While the promise of the digital age is to make everything effortless and efficient, reality is less idyllic. Computers can break down, hackers can uncover and exploit vulnerabilities and con artists can use technology to scam millions of victims across the globe. And then there’s metadata.

Metadata is information about information. It turns out that while computers are great at displaying information (such as the info you find on Web pages), they’re still lousy at interpreting that data. But metadata can help computers and programs identify the type of information that’s on a digital document. It can also keep a record of the history of how the data in that document is managed.

According to the Associated Press, that last facet of metadata became the focus of a court case in Arizona. A Phoenix police officer asked to see the documentation created by a supervisor in regards to the officer’s demotion. The officer received printed copies of the supervisor’s notes. But the officer wanted more than that — he demanded to see the metadata for the documentation. It was his suspicion that the supervisor had created support for the demotion after the fact and then backdated the documentation. The metadata would give the true creation date.

This raised an important question: Is metadata about public records also public? Normally, you can’t see metadata. It’s there to help document data or, for electronic files, to give computers the information they need to process or display the data correctly.

Justice Scott Bales wrote in his decision that metadata for public records should also follow the same laws as normal public record information. The League of Arizona Cities and Towns object to this interpretation. It’s not because the members of this league wish to keep secrets — they’re more concerned that it will take too much time, effort and money to supply metadata for data requests.

It’s easier than ever to create or alter information digitally. It would be just as easy to create two levels of documentation. The surface level would be what you and I could see normally. But beneath that layer could be an entirely different document written as metadata. Theoretically, you could clandestinely communicate with other people while maintaining what appears to be an innocent and legitimate digital conversation. In matters of public record, this is a problem.

I applaud the decision of the Arizona Supreme Court. I don’t like the thought of officials finding sneaky ways to hide information from the public. I imagine I will continue to feel this way until I’m elected to public office. Vote early, and vote often.

Need more information about information? Take a trip to HowStuffWorks.com:

How Semantic Web Works
How Web Pages Work
How Encryption Works