WRITTEN ON January 7th, 2008 BY William Heath AND STORED IN Data nitwittery, Foundation of Trust, What do we want?
Marvellous story from the Beeb:
TV presenter Jeremy Clarkson has lost money after publishing his bank details in his newspaper column. The Top Gear host revealed his account numbers after rubbishing the furore over the loss of 25 million people’s personal details on two computer discs. He wanted to prove the story was a fuss about nothing. But Clarkson admitted he was “wrong” after he discovered a reader had used the details to create a £500 direct debit to the charity Diabetes UK.
In his own inimitable manner he describes his process of enlightenment. Before, it’s very “nothing to fear”
“All you’ll be able to do with them is put money into my account. Not take it out. Honestly, I’ve never known such a palaver about nothing,”
After, it’s sadder wiser bunny
“I opened my bank statement this morning to find out that someone has set up a direct debit which automatically takes £500 from my account,” …Clarkson now says of the case: “Contrary to what I said at the time, we must go after the idiots who lost the discs and stick cocktail sticks in their eyes until they beg for mercy.”
I expect we’ll see a similar process of enlightenment eventually among Ministers, political advisers, Whitehall perm secs and chief execs. Eventually even the CIOs will get it.
2 Responses to “Nitwit learns the seriousness of data nitwittery”
Very good point Paul, and very good challenge/suggestion. I think we can muster the odd advocate, and we can always ask the IPS press office to help out 
Do you have experience of using the debatemapper? It looks intriguing, but I can sometimes be seduced by the superficial appeal of an attractive-looking tool. Does it need a good debate-mapper-moderator?
William
I am a bit frightened to share this piece of personal data about me, but despite being a regular reader of this site, I still see myself as an ignoramus in relation to the ID cards debate. What would be useful to me would be a clear presentation of the pros and cons. Would it make sense to try to get all sides of the debate to collaboratively map their argument on a tool such as https://debatemapper.com/sf/home.aspx? What do you think? And who might one be able to rope in to provide a good taste of the arguments in favour?
Paul