This is a great example of post-Cambridge Analytica data reporting that just fails to do the issue, the concerns or the public policy issue any service whatsoever. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/12/uk-government-using-confidential-patient-data-in-coronavirus-response?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

It’s totally appropriate to use confidential patient data in a pandemic response - the question is how you protect it, with proper governance, processes and storage. The article offers not a single suggestion to improve those things.

It goes on to use the political alignment of people tangentially involved to suggest ill intent, without any evidence or acknowledgement that those firms/individuals may actually have some expertise in data analysis.

Many of the most important things are glossed over as if irrelevant, when they are actually critical. Data remains controlled by the NHS, no third party use, statistics are aggregated. Unclear whether the ICO was contacted, but suspect that is what they would focus on.

If Palantir and Dominic Cummings were replaced by IBM and Robby Mook, you feel this would be a page 20 story. It’s a disservice to those working on today’s challenges to see every policy or process through the lens of a referendum/election several years ago.

It’s essential the media critique projects like this and the privacy implications are properly scrutinised. But if you can’t offer a single proposal for change and your critique rests on people rather then process, the outcome is likely a less informed, more anxious public.