Nomophobia In 1984

Every day, the typical person in the United States can be found with some model of smartphone. Every day those people trust that their information is safely secured through usernames and passwords. The thing they don’t understand is that there is always more than one way to access information, even extremely sensitive information. Though policies have been placed to prevent invasion of privacy, current technology is bringing us closer to the world of 1984. Phones are trackers, security cameras can be found almost everywhere, and Congress passed the Patriot Act allowing for investigation of private information without a court order. Technology is truly bringing us frightfully close to the dystopia of George Orwell’s 1984. With our technology,

Nomophobia is the irrational fear of being without a mobile phone. In the Scientific American, Valdesolo Piercarlo explains that most people who lose their phone will begin feeling anxiety or distress that some people experience when they don’t have their phone on them. Next, he explains how “…the degree to which people depend on phones to complete basic tasks and to fulfill important needs such as learning, safety and staying connected to information and to others.” This can show how the level of dependence on the smartphone that keeps people to their phone. With the phone on the person, the phone can now tell almost anything about where it is and what is going on. The typical phone can have about 14 different sensors installed. Most phones have GPS that tells where the user is, microphones that are powerful enough to capture sound from the immediate area, and cameras that can take videos that may end up revealing activities that may cause a person’s reputation to be ruined. In Peter Mass and Megha Rejagopalan’s article “That’s No Phone, That’s My Tracker.” it states “…these devices are also taking note of what we buy, how much money we have in the bank, whom we text and e-mail, what Web sites we visit, how and where we travel, what time we go to sleep and wake up – and more.” In the article, the authors quote Paul Ohm, a law professor at the University of Colorado, when they say “Every year, private companies spend millions of

In an article written by Neil M. Richards, in the Harvard Law Review, titled “The Dangers of Surveillance” it states, “Although we have laws that protect us against government surveillance, secret government programs cannot be challenged until they are discovered. And even when they are, our law of surveillance provides only minimal protections.” With that much power, the government has the ultimate say in who is watched, when they are watched, and who sees them. The article continues by saying, “Courts frequently dismiss challenges to such programs for the lack of standing, under the theory that mere surveillance creates no harms.” In 1984 the people of Oceania are powerless to speak up on the issue of the constant surveillance that plagues their society. If anybody ever spoke up about the issue in secret, they would be eliminated from society one way or another. This is because of the surveillance that surrounds them. In Richards’ article, it states, “The Supreme Court recently reversed the only major case to hold to the contrary, in Clapper v. Amnesty International USA, finding that the respondents’ claim that their communications were likely being monitored was ‘too speculative.’” The case was debating if the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) violated the Fourth Amendment, First Amendment,