Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
The Unwanted Gaze: The Destruction of Privacy in America Hardcover – May 30, 2000
In this pathbreaking book, Jeffrey Rosen explores the legal, technological, and cultural changes that have undermined our ability to control how much personal information about ourselves is communicated to others, and he proposes ways of reconstructing some of the zones of privacy that law and technology have been allowed to invade. In the eighteenth century, when the Bill of Rights was drafted, the spectacle of state agents breaking into a citizen's home and rummaging through his or her private diaries was considered the paradigm case of an unconstitutional search and seizure. But during the impeachment of President Bill Clinton, prosecutors were able to subpoena Monica Lewinsky's bookstore receipts and to retrieve unsent love letters from her home computer. And the sense of violation that Monica Lewinsky experienced is not unique. In a world in which everything that Americans read, write, and buy can be recorded and monitored in cyberspace, there is a growing danger that intimate personal information originally disclosed only to our friends and colleagues may be exposed to--and misinterpreted by--a less understanding audience of strangers.
Privacy is important, Rosen argues, because it protects us from being judged out of context in a world of short attention spans, a world in which isolated bits of intimate information can be confused with genuine knowledge. Rosen also examines the expansion of sexual-harassment law that has given employers an incentive to monitor our e-mail, Internet browsing habits, and office romances. And he suggests that some forms of offensive speech in the workplace--including the indignities allegedly suffered by Paula Jones and Anita Hill--are better conceived of as invasions of privacy than as examples of sex discrimination. Combining discussions of current events--from Kenneth Starr's tapes to DoubleClick's on-line profiles--with inno-vative legal and cultural analysis, The Unwanted Gaze offers a powerful challenge to Americans to be proactive in the face of new threats to privacy in the twenty-first century.
- Print length288 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherRandom House
- Publication dateMay 30, 2000
- Dimensions6.5 x 1 x 8.75 inches
- ISBN-100679445463
- ISBN-13978-0679445463
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now.
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com Review
Rosen has two overriding concerns: how sexual-harassment law has underwritten invasions of privacy (it was Paula Jones's suit against Clinton, after all, that led to the Lewinsky revelations), and how the Internet threatens anonymity (he criticizes, for instance, Amazon.com's "creepy feature that uses ZIP codes and domain names to identify the most popular books purchased on-line by employees at prominent corporations"). Much of The Unwanted Gaze reads like a law review article--albeit one written with the storytelling touch of a professional reporter--and at times Rosen seems to aim mainly for an academic audience. Yet the book remains entirely open to lay readers, especially when Rosen delivers his impassioned apologies for privacy: "There are dangers to pathological lying, but there are also dangers to pathological truth-telling. Privacy is a form of opacity, and opacity has its values. We need more shades and more blinds and more virtual curtains. Someday, perhaps, we will look back with nostalgia on a society that still believed opacity was possible and was shocked to discover what happens when it is not." Rosen is a sharp thinker with a knack for conveying complex ideas through readable prose. --John J. Miller
From Publishers Weekly
Copyright 2000 Reed Business Information, Inc.
From Library Journal
Copyright 2000 Reed Business Information, Inc.
From Booklist
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved
Review
" Jeffrey Rosen is America's most penetrating legal journalist, and this book is his magnum opus, bringing together many of the themes he has explored with such wit, elegance, insight, and imagination over the last decade. The Unwanted Gaze is as absorbing and downright fun to read as The Brethren, but with far more erudition, range, and sheer brilliance. There is no work--and no author--I know that does a better job braiding legal scholarship, academic ideas outside law, and popular culture. A contribution both timely and timeless."
---Akhil Reed Amar, Southmayd Professor of Law, Yale Law School
" Jeffrey Rosen has the rare ability to write about complex areas of the law with grace and clarity. In this book, he addresses one of the most important and controversial legal questions of our time: the much-contested right to privacy, which Rosen persuasively argues has been seriously damaged by a wide range of intrusive innovations in law and society. Beginning with the Lewinsky scandal, Rosen ranges widely through critical moments in recent history and presents a disturbing picture of how law and technology have combined to imperil an important, if relatively recently asserted, right."
---Alan Brinkley, Alan Nevins Professor of History, Columbia University
" Jeffrey Rosen performs a great service by exploring the many facets of privacy and the variety of ways it is under siege today. Moving swiftly past the most conventional wisdom about these matters, he sheds interesting light on many of the less obvious functions of privacy protection--not the least of which is its role in reducing the risk that we will be judged out of context and ultimately misunderstood in a world of depressingly short attention spans."
---Laurence H. Tribe, Tyler Professor of Constitutional Law, Harvard Law School
" Possibly the most important privacy book in a generation. From Wilkes's diaries to Monica's phone calls, Jeffrey Rosen provides an extraordinarily provocative discussion of the ethical, legal, and philosophical dimensions of privacy. A brilliant exploration of one of today's most pressing social issues."
---Marc Rotenberg, executive director, Electronic Privacy Information Center
" Jeffrey Rosen has written an indispensable analysis of the judicial foundation of the Starr inquisition (among other insupportable assaults on individual freedom). His lucid writing and subtle thinking are exhilarating. When a problem is identified with such clarity and precision, its solution no longer seems impossible."
---Janet Malcolm, author of The Crime of Sheila McGough
From the Inside Flap
In this pathbreaking book, Jeffrey Rosen explores the legal, technological, and cultural changes that have undermined our ability to control how much personal information about ourselves is communicated to others, and he proposes ways of reconstructing some of the zones of privacy that law and technology have been allowed to invade. In the eighteenth century, when the Bill of Rights was drafted, the specta
From the Back Cover
Praise for The Unwanted Gaze
" Jeffrey Rosen is America's most penetrating legal journalist, and this book is his magnum opus, bringing together many of the themes he has explored with such wit, elegance, insight, and imagination over the last decade. The Unwanted Gaze is as absorbing and downright fun to read as The Brethren, but with far more erudition, range, and sheer brilliance. There is no work--and no author--I know that does a better job braiding legal scholarship, academic ideas outside law, and popular culture. A contribution both timely and timeless."
---Akhil Reed Amar, Southmayd Professor of Law, Yale Law School
" Jeffrey Rosen has the rare ability to write about complex areas of the law with grace and clarity. In this book, he addresses one of the most important and controversial legal questions of our time: the much-contested right to privacy, which Rosen persuasively argues has been seriously damaged by a wide range of intrusive innovations in law and society. Beginning with the Lewinsky scandal, Rosen ranges widely through critical moments in recent history and presents a disturbing picture of how law and technology have combined to imperil an important, if relatively recently asserted, right."
---Alan Brinkley, Alan Nevins Professor of History, Columbia University
" Jeffrey Rosen performs a great service by exploring the many facets of privacy and the variety of ways it is under siege today. Moving swiftly past the most conventional wisdom about these matters, he sheds interesting light on many of the less obvious functions of privacy protection--not the least of which is its role in reducing the risk that we will be judged out of context and ultimately misunderstood in a world of depressingly short attention spans."
---Laurence H. Tribe, Tyler Professor of Constitutional Law, Harvard Law School
" Possibly the most important privacy book in a generation. From Wilkes's diaries to Monica's phone calls, Jeffrey Rosen provides an extraordinarily provocative discussion of the ethical, legal, and philosophical dimensions of privacy. A brilliant exploration of one of today's most pressing social issues."
---Marc Rotenberg, executive director, Electronic Privacy Information Center
" Jeffrey Rosen has written an indispensable analysis of the judicial foundation of the Starr inquisition (among other insupportable assaults on individual freedom). His lucid writing and subtle thinking are exhilarating. When a problem is identified with such clarity and precision, its solution no longer seems impossible."
---Janet Malcolm, author of The Crime of Sheila McGough
About the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
This book began as an effort to understand the constitutional, legal, and political drama that culminated in the impeachment and acquittal of President Bill Clinton. But that strange and singular confluence of events prompted me to think about the Clinton impeachment as a window onto a less unusual phenomenon that affects all Americans: namely, the erosion of privacy, at home, at work, and in cyberspace, so that intimate personal information-from diaries, e-mail, and computer files to records of the books we read and the Web sites we brows-is increasingly vulnerable to being wrenched out of context and exposed to the world. What follows is an attempt to explore the legal, technological, and cultural changes that have undermined our ability to control how much information about ourselves is communicated to others. I would also like to explore ways of reconstructing some of the zones of privacy that law and technology have been allowed to invade.
In January of 1998, when Kenneth Starr began to examine allegations that President Clinton had lied under oath about an adulterous affair, I became interested in trying to identify the legal forces that converged in Paula Jones's sexual harassment suit and in the subsequent impeachment investigation. Why, for example, were Jones's lawyers permitted to go on a fishing expedition into the President's sexual history, asking him to identify all the women with whom he had sexual relations as governor and president? Merely by accusing Clinton of an unwanted advance, Jones was able to violate not only his privacy but also that of Monica Lewinsky, who was forced to describe her own consensual sexual activities under oath. How could the law permit such unreasonable searches, in which the investigation of the offense seemed more invasive than the offense itself?
The invasions of privacy continued to multiply during the Starr investigation and the impeachment trial that followed. Many examples of the erosion of privacy by means of technology seemed to sit uneasily with the public-the DNA testing, the retrieval of e-mails that Lewinsky and a friend had tried unsuccessfully to delete, the tape recordings, the release of the secret grand jury transcripts on the Internet. But Lewinsky herself was especially unsettled by Starr's decision to subpoena a Washington bookstore for receipts of all of her book purchases since 1995. In her memoir, Lewinsky pointed to the bookstore subpoenas as one of the most invasive moments in the Starr investigation, along with the moment when prosecutors retrieved from her home computer the love letters that she had drafted, but never sent, to the President. "It was such a violation," she complained to her biographer, Andrew Morton. "It seemed that everyone in America had rights except for Monica Lewinsky. I felt like I wasn't a citizen of this country anymore."
Monica Lewinsky is an improbable spokesperson for the virtues of reticence, but her ordeal raises deep questions about recent changes in law and technology that threaten individual control over personal information. In the late eighteenth century, the spectacle of state agents breaking into a suspect's home and rummaging through his or her private diaries was considered the paradigm case of the unreasonable searches and seizures that the framers of the Bill of Rights intended to forbid. In the most famous essay on privacy ever written, published in the Harvard Law Review in 1890, Louis D. Brandeis, the future Supreme Court justice, and Samuel D. Warren, his former law partner, announced confidently that "the common law secures to each individual the right of determining, ordinarily, to what extent his thoughts, sentiments, and emotions shall be communicated to others." The legal principle that prevented prosecutors from scrutinizing diaries, letters, books, and private papers, Warren and Brandeis wrote, was the same principle that, in their view, should prevent gossip columnists from writing about the sex lives of citizens. They called that principle the right to an "inviolate personality" and said that it was part of the most general "right to be let alone."
In asserting a right to privacy that could constrain the press, the two lawyers were treading on adventurous ground; yet it was a matter of general agreement, in the 1890s, that the Constitution prohibited prosecutors and civil plaintiffs from rummaging through private papers in search of sexual secrets or anything else. How, then, could that consensus have eroded to the point that Lewinsky's unsent love letters could be retrieved from her home computer? Part of the answer, I will argue, has to do with an unfortunate confluence of decisions by the Supreme Court. The legal forces that culminated in the Clinton impeachment-in particular, the erosion of privacy law, embodied in Fourth and Fifth Amendment protections for individual control over personal information, and the expansion of sexual harassment law, to a point where people can be interrogated about the details of their consensual relationships on the flimsiest of allegations-are the product of surprisingly recent Supreme Court decisions. It was during the 1970s and 1980s, for example, that the principle that private diaries couldn't be subpoenaed as "mere evidence" in civil or white-collar criminal cases was quietly allowed to wither away. And it was during the 1980s and 1990s that the Supreme Court recognized sexually explicit speech and conduct that created a "hostile or offensive working environment" as a form of gender discrimination, a development that made it increasingly difficult for lower courts and employers to distinguish consensual affairs from illegal forms of sexual coercion.
The Lewinsky investigation might never have occurred, however, if these two unfortunate legal trends hadn't converged with a third novel and illiberal law: the Independent Counsel Act, which encouraged a level of inquisitorial zeal in which ordinary prosecutors-constrained, as they are, by time, money, and public accountability-are less likely to indulge. Now that both parties have experienced the excesses of monomaniacal independent counsels, that law, mercifully, has been allowed to expire. But like a blinding klieg light that exposes the fissures in every surface on which it is turned, the independent counsel law served the jarring yet useful purpose of revealing the fault lines in the legal and technological protections for privacy today.
A hundred years ago, Brandeis and Warren worried that changes in technology as well as law were altering the nature of privacy. "Instantaneous photographs and newspaper enterprise have invaded the sacred precincts of private and domestic life, and numerous mechanical devices threaten to make good the prediction that 'what is whispered in the closet shall be proclaimed from the housetops,'" they wrote. But it was not, in fact, the desire to be let alone that motivated Brandeis and Warren to write their famous article; it was instead the desire to restrict discussion of an intimate family event to the sympathetic boundaries of their own social circle. What outraged Brandeis and Warren was a mild society item in the Boston Saturday Evening Gazette that described a lavish breakfast party Warren himself had put on for his daughter's wedding. Although the information itself wasn't inherently salacious, Brandeis and Warren were appalled that a domestic ceremony would be described in a gossip column and discussed by strangers. For this reason, they conceived of privacy in geographic or spatial terms. The press, they wrote, was "overstepping" the "bounds of propriety and of decency," and intruding on "the domestic circle."
At the beginning of the twenty-first century, new technologies of communication have increased the danger that intimate personal information originally disclosed to our friends and colleagues may be exposed to-and misinterpreted by-a less understanding audience. For as thinking and writing increasingly take place in cyberspace, the part of our life that can be monitored and searched has vastly expanded. E-mail, even after it is ostensibly deleted, becomes a permanent record that can be resurrected by employers or prosecutors at any point in the future. On the Internet, every Web site we visit, every store we browse in, every magazine we skim, and the amount of time we spend skimming it, create electronic footprints that can be traced back to us, revealing detailed patterns about our tastes, preferences, and intimate thoughts. A friend who runs a Web site for political junkies recently sent me the "data trail" statistics that he receives each week. They disclose not only the Internet addresses of individual browsers who visit his site, clearly identifying their universities and corporate employers, but also the Web sites each user visited previously and the articles he or she downloaded there. Amazon.com has announced a similarly creepy feature that uses zip codes and domain names to identify the most popular books purchased on-line by employees at prominent corporations. (The top choice at Charles Schwab: Memoirs of a Geisha.)
The sense of violation that Monica Lewinsky and the amazon.com customers experienced when their reading habits were exposed points to a central value of privacy that I want to explore in this book. Privacy protects us from being misdefined and judged out of context in a world of short attention spans, a world in which information can easily be confused with knowledge. True knowledge of another person is the culmination of a slow process of mutual revelation. It requires the gradual setting aside of social masks, the incremental building of trust, which leads to the exchange of personal disclosures. It cannot be rushed; this is why, after intemperate self-revelation in the heat of passion, one may feel something close to self-betrayal. True knowledge of another person, in all of his or her complexity, can only be achieved with a handful of friends,...
Product details
- Publisher : Random House; 1st edition (May 30, 2000)
- Language : English
- Hardcover : 288 pages
- ISBN-10 : 0679445463
- ISBN-13 : 978-0679445463
- Item Weight : 1 pounds
- Dimensions : 6.5 x 1 x 8.75 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #2,034,498 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #657 in Intellectual Property Law (Books)
- #2,196 in General Constitutional Law
- #9,097 in Business Technology
- Customer Reviews:
About the author

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read book recommendations and more.
Customer reviews
- 5 star4 star3 star2 star1 star5 star49%42%9%0%0%49%
- 5 star4 star3 star2 star1 star4 star49%42%9%0%0%42%
- 5 star4 star3 star2 star1 star3 star49%42%9%0%0%9%
- 5 star4 star3 star2 star1 star2 star49%42%9%0%0%0%
- 5 star4 star3 star2 star1 star1 star49%42%9%0%0%0%
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonTop reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
- Reviewed in the United States on July 4, 2000I share Jeffrey Rosen's anger over the victimization of Lawrence Lessig. The Harvard University Law scholar's humorous and casual remarks about the software giant were unethically taken out of context. This resulted in forcing Lessig to resign his post as the Microsoft "special master." It is, however, an earlier incident ignored by Rosen that requires our current attention. During the murder trial of O.J. Simpson, Detective Mark Furhman was viciously attacked for using the "n" word. The Liberal media had a field day deriding this man for simply employing the word regardless of how it might have been used in a conversation. Rosen warns us to be wary of taking statements out of context. Yet, few legal scholars, if any, realized the precedent being set during the lynching of Detective Furhman. The Afro-American comedian, Chris Rock, never hesitates to joke about "niggers" and he is paid well for doing so. I have heard the "n" word used warmly between black males often in my life. Furhman, however, was not allowed the opportunity to explain the context of his words. Johnny Cochrane was permitted in a court of law to demand of Furhman if the latter had simply ever uttered the "n" word. Judge Ito disgracefully allowed Cochrane to get away with this outrage. The law departments of our major universities shamed themselves by their silence.
Words are intrinsically nebulous. Language is a discipline belonging primarily to the Liberal Arts, and not the hard sciences. There is inherently no such thing as the unchanging and absolute meaning of any word. Literal language does not exist on our planet. The absolute letter of the law is a senseless concept. Ultimately, the spirit of the law is all we have separating us from Armageddon. It is merely a matter of the probability or outside possibility of how certain words are to be interpreted. This why I also argue that we will never engage, Bill Joy notwithstanding, in a give and take conversation with a computer. Stanley Kubrick's "HAL," will forevermore remain a fictional character. The meaning of a particular word is always subjective. This is neither the time and place for me to go into greater detail, but the philosophical deconstructionists mistakenly conclude that we should therefore abandon ourselves to nihilistic relativism and unbridled skepticism. Nevertheless, words are of no value unless put into proper context. It is both the logical and moral duty of individuals to make sure that they do their best to prudentially understand the whole context of another's words.
Professor Rosen should invest time and energy reevaluating our almost sacred doctrinal adherence to our adversarial legal system. His concerns regarding privacy issues make little sense unless the very premise of our system of justice is taken to task. The disgusting and vile doctrine encourages the ruthless disregard of truth and justice. Our adversarial legal system inevitably deteriorates into something akin to a game with debatable rules in which only victory at any cost is to be valued. Laws based on an adversarial set of guidelines eventually seduce the wider culture. This encourages the mindset that anything and everything goes as long as one cannot be arrested or sued for their misbehavior. Originally in our nation's history, the destruction of the adversarial principle was limited because of a tacit agreement not to abuse the system. In the 21st Century, though, attorneys normally lie and offer the excuse that their words might through a bizarre interpretation mean the opposite of their common usage. President Bill Clinton, for instance, is a splendid example of this decline when he lied about having sex with Monica Lewinsky. Vigorous advocacy of our rights is appropriate and mandatory if our democratic society is to survive. I strongly reject the concept that an individual should be presumed guilty until proven innocent. It is foolish, however, to pretend that we must either embrace the evil principle of adversarial justice, or American Democracy is unsustainable. The less extreme principle of vigorous advocacy is pragmatic and workable. I suggest that Jeffrey Rosen tackle this subject in his future writings. It behooves Rosen to go a bit deeper into the subject of privacy. His present book is well done, but it essentially puts the proverbial cart before the horse.
- Reviewed in the United States on October 7, 2015This book is still remarkably relevant to current problems about privacy. It is the most detailed and well worked out discussion of the psychological effects of the "omniopticon"--everyone watching everyone. In contrast, most current critiques of contemporary surveillance focus on--the genuine and important--problems of the lack of free and informed consent to data collection, and the use of information to in ways that unjustifiably harm individuals and groups.
- Reviewed in the United States on August 12, 2016After reading Rosen's bio of Louis Brandeis, this one was a bit of a disappointment, mixing a professional view of jurisprudence with a lot of amateur sociology. That may be reflective of the privacy topic. It doesn't seem that the SC or any government agency is doing any better. The book starts with the Brandeis-Warren paper defining privacy as the right to be left alone. We have not seen much progress since. Sexual harassment is hard to define and easy to spin, privacy in cyberspace is traded with security considerations, and libel laws are excessively vague. The book presents background from the prior century or two with John Wilkes, Lord Camden, Oscar Wilde, Queen Caroline and more recent cases of Bill Clinton, Clarence Thomas and John Packwood.
J.S. Mill observed that the tyranny of social conformity is worse than the threat of law. It seems to me that we were better off when ostracism was effective. Though lacking modern concept of justice, it was more effective than subsequent legislation in controlling socially deviant entitlements and pregnancy. The book illustrates the inefficacy of legislation and jurisprudence to compensate for liberal sociology.
- Reviewed in the United States on December 6, 2000Jeffrey Rosen, author of THE UNWANTED GAZE (2000), went to Harvard College, Oxford U. (Balliol College....the book jacket doesn't say if he were a Rhodes Scholar like President Clinton was, but probably he was), and finally (again like President Clinton), Yale Law School. Also, like Mr. Clinton, Mr. Rosen taught (still teaches) law school at Washington, D.C.'s excellent and underrated Geroge Washington University. Need we say more? If EVER an overachiever walked the face of the planet, Mr. Rosen certainly fits the that description. Beyond question, he is one smart dude!
His excellent book, THE UNWANTED GAZE (about privacy invasion by computers...and evil people invading YOUR PRIVACY using computers), is worth buying from Amazon.Com and reading again and again.
This is easier said than done. Simply possessing the book and finding a quiet place to read it doesn't deliver the information Rosen offers (worth having once gotten) easily. His book is about an immensely complicated subject, and even though Rosen is a genious (really!) law professor, etc., etc., tackling his book ain't easy.
The result is that, through no fault of his own (he's breaking very thick and important ice), his book is extremely difficult to read and digest.
Read it anyway.
You'll learn a lot about an important subject.
Here's what his book is about:
As thinking, writing, and gossip increasingly take place in cyberspace, the part of our life that can be monitored and searched has vastly expanded. E-Mail, for instance (the most used and most famous form of cyberspace use), even after it is deleted, becomes a PERMANENT record that can be resurrected by employers or prosecutors (district attorneys, cops, the FBI, the CIA....you know....those guys, and for the past 30 years, those girls) at ANY point in the future. Cyberspace doesn't give a damn about paper deterioration, etc. Cyberspace is a WHOLE NEW media ball game with brand new rules!
On the Internet, EVERY website we visit, every store we browse in, every magazine we skim...AND the AMOUNT OF TIME we skim it...create electronic FOOTPRINTS that can be traced back to us, revealing detailed patterns about our tastes, preferences, and intimate thoughts (example...I visit public libraries very often and use library computers and Internet services....cops checking up on me who trace writings like the one you are now reading...composed in a Maryland public library...and see a pattern of public library use).
The brilliant Mr. Rosen (a smart lawyer you ought to hire if you get in trouble) explores the legal, technological, and cultural changes that have undermined our ability to control how much personal information about ourselves is communicated to others. He proposes ways of reconstructing some of the zones of privacy that law and technology have been allowed to invade (computers, the Internet, etc. ALONE don't do evil things and victimize people without help....it takes bad guys and gals USING computers, the Internet, etc. to do us dirty and invade out privacy).
Poor gorgeous, big busted Monica Lewinsky, the Linda Lovelace of the Whitehouse, is the main example Mr. Rosen uses to illustrate his worthwhile point. If Mr. Rosen is a comic book example of an overachiever (see above stated educational credentials if you doubt he is an overachiever), Ms. Lewinsky is the comic book provider of oral sex to highly place politicians, certainly eclipsing Linda Lovelace and others you may have heard about. She got famous for this, and thus is easy to relate to.
For this reason, perhaps, Mr. Rosen, uses her. He does so brilliantly to show how legal types and nosy types got away with invading her privacy using computers and the Internet. Ms. Lewinsky was not regarded sympathetically by the media, and perhaps for this reason, the VIOLATION of HER RIGHTS to privacy was ignored as a journalistic topic. She was, in the male chauvinist mentality of the times, simply regarded as an appendage of the OTHER villain in the Clinton/Lewinsky story, Mr. Clinton, destined to become the most famous sex act President in U.S. history (it will be hard for future sex abuse Presidents to top his act).
Mr. Rosen plays the gentleman, and defends Ms. Lewinsky, especially her violated rights to privacy. These rights were invaded when her computer use (to buy books, to write her diary, to send E-Mail communications, etc.) was used AGAINST her (in order to make Mr. Clinton look bad) in flagrant VIOLATION of her rights to free speech and privacy.
Mr. Rosen makes the dubious legal analysis that women seeking redress from sexual harrassment abuses, such as those suffered by Paula Jones and Anita Hill, should trash sexual harrassment charges and instead charge invasion of privacy. This is one of the very few few weak parts of Rosen's book or thinking, but it is such spectacular balderdash that it is worth mentioning.
The author of THE UNWANTED GAZE (title taken from the "Encyclopedia Talmudit," not to be confused with the Talmud) discusses Kenneth Starr's tapes and DoubleClick's (DoubleClick is the world's largest Internet advertising company at present....buy its stock if you want to get rich quick) on-line profiles (they probably have mine gotten from Amazon.Com and also from HotMail, both of whom successfully solicited "profiles" ,i.e. autobiographies, from me).
This smart Yale lawyer prepared by Oxford and Harvard REALLY covers the waterfront.
The result is that readers like me get very scared of the Internet, and start returning to use of OTHER information sources nutty FBI loose cogs (like G. Gordon Liddy and J. Edgar Hoover) can't trace so easily. For instance, NOW, when I want to communicate with one of my celebrity friends, I use the public library's copy of WHO'S WHO IN AMERICA.....their PRINT copy, NOT their on-line copy. THAT WAY bad guys don't know who I'm sending nasty notes to, or nice notes, as the case may be.
Staying away from the Internet might be a healthy thing. Personally, I don't plan to, but you might consider the idea. You'll probably last longer than I will.
- Reviewed in the United States on December 29, 2014Interesting, important subject.




