lawful bases. This right to object augments the right to object to marketing which I am also exercising.
It could be that you need further information from me to establish a suppression list so you do not send me your marketing material; if so please let me know what details you need. To help you with a social media suppression list, I use the following pseudonyms: Twitter is hawktalk_blog; facebook is ……….. etc etc. (PUT YOUR DETAILS IN HERE).
Please take this email as a notice in writing in accordance with Schedule 1, paragraph 22 of the DPA2018; this means that political parties cannot rely on this paragraph to process personal data that reveals my political opinions. This extends to any social media partner where you instruct them to identify my political views from my social media activity in order to send me your election material.
Finally, I apply for subject access request to my personal data which is applicable when you have heeded the above. I suspect very little personal data will be left in your possession.
Yours etc
Name and postal address
Conclusion
Each voter has the ability not to receive misleading political adverts; the more the GDPR rights are exercises, the louder the political message that is sent. It all depends whether enough voters say "I don't want political disinformation sent to me".
Email contacts for exercise of rights
Conservative Party: objections by e-mail to [email protected].
Labour Party: objections by email to [email protected]
Lib Dems; objections by e-mail to [email protected]
Brexit Party; objections by e-mail to: [email protected]
Scottish National; objections by e-mail to [email protected]
For Northern Ireland Parties (e.g. DUP, UUP, SF), Greens, Welsh Nationalists, Choice UK etc have a look at the respective website for a suitable email.
ADVERT
Our popular UPDATE session AGENDA for Monday, 18 November 2019, in London is:
Update on Brexit, adequacy and the replacement for the Privacy and Electronic Regulations. Elisabeth Stafford, DCMS, Head of Policy on EU Data Flows
Case Law Review or Morrisons case. Rosemary Jay (Solicitor, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP)
"Google's approach to transparency, control and grounds for processing" ; William Malcolm; Legal Director of Google, Privacy
Update on PI’s campaign against ad-tech companies and mental health websites. Eliot Bendinelli, Privacy International
News from the FOIA/DPA interface? Sue Cullen (Director, Amberhawk)
Guidance from the ICO/EDPB checklist and related comments. Dr. C. N. M. Pounder (Director, Amberhawk).
News Roundup: Recent enforcement and audit reports. Dr. C. N. M. Pounder (Director, Amberhawk)
Venue for the Update is in Central London (near Chancery Lane Tube); £260+VAT for the day, booking arrangements from http://www.amberhawk.com/bookevents.asp or by emailing [email protected]
Comments