Modified Annotated Bibliography #2 Boston.com, The Boston Globe, 2 Nov. 2007, archive.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/11/02/big_brother_meets_big_mother/. In Ellen Goodman’s article, “Big Brother meets Big Mother”, (2007) Goodman explains that parents are becoming to overprotective as time moves forward. Goodman supports her claim by showing the readers what parents are doing to know where their child is and what they are doing. Parents are buying electronics in order to stalk their children. Ellen Goodman tries to connect with the reader by stating that they both want the same thing, to end overprotected surveillance. I agree with Goodman’s claim that parents are getting to overprotective because parents are buying
technology that tracks your child and parents are confusing parenting and stalking. The first reason why I agree with Ellen Goodman’s article is because parents are buying electronics that track their children. Parents are buying technology like a jacket that has a sewn in GPS, IMSafer which is an app that tells you who your child is talking to and chips that are implanted into your child to track where they are at all times. The second reason why I agree with Goodman is because as time goes by parents are starting to become more overprotecting. “Indeed, the most common cellphone greeting is not “How are you?” but “Where are you?”. Parents are starting to become less trusting of their child and want to know where they are at all times by apps and other technology. Parents are buying electronics and confusing parenting to stalking and these are just two of the reasons why I agree with Goodman’s claim.
The expansion of the Internet infrastructure across the world, has brought an increased audience. Which has provided expanded markets for businesses and exploited new opportunities. There are virtually countless social sites and media used by individuals to access and share experiences , content, insights, and perspectives. Parents today tend to believe they should spy on their kids online activity. I argue parents should respect the privacy of a child's social life and his/her internet activity.
Internet is advancing every day, parents have no idea what their kids are doing in cyberspace and are contemplating the idea of spyware. In the article, “The Undercover Parent” by Harlan Coben, he argues the idea of parents putting spyware on kids’ computer is a good idea to keep the child safe. Many American parents have no idea what happens in cyberspace; sex, bullying, and drugs. Parents are torn between protecting their child with spyware and allowing the child to have privacy. Coben uses his friends’ personal experiences to support his argument without leaving room for counterarguments. By using strong emotional appeals, weak qualifiers, and sugary word choice Coben creates a weak argument that lacks persuasion.
Taylor, James Stacey. "In Praise of Big Brother: Why We Should Learn to Stop Worrying and Love Government Surveillance." Public Affairs Quarterly July 2005: 227-246.
Privacy is becoming rare as our society continues to become more industrialized and move towards a society hyper-focused on technology. Nicholas Carr explains this obsession with technology in his essay “Tracking Is an Assault on Liberty.” He identifies three dangers that are present in today’s internet society that are: personal data can fall into the wrong hands easily, personal information may be used to influence our behavior, and personal privacy is eroding and may lead us as a society to devalue the concept of privacy. These dangers are not only possible but they are seen in our world today.
It is the way of life in this age, to search the internet for leisure, research and general amusement. When you are not able to communicate with someone face to face, you pick up the phone. When you venture out of your house for any reason and into populated areas, you are recorded by businesses, photographed by red light cameras, and recorded by traffic cameras. The government has the capacity to watch all of this use. Last year, Edward Snowden’s leaked documents proved it that Big Brother is indeed watching. (Orwell 1)
Today, people constantly carry around cell phones or other forms of devices that allow them to connect with others electronically. While being connected to others in an instant is beneficial, there are far more problems that arouse because of this. As Cole states, “Our cellphones constantly apprise the phone company of where we are, and whom we are talking to and/or texting.” Because of this, it is a scare factor to citizens to know that they can be “watched” at any time along with their privacy. While this is true in today’s world, the Party in 1984 has taken
In 1948, George Orwell wrote about a society in which individual privacy was nonexistent. In this society, which he imagined would become a reality in the 1980s, surveillance was foremost. Everything one did was under surveillance by “Big Brother”, an unseen figure who was always watching you. Surveillance in this society was imposed and malicious. Although this type of society has never fully become a reality in the Western world, changes in technology and media are indirectly bringing this imagined society, one of complete surveillance, to life. With the rise in corporate business and commercialism, surveillance in society increasing; however, new media has brought about a significant shift in its use. In the 20th century, surveillance was primarily used for “protective measures”, as Orwell had imagined. In the 21st century, there has been a rise in its use for commercialism. This essay will critically analyze the developments in new media that have contributed to this shift, as well as explain the reason for the ubiquitous nature of surveillance in today’s western society. To aid with this analysis, surveillance will hereby be defined as a “focused, systematic, and routine attention to personal details for purposes of influence, management, protection or direction” (Lyon 2007:14).
Amy Gahran, a media consultant exploring communication in the technology era, writes about how cell phones are significant. She feels that cell phones have changed our lives by providing “…vital services and human connections…offer new hope, even through simple broadcast text messages” (Gahran). Gahran is insisting that cell phones allow us to learn news quickly, connect with safety, and can even fight crime through video recordings (Gahran). In addition, she feels that the overall benefits of owning a cell phone outweigh any negatives. This somewhat challenges the ideas presented by Rosen because it points out more benefits of cell phones. In “Our Cell Phones, Ourselves” Rosen mentions that although cell phones indeed connect us with safety, they can often lead to a sense of paranoia. To expand, she writes that parents who give children a cell phone for security purposes, develop a paranoid sense of their community and lose trust in “social institutions” (Rosen). In making this comment, Rosen argues that although cell phones may be beneficial, they can change the way we view our world. Without a cell phone, many individuals feel vulnerable, as if their phone protects them from all possible dangers that they may encounter. In fact, a Rutgers University professor challenged his students to power off their phones for 48 hours and report back with their experience (Rosen). Many felt almost lost without it and one young women described the feeling “…like I was going to get raped if I didn’t have my cell phone in my hand” (Rosen). In reality, having a cell phone will not save a person’s life in all situations. Although many, including Gahran, feel a phone is a vital tool, it has changed how we feel about the world around us and how vulnerable we feel without a phone in
Bradford, Bryan and Mark Krumholz. Telecommunications and Decency: Big Brother goes Digital. Business Today Spring 1996 : 12-16.
Ever since day one, people have been developing and creating all sorts of new methods and machines to help better everyday life in one way or another. Who can forget the invention of the ever-wondrous telephone? And we can’t forget how innovative and life-changing computers have been. However, while all machines have their positive uses, there can also be many negatives depending on how one uses said machines, wiretapping in on phone conversations, using spyware to quietly survey every keystroke and click one makes, and many other methods of unwanted snooping have arisen. As a result, laws have been made to make sure these negative uses are not taken advantage of by anyone. But because of how often technology changes, how can it be known that the laws made so long ago can still uphold proper justice? With the laws that are in place now, it’s a constant struggle to balance security with privacy. Privacy laws should be revised completely in order to create a better happy medium between security and privacy. A common misconception of most is that a happy medium of privacy and security is impossible to achieve. However, as well-said by Daniel Solove, “Protecting privacy doesn’t need to mean scuttling a security measure. Most people concerned about the privacy implications of government surveillance aren’t arguing for no[sic] surveillance and absolute privacy. They’d be fine giving up some privacy as long as appropriate controls, limitations, oversight and accountability mechanisms were in place.”(“5 Myths about Privacy”)
Rosen, Christine. "The Parents Who Don't Want To Be Adults." Commentary 127.7 (2009): 31. MAS Ultra - School Edition. Web. 13 Dec. 2013.
The inevitable truth about our technological advances has become an ongoing controversial dilemma. It begs to question whether or not our technology is taking us closer to the world of Big Brother. It even subjects us to address all the pros and cons this said technology, as a whole, has to offer. These days when people talk to each other, some no longer share eye contact because they are too busy on social media, texting, checking emails, looking for the next big thing, and so forth. Many people are blinded by the fancy & entertaining applications, availability of gps, and most importantly, being able to surf the web at the palm of their hands, but little do they know that those
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.
These individuals feel that it is an invasion of the teenagers’ right to privacy and the development of their trustworthiness. Kay Mathieson states “only by giving children privacy will they come to see their thoughts as something that belongs to them – to which they have an exclusive right.” In the United States and according to the law, monitoring the internet usage of a minor does not break any laws and is a moral obligation of the parent. Trustworthiness is an important development of a child to learn in order to develop genuine relationships with others in the lifetime. “Not only does monitoring have the great potential to undermine the trust of the child in the parent, and thus to undermine trust in others more generally, it also has the potential to undermine the capacity of the child to be worth of trust” (Mathieson). If the parent has not already had conversations with the teenager about monitoring internet usage and the parent is not telling the child about the monitoring, there is already an issue with the development of trustworthiness in the teenager. There was already a failure of development of this skill before the internet or internet monitoring was introduced.
supervision or no parental limits, our nation’s youth will be so caught up in the power of