Less than one week after the paper’s editor promised The Oklahoman would not publicize state employees’ personal identifying information, the paper did just that today, making public more than 100 employees’ names and birthdates, Rep. Randy Terrill said.
The mass disclosure came in an amicus (“friend of the court”) brief that included information supplied by The Oklahoman listing the names and birthdates for every employee of the Office of the Attorney General. The brief is a public document available to anyone, anywhere for any reason.
“This is a matter of trust,” said Terrill, R-Moore. “Making this information public to anyone, anywhere clearly violates The Oklahoman’s pledge. It doesn’t matter if this info is published in the actual newspaper or another document – it’s now been published and disseminated. The genie is out of the bottle and they can’t put it back in now.”
The Oklahoman recently requested the blanket release of all state employees’ birthdates, requesting seven specific identifying pieces of information for roughly 40,000 individuals.
Under existing state law, taxpayers are able to learn the name, job title and salary for all state workers, but birthdates aren’t mentioned in the Open Records Act.
The Oklahoma Public Employees Association has opposed that request due to safety concerns expressed by law enforcement personnel and the very real threat of identify theft.
A recent study paper published in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that an individual’s birth date, when combined with other identifying data, can allow thieves to accurately predict an individual’s Social Security number and steal his or her identity.
Terrill and Senator Debbe Leftwich (D-Oklahoma City) have filed legislation that would prevent the mass distribution of all state employees’ birthdates.
A compromise version of that bill would allow the media to obtain confirmation of identity when specific allegations arise – for example, news organization would be able to determine if an individual listed on the sex offender registry was employed by the state if names were similar.
In an April 4 letter to readers, The Oklahoman Editor Ed Kelly wrote, “Despite claims by the OPEA, The Oklahoman has never intended to publish lists of dates of birth either in the newspaper or online at our Web site, NewsOK.com. We’ve never done such a thing in our 116 years of publishing, and we certainly aren’t about to do it now.”
Terrill said the paper’s action today justifies the concerns of thousands of state employees and shows the need for the courts to issue a restraining order.
“If The Oklahoman is willing to do this to every employee of one agency in direct violation of the paper’s promise, why would they not do it to other agencies and employees?” Terrill said. “This mass disclosure of employees’ birthdates is the exact reason the courts should issue a permanent injunction.”
Earlier this week, representatives of virtually every major law enforcement entity in Oklahoma announced their opposition to the blanket release of all state employees’ birthdates. Experts at those agencies noted that providing state employees’ full names and birthdates to anyone filing a request could make it easier for criminals, gangs and drug cartels to identify and track down law enforcement personnel and their families.
In his April 4 column, Kelly also complained that shielding state employees’ Social Security numbers, home addresses and telephone numbers from reporters and the public represented “an already expansive list of information that is exempt from the Open Records Act.”
The newspaper’s corporate parent also owns a direct-mail marketing firm.
The mass disclosure came in an amicus (“friend of the court”) brief that included information supplied by The Oklahoman listing the names and birthdates for every employee of the Office of the Attorney General. The brief is a public document available to anyone, anywhere for any reason.
“This is a matter of trust,” said Terrill, R-Moore. “Making this information public to anyone, anywhere clearly violates The Oklahoman’s pledge. It doesn’t matter if this info is published in the actual newspaper or another document – it’s now been published and disseminated. The genie is out of the bottle and they can’t put it back in now.”
The Oklahoman recently requested the blanket release of all state employees’ birthdates, requesting seven specific identifying pieces of information for roughly 40,000 individuals.
Under existing state law, taxpayers are able to learn the name, job title and salary for all state workers, but birthdates aren’t mentioned in the Open Records Act.
The Oklahoma Public Employees Association has opposed that request due to safety concerns expressed by law enforcement personnel and the very real threat of identify theft.
A recent study paper published in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that an individual’s birth date, when combined with other identifying data, can allow thieves to accurately predict an individual’s Social Security number and steal his or her identity.
Terrill and Senator Debbe Leftwich (D-Oklahoma City) have filed legislation that would prevent the mass distribution of all state employees’ birthdates.
A compromise version of that bill would allow the media to obtain confirmation of identity when specific allegations arise – for example, news organization would be able to determine if an individual listed on the sex offender registry was employed by the state if names were similar.
In an April 4 letter to readers, The Oklahoman Editor Ed Kelly wrote, “Despite claims by the OPEA, The Oklahoman has never intended to publish lists of dates of birth either in the newspaper or online at our Web site, NewsOK.com. We’ve never done such a thing in our 116 years of publishing, and we certainly aren’t about to do it now.”
Terrill said the paper’s action today justifies the concerns of thousands of state employees and shows the need for the courts to issue a restraining order.
“If The Oklahoman is willing to do this to every employee of one agency in direct violation of the paper’s promise, why would they not do it to other agencies and employees?” Terrill said. “This mass disclosure of employees’ birthdates is the exact reason the courts should issue a permanent injunction.”
Earlier this week, representatives of virtually every major law enforcement entity in Oklahoma announced their opposition to the blanket release of all state employees’ birthdates. Experts at those agencies noted that providing state employees’ full names and birthdates to anyone filing a request could make it easier for criminals, gangs and drug cartels to identify and track down law enforcement personnel and their families.
In his April 4 column, Kelly also complained that shielding state employees’ Social Security numbers, home addresses and telephone numbers from reporters and the public represented “an already expansive list of information that is exempt from the Open Records Act.”
The newspaper’s corporate parent also owns a direct-mail marketing firm.