Slate's Bizbox
human nature: Science, technology, and life.

Digital PenetrationInvasion of the naked body scanners.

By William Saletan
Posted Saturday, March 3, 2007, at 7:32 AM ET

(Continued from page 1)

The impersonality of machines can also filter out racism. Five years ago, the ACLU objected to body scans because they were administered selectively, "based on profiles that are racially discriminatory." But the best way to remove selection bias is to scan everyone. In Phoenix, TSA has put the backscatter monitors in a sealed room 50 feet from the security checkpoint, so the officers who staff them can't see you. All they can see are X-ray images, which capture density, not pigment. To them, everyone is the same color.

Putting a machine interface between you and the examining officer protects your visual as well as tactile privacy. In a strip search, the officer sees you exactly as you are. On a monitor, the image can be filtered. The "privacy algorithm" doesn't obscure every detail of your physique, as pictures on TSA's Web site make all too clear. But that's not essential. Look closely at the pictures. It's not the body that has been rendered indistinct. It's the face.

That's the first key to reconciling airport screening with privacy: We need to see your body, not your face. For those 30 seconds, we know where you are. If your scan suggests a problem, we'll pull you aside. The second key is that the officer who sees you on the monitor never sees you in the flesh. In Phoenix, TSA hasn't just put the monitors in a separate room. It's laying cables to put them in an entirely different terminal. Likewise, the officer who sees you in the flesh never sees you on the monitor. It's like the blind men and the elephant: Nobody has the whole picture.

Which brings us back to Susan Hallowell. The Times twice avoided naming the naked woman in its Feb. 24 photo. It did, however, mention that the machines were made by AS&E. On AS&E's Web site, I found a press release complaining that pictures circulating in the press were obsolete because they'd been taken in 2003. Then I ran across a 2004 article that said Hallowell had demonstrated the technology the previous year. I typed her name into a search engine and up came a 2003 wire story with a photo of her, fully clothed, next to a monitor showing the same image that appeared in the Times. I didn't need to read a word. You could tell she was the same woman just by looking at her face.

Hallowell volunteered for this notoriety. But what happened to her mustn't happen to others. In the age of body scans, privacy means keeping your name, your face, and your nude image apart. That job doesn't end at the security gate; it begins there. Will your scan leak? "Images will not be printed, stored or transmitted," TSA swears on its Web site. Directly above that assurance, the agency has posted four nude pictures—"actual images shown to the Transportation Security Officer during the backscatter process." And you thought airport screeners had no sense of humor.

Enough with the fairy tales. We lost our innocence when the planes hit the towers. Now we're losing our modesty. If we're going to be ogled, at least protect us from being Googled.

A version of this article also appears in the Outlook section of the Sunday Washington Post.

VIEW AS SINGLE PAGE
Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss this in The FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAIL
Share on FacebookPost to MySpace!Share with MixxDigg ThisShare with RedditShare with del.icio.usShare with FurlShare with Ma.gnolia.comShare with SphereShare with Stumble Upon
William Saletan is Slate's national correspondent and author of Bearing Right: How Conservatives Won the Abortion War.
Illustration by Rob Donnelly.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES

Remarks from the Fray:

Of course, the 'experimental' and 'voluntary' use under very rigid protocols is just the proverbial camel's nose under the tent. The idea is apparently that someday everyone, without exception, will need to go through one of these to get on an airplane. Of course, once that legal justification is made, then there isn't must reason that you can't be required to go through them anywhere else. To get on a bus? To walk into a federal building? Every day at school? What about private businesses that want their own machines? To replace metal detectors at the door of your favorite club?

As they become more common, of course, the "high/strict standards" imposed will invariably crumble before the reality of the modern economic world. You may be able to have all these safeguards at the airport, but that will be an exception. And, of course, not really "everyone" will be required to suffer any indignities associated with such a check. As always, there will almost certainly be exceptions to the requirements for certain select groups of people/VIPs.

In addition, these scanning machines may very well become great devices for biometric identification. Of course, the whole task of identification will throw away the 'anonymity' argument -- but that is the next step. For now we are all quite safe...

Such scanning may or may not turn out to be a good idea. But let's not kid ourselves about this being at the airport only, and only with the rigid protocols that have been described so far. Get ready for a whole lot of scanning...

--fozzy

(To reply, click here.)

I'd greatly prefer the backscatter system to the present one. Getting on an airplane is an exercise in patience today. Taking off my shoes, taking off my belt, hell I practically have to take out my fillings to pass a checkpoint.

"Ooohh but they'll show my naked body." Who gives a crap? If it comes down between some a-hole making off with recorded images from the backscatter system and dying in a fiery airplane crash I'll accept the humiliation thank you.

But that is exactly what this will come down to - people nervous about showing their body to some stranger. Unfortunately they have real concerns above Puritanical ones. The screeners are human and therefore the danger exists for exploitation and abuse of the system. Having backscatter photos show up on the web would practically destroy the system's intent and throw us all back to taking off our shoes and wanding us again.

It's unfortunate that our own immaturity with the naked body is a real hinderance to forward progress.

--Eigenvector

(To reply, click here.)

(3/4)

Washington Post
The Washington Post
OPINIONS
Topic A: Obama's Speech
| Pundits and diplomats respond.
Robinson: Sunshine in BerlinToles: Obama the UniterTelnaes: Meanwhile, McCain
PLUS » Stumped: Bring Back Bill Clinton