The Controversy of Wikileaks: Right to Free Speech versus Right to Privacy Wikileaks creates a great amount of discussion on the private information it releases to the public. Not only does it cause a debate over the content of the site, but also many other issues it raises; the newspaper articles presented add to the ongoing controversy of the Wikileaks site. The argument of whether Wikileaks has the right to reveal certain private information or not creates the biggest controversy; the discussion comes down to personal privacy rights versus First Amendment rights. In his article, “Where’s the Wikileaks Outrage?,” Michael A. Cohen defines Wikileaks as “a threat to our already shrinking zone of privacy” and suggests that it unrightfully strips people of their right to privacy. He claims that personal data that is not safe to be posted on the Wikileaks site, which illustrates an invasion of privacy and an attack on privacy rights; in order to support his claim, he uses the Sony leaks as an example. The article provides a relevant argument about Wikileaks’ effect on people’s privacy rights; it is a valid example of the major controversy of the …show more content…
supports Wikileaks’ First Amendment right and claims that the exposure of the private information of the government enhances the condition of our democracy. W.W. writes this article to oppose a co-blogger and believes that Wikileaks is beneficial in informing the American people of important information that the government may classify in order to hide mistakes. The author asserts that Wikileaks plays an important role in ensuring that the people know and understand the moves of the government and why they are made. This article offers a respectful acknowledgement of the opposing argument; therefore, it seems to be a trustworthy piece to someone who is researching Wikileaks, the information it releases, and the importance of people’s knowledge of this
There are a bunch of conspiracies in this world and there's a few on the tragedy that happened on September 11, 2001. One of the theories is that inside traders knew about the attacks before they happened. As said in an article, “in the days before 9/11 there was a huge increase in the number of put options purchased on their airlines, compared to the normal average daily volume.”(Davis) Before I explain what that means the article also mentioned, “ this huge increase in the volume of put options suggests that the people buying these put options knew in advance that 9/11 was about to happen.” (Davis) What the quotes are saying, is that a few days before 9/11, out of nowhere, there was an huge increase in the airlines, that were hijacked, stock markets. The conspiracy theory is that the government was aware of the attacks the entire time but because they were making profit, this did nothing about it.
McCraw, David, and Stephen Gikow. “The End to a Unspoken Bargain? National Security and Leaks in a Post-Pentagon Papers World.” Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review 48.2 (2013): 473-509. Academic OneFile. Web. 5 Dec. 2013.
The movie Shock Doctrine revolves around the concept of the same name. The film begins by discussing psychological research on the effects of shock therapy. It is evident that a person under extreme stress and anxiety commonly experienced during a crisis functions and performs inadequately. It is noted that the studies are conducted by a man by the name of Milton Friedman, from the University of Chicago; the studies took place in the past, and some of the subjects are still recovering in the aftermath. From this research, interrogation techniques were learned and the concept of the shock doctrine was formed. Essentially through causing a crisis, the population of a country can be shocked into complying with accepting laws that favors the United States and capitalism. This theory coexists with Friedman’s belief in that government regulation is bad, and through a crisis a country would better itself with deregulation. The video uses Chile as an example and shows how America allowed a crisis to occur in Chile, through coups, interrogations and subterfuge. In the end a new government is formed that allows capitalism. Unfortunately afterwards violence and riots occur, as the rich gain most of the wealth and poverty rises. In addition to Chile, Argentina, Russia and even Iraq underwent the shock doctrine. Almost in every account, poverty rises and violence ends up erupting. The movie ends by showing how the US was in the process of the shock doctrine, and still is but the population has taken notice. Protests such as Occupy Wall Street are some of the initiatives necessary to bring awareness to the problems of class inequalities in order to prevent capitalism from benefitting the rich and increasing the wealth gap among the classes.
Is the American government trustworthy? Edward Joseph Snowden (2013) released to the United States press* selected information about the surveillance of ordinary citizens by the U.S.A.’s National Security Agency (N.S.A.), and its interconnection to phone and social media companies. The motion picture Citizenfour (2014), shows the original taping of those revelations. Snowden said that some people do nothing about this tracking because they have nothing to hide. He claims that this inverts the model of responsibility. He believes that everyone should encrypt Internet messages and abandon electronic media companies that track personal information and Internet behavior (op.cit, 2014). Snowden also stressed to Lawrence Lessig (2014) the importance of the press and the first amendment (Lessig – Snowden Interview Transcript, [16:28]). These dynamics illustrate Lessig’s (2006) constrain-enable pattern of powers that keep society in check (2006, Code: Version 2.0, p. 122). Consider Lessig’s (2006) question what is “the threat to liberty?” (2006, p. 120). Terrorism is a real threat (Weber, 2013). Surveillance by social media and websites, rather than the government, has the greater negative impact on its users.
Edward Snowden is America’s most recent controversial figure. People can’t decide if he is their hero or traitor. Nevertheless, his leaks on the U.S. government surveillance program, PRISM, demand an explanation. Many American citizens have been enraged by the thought of the government tracing their telecommunication systems. According to factbrowser.com 54% of internet users would rather have more online privacy, even at the risk of security (Facts Tagged with Privacy). They say it is an infringement on their privacy rights of the constitution. However, some of them don’t mind; they believe it will help thwart the acts of terrorists. Both sides make a good point, but the inevitable future is one where the government is adapting as technology is changing. In order for us to continue living in the new digital decade, we must accept the government’s ability to surveil us.
With the introduction of the internet being a relatively new phenomenon, the act of cyber espionage is not something that has been properly acknowledged by society. The American Government has done a stand up job of keeping its methods in the shadows and away from the eyes of its people since its documented domestic surveillance began on October 4th, 2001; Twenty three days after the Twin Towers fell President George Bush signed an order to begin a secret domestic eavesdropping operation, an operation which was so sensitive that even many of the country's senior national security officials with the...
In early June 2013, Edward Snowden, a 29-year-old former defense contractor who had access to NSA database while working for an intelligence consulting company, leaked classified documents reports that the National Security Agency (NSA) is recording phone calls of millions of Americans along with gathering private data and spying foreign Internet activity. The Washington Post later broke the news disclosed PRISM, a program can collect data on Internet users. The leaked documents publicly stated a vast objection. Many people were shocked by the scale of the programs, even elected representatives were unaware of the surveillance range. A nationwide debate over privacy rights have been sparked. Although supporters claim that the NSA only does its best to protect the United States from terrorists as well as respecting Americans' rights and privacy, many civil rights advocates feel that the government failed to be clear about the limit of the surveillance programs, threatening Americans' civil...
On September 11, 2001 terrorists crashed two American airline airplanes into Twin Towers, killing thousands of people. It was the worst terrorist attack in American history and it showed us that we are not protected by Atlantic and Pacific. It showed us that we could be attacked by anyone at anytime. It showed us that if we will be attacked again that we can only depend on each other and not on other nations to help us. The 9/11 changed people forever, some lost family members or friends, others lost their jobs even so called “American Dream.”
Edward Snowden. This is a name that will be in the history books for ages. He will be branded a traitor or a whistleblower depending on where you look. Many Americans feel that Edward Snowden is a traitor who sold the United States’ secrets aiming to harm the nation. Others believe that he was simply a citizen of the United States who exercised his right to expose the government for their unconstitutional actions. It is important to not only know the two sides to the argument of friend or foe, but to also know the facts as well. My goal in this paper is to present the facts without bias and to adequately portray the two sides of the argument.
Edward Snowden, the former National Security Agency (N.S.A) subcontractor turned whistle-blower is nothing short of a hero. His controversial decision to release information detailing the highly illegal ‘data mining’ practices of the N.S.A have caused shockwaves throughout the world and have raised important questions concerning how much the government actually monitors its people without their consent or knowledge. Comparable to Mark Felt in the Watergate scandals, Daniel Ellsberg with the Pentagon Papers, Edward Snowden joins the rank of infamous whistleblowers who gave up their jobs, livelihood, and forever will live under scrutiny of the public all in the service to the American people. Edward Snowden released information detailing the extent of the N.S.A breaches of American privacy and in doing so, became ostracized by the media and barred from freely reentering America, his home country.
Journalist or Terrorist Julian Assange, an Australian editor, activist, journalist and publisher, launched the WikiLeaks website in the year 2006. From that moment, the site spiraled rapidly into the limelight all over the world. It then came to be known as the most powerful whistle-blowing and also the most scandalous “media” in the online world. WikiLeaks profans and violates the right of privacy, right of accountability and confidentiality among Information and data sharing also it has a negative impact on governments, private sectors or businesses and also individuals, there is also a big question of accountability. Right of privacy, right of accountability and confidentiality are some of the rights that you acquire being a citizen of the country and when these rights are violated it is an offence.
The attacks on American soil that solemn day of September 11, 2001, ignited a quarrel that the grade of singular privacy, need not be given away in the hunt of grander security. The security measures in place were planned to protect our democracy and its liberties yet, they are merely eroding the very existence with the start of a socialistic paradigm. Benjamin Franklin (1759), warned more than two centuries ago: “they that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Implementing security measures comes at a cost both economically and socially. Government bureaucrats can and will utilize information for personal political objectives. The Supreme Court is the final arbitrator of what the ‘law is”, causing a lack of circulated rule. The actual leaders with political purposes jeopardize our individual privacy rights, liberties, and freedoms.
James Madison once said “Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.” To gain a better understanding of a society, one must gain knowledge of the needs and wants the citizens’ demand from the country’s representatives. In every country the needed to protect its citizens is the same. In some nations, security is a higher priority which causes sacrifices to be made to obtain an indefinite protection against all rivals. In Peter Singer’s essay titled “Visible Man: Ethics in a World without Secrets” he states that there is a way that governments can collect information by using technology; to allow more ‘openness’ and exposure as an increase of unknown surveillance that the public is not aware of. Singer’s essay also talks about how also with the rise of secrecy within politics; organizations such as ‘WikiLeaks’ and ‘Anonymous’ reveal to the world what is really going on within their privacy. Benefits come from both sides in a world where surveillance exists to the highest priority with or without privacy.
The world erupted in outrage following revelations by Edward Snowden regarding the extent of surveillance perform by the National Security Agency. Privacy becomes one of the hottest topic of 2013 and was chosen by the world’s most popular online dictionary, Dictionary.com, as the Word of the Year. However, the government is not the only one that conduct data gathering and surveillance. Employers often monitor their employees, and businesses collect data on theirs customer. The morality of these practices is a topic that generates heated debate.
It is reasonable to argue that, governmental institutions or people with authority are subject to withhold a great deal of information from society. Many may argue that secrets are kept to ensure the safety of the nation. Thus, upholding the governmental duty of protecting the nation against possible threats. On the other hand, many believe that secrets may exist which violate our constitutional rights. Over the last year, Edward Snowden, has made headline news for leaking sensitive governmental information to the press. Edward Snowden is a 29-year-old high school drop-out, who was a tech specialist for the National Security Association. Snowden had discovered and later exposed the NSA for monitoring the nations e-mails, phone calls, and internet searches. As the allegations spread like wild fire, Edward Snowden sought asylum in Russia for one year. Snowden had a valid and justifiable reason to expose the NSA to the world because they were in violation of our fourth Amendment rights to unreasonable searches and seizures. The government called him a traitor, while others viewed him as a hero for exposing the government. Edward Snowden is a whistle blower because he felt that it is up to society to decide if governmental practices are just or unjust. Snowden does “express the highest respect for the law”, and he wanted to protect the right of privacy for American citizens.