What's in a name?


    The  Australian Census is upon us once again, and once more
    it's got my dander up.  Every time this event rolls around,
    the  Bureau  of  Statistics make a big song and dance about
    how  all  information  collected  is   kept   private   and
    confidential,  and  no  Census  data or results may include
    identifying information.  This is all well  and  good.   It
    gives  me  warm fuzzy feelings of security.  But those warm
    fuzzies don't last too long.  Why? The  first  question  on
    the Census form, that's why.

    Despite  the  government's  protestations  of  privacy  and
    confidentiality, the very first question  asked  calls  for
    identifying   information.    Now,  why  is  that  question
    necessary, if the information may not  be  used  in  census
    results?   The  official  answer is twofold. First, so that
    Census collectors may address  me  properly  when  speaking
    with   me,   and  second  so  that  information  on  family
    membership may  be  gathered.   I  call  bullshit  on  both
    reasons.

    I  have  seen several Australian Censuses in my adult life,
    and not once has a Census collector ever had  the  need  to
    address me.  Yes, the collectors have spoken to me and I to
    them.  But just like any stranger who comes knocking on  my
    door,  I  did  not  give them my name and I did not care to
    know theirs.  Census collectors have no  need  to  identify
    me.   If they want to talk to me, they do not need my name.
    There   are   well-established   social   conventions   for
    addressing  a  person whose name is not known.  Surely it's
    not too much to ask that collectors follow them?

    So  let's  take  a  look  at  the  second   part   of   the
    justification  for  asking  for  names and addresses.  They
    want to guess at family membership based on  family  names.
    This is utterly ridiculous.  The Bureau has the opportunity
    to ask specific questions on the census and yet they  claim
    that  names will help them determine family membership.  It
    would make far  more  sense  to  include  a  question  that
    specifically  asks  for  the  relationship  to other Census
    respondents.

    There is nothing meaningful about  family  membership  that
    can reasonably be drawn from the fact that two people do or
    do not share a family name.  I have the same family name as
    thousands  of  people  to  whom I claim no relationship.  I
    have a son and daughter, both of whom have different family
    names,  neither  of which is the same as my own.  And until
    quite recently, my sister did not have the same family name
    as me.

    Having  established  that neither stated reason holds up to
    even the most perfunctory scrutiny, it's  quite  reasonable
    to assume that there must be at least one other reason that
    the Bureau of Statistics wants my name.  If that is  indeed
    the case, keeping it secret is doing nothing to engender my
    trust.  Therefore, it is once  again  time  for  my  little
    pentannual episode of civil disobedience.

    In previous censuses, I defaced the Census form and did not
    answer any questions at  all.   I  see  that  behaviour  as
    rather  childish and petulant, and I like to think that I'm
    somewhat more grown-up now.  This time, I will fill in  the
    Census  form,  answering  all  questions  except the one(s)
    requiring my name and address, and place  my  form  in  the
    supplied privacy envelope with a copy of this document.


    --

    blubrick, 27/07/2011