This essay will show that rather than the Internet being a guarantor of liberty it is more an intrusive source of surveillance. Mobbs (2003) defined internet surveillance as monitoring the everyday activities and communications of individual’s. Deibert, Rohozinski (2007) explained liberty as personal freedoms, being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on personal behavior or political views.
According to Giddens (2009) while the Internet is a source of "stunning technology", not only used for shopping or as an educational tool, the Internet also enables communications across the globe opening up new friendships in the new world of cyberspace, where people from all over the world can converse and learn about different cultures, cities and towns that they may never reach in person.
Sharman (2012) stated, Internet shopping is on the increase globally, because it is convenient and frees up personal time. Many sites have price comparisons, which enables people to shop around in the comfort of their own home. With the added attraction of being able to research and review both the retailer and the item in which they wish to purchase. With a belief, that the payment methods, are secure, when purchasing from reputable online retailers. Flexibility within Internet shopping ensures liberty. However, there are many dangers to shopping online. According to Mukerji (2013), on purchasing items many websites will ask for personal details, some details required may not be necessary and can be an endeavoure to acquire the identity of the purchaser. Moreover, Identity fraud can have a direct impact on personal liberty, affecting credit ratings and inhibiting the possibility of gaining credit in the futu...
... middle of paper ...
...life , open University press, Buckingham.
McLaughlin E and Muncie J (2013) Criminological perspectives, Sage production Ltd London
Mobbs,P (2003) GreenNet Civil Society Internet Rights Project. Revision 1, http://www.internetrights.org.uk/ date accessed 15/10/13
Mukerji, c. (2013) How to shop on line safely, http://businesstoday.intoday.in/story/how-to-shop-online-safely-make-payments-safeguard-identity/1/194372.html (date accessed. 05/11/13)
Reporters without borders, (22/6/13) http://en.rsf.org/who-we-are-12-09-2012,32617. Date accessed(20/10/13)
Sharman, ( 2012) On line shopping, http://ventureburn.com/2012/04/online-shopping-on-the-rise-price-convenience-security-key/ ( date accessed. 05/11/13)
Sinico (12/3/13) Online surveillance threatens Internet freedom, http://www.dw.de/online-surveillance-threatens-internet-freedom/a-16655554 date accessed (1/11/13
There is considerable utilitarian value in extending privacy rights to the Internet. The fear that communication is being monitored by a third party inevitably leads to inefficiency, because individuals feel a need to find loopholes in the surveillance. For instance, if the public does not feel comfortable with communica...
This can be seen by how the internet can influence us by the information that have obtained and how the lack of privacy on the internet is establishing a belief that the lack of privacy is not an issue. The internet influencing the world drastically is seen in the quote, “As marketing pitches and products offerings become more tightly tied to our past patterns of behavior, they become more powerful as triggers of future behavior.” This quote explains how companies and other sources can predict our future by our past purchases, visits, and comments. Another problem that can occur is the loss of liberty due to the limited freedom on the web. This loss of freedom is shown in the quote, “The greatest danger posed by the continuing erosion of personal privacy is that it may lead us as a society to devalue the concept of privacy, to see it as outdated and unimportant.” This quote reveals that the loss of freedom on the internet can result in much larger losses of freedom in other aspects of our daily
“Human beings are not meant to lose their anonymity and privacy,” Sarah Chalke. When using the web, web users’ information tend to be easily accessible to government officials or hackers. In Nicholas Carr’s “Tracking Is an Assault on Liberty,” Jim Harpers’ “Web Users Get As Much As They Give,” and Lori Andrews “Facebook is Using You” the topic of internet tracking stirred up many mixed views; however, some form of compromise can be reached on this issue, laws that enforces companies to inform the public on what personal information is being taken, creating advisements on social media about how web users can be more cautious to what kind of information they give out online, enabling your privacy settings and programs, eliminating weblining,
The paper will deal with two aspects of the privacy-vs-security issue. The first one is concerned with general civil liberties, where privacy is understood to mean freedom to make personal (private) choices in our own homes, control our daily lives and decide with whom we share information that is of our concern – information about our emotions, attitudes, behavior and future decisions and events. The second aspect deals with the privacy vs. security on the internet. Since we live in a technological era, internet has become an inseparable part of our l...
Imagine walking along a busy street in the middle of a sunny day. Also imagine that someone is following you around, videotaping everything you do. Disturbing thought? Even more disturbing is the fact that the United States government is already doing this, and it's perfectly legal.
Former Vice President Al Gore addressed the topic of Internet privacy and pointed out that “privacy is a basic American value […] in the Information Age and in every age […] and it must be protected” (qtd. in Masci). Senior researcher David Masci states that the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights indirectly implies the right of privacy “when it prohibits what it terms ‘unreasonable’ search and seizure” (Masci 183, 184). Yet, the usage of Internet, the part of nearly everyone’s day life that has increased tremendously over the past two decades, does not have any laws that would protect the
"In the year 2018, the Internet has now reached a global scale of immense proportions; just in the United States, it is now in almost 99% of our homes. Thus, this influence raises the question, how far should the government be involved in monitoring the internet? With the most recent Net Neutrality issue, the government has now become tangled with constant debate about free market. However, because of society’s personal involvement with the network, it is my firm belief that the government should be involved to some minimal degree when it comes to protecting the people’s privacy.
“Personal privacy is a closely held American value,” Anna Eshoo. Even though this might be considered one of the biggest lies discovered in the 21st century, government surveillance should actually not come to a surprise to anybody. While no one can deny that we live in a real surveillance state today, predictions from novels such as 1984 are far from accurate. A dystopian novel filled with contradictions and an excessive left wing totalitarian government who hears, listens, and controls every aspect of its citizens’ lives is inaccurate to our current era of spying. Due to its dramatic end of the world environment, excessive government control, and inaccurate predictions of spying devices today, the novel 1984 has failed to foresee the modern
First, the Internet has affected us socially and allows people to communicate with friends and family across the
The issue on privacy is extremely controversial in today’s world. As the United States’ use of the internet, a global web of interconnected computer networks, expands, so does its problem with privacy invasion. With the U.S. pushing for new laws governing internet use, citizens are finding their privacy being pulled right from underneath them. Web users are buying and selling personal information online as well as hacking users for more information. One may argue that there is no such thing as privacy on the internet, but privacy is a right among Americans, and should be treated as such.
However, government agencies, especially in America, continue to lobby for increased surveillance capabilities, particularly as technologies change and move in the direction of social media. Communications surveillance has extended to Internet and digital communications. law enforcement agencies, like the NSA, have required internet providers and telecommunications companies to monitor users’ traffic. Many of these activities are performed under ambiguous legal basis and remain unknown to the general public, although the media’s recent preoccupation with these surveillance and privacy issues is a setting a trending agenda.
As technology progresses since the time of the application of the Constitution in 1787, the government is naturally going to run into unprecedented circumstances because of the invention of entities that have never existed before. This means that they have no formal decisions to base their actions on. One such unprecedented circumstance is the use of the internet by millions of Americans. Being that all of your internet content is kept track of and saved in a way that an organization with a lot of power (such as the government) could potentially monitor you, it seems inevitable that controversies may arise with respect to internet monitoring. I firmly believe in a hands-off attitude towards internet content and control. It has been understood for a couple
E“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety”. A famous quote by none other than Benjamin Franklin, and although he did not live to see it, his words would be part of almost every argument considering internet surveillance. This ongoing debate is so big because so many different people from all aspects of society use the internet, so everyone is affected by the outcome of the debate. There is no easy solution when it comes to the balance between security and freedom, but in the end the right thing to do is to allow people to not be monitored when surfing the internet as it is a violation of the 1st amendment and also very expensive and impractical.
The Internet provides a gateway for an individual to speak freely and anonymously without being targeted to what he or she said. With this said, one of the biggest issues concerning the Internet today is freedom of speech. The issue of free speech on the Internet has been a topic of discussion around the world within the past years. It is a unique communication medium and is powerful than the traditional media[2]. Because the Internet can not be compared equally to other mediums of communication, it deserves the utmost freedom of speech protection from the government. The restriction of speech on the Internet takes away from individual's rights and freedom from experiencing the Internet's benefits and uses. Information found on the Internet is endless and boundless and this poses the question, "should the government be allowed to regulate the information and content being transmitted or posted online?"
In this current day and age, there’s a lot of disagreement about the level of privacy one has on the Internet. With the government able to see things such as your credit card records, employment records, and more, it can be tempting to dismiss the entire idea of allowing the government to “spy” on Americans. In Daniel J. Solove’s paper “Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have ‘Nothing to Hide’” explores the issue of how the government uses the Internet to watch Americans and what they do while online. Solove states “In many instances, hardly anyone will see the information, and it won't be disclosed to the public.” So one must decide why it’s so important that the government watches online activity and whether or not it’s needed to the extreme that the government states it is. With online activity growing more every year, is the government’s eyes on it really as necessary as it makes it seem to be?