More handpicked essays just for you.
Technology and its impact on society
Technology and its impact on society
Technology and its impact on society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
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.
One type of surveillance is employee monitoring. Many employers monitor their workers’ activities for one reason or another. Companies monitor employees using many methods. They may use access panels that requires employees to identify themselves to control entry to various area in the building, allowing them to create a log of employee movements. They may also use software to monitor attendance and work hours. Additionally, many programs allows companies to monitor activities performed on work computers, inspect employee emails, log keystrokes, etc. An emerging methods of employee monitor also include social network and search engine monitoring. Employers can find out who their employees are associated with, as well as other potentially incriminating information. (Ciocchetti)
Employees are not the only people whose information interest companies. To a far greater extent, businesses are looking to gather data on their users and the market in general. User data collection has become one of the most important components of market research. For example, online retailers can use data collected from a consumer’s purchase to target advertising on products that the consumer is most likely to buy....
... middle of paper ...
... potentially criminal. Similar to the collection of consumer data, the information gathered by the government is also subject to abuse by people who are granted access privilege. For example, in 2007, a federal agent was charged with using a government database to track the travel pattern of his ex-girlfriend (Lee).
Ultimately, however, surveillance is only a tool that can be used both ethically and unethically. Employee monitoring, consumer data collection, and government surveillance provides great benefits, including improving company efficiency, providing commercial and health values, and protecting the nation from threats. However, when considering the extent to which surveillance can be done, the rights of the people affected must be taken into account. Finding the right balance between these two views is the key to maximizing the benefits of everyone involved.
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.
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.
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.
The NSA and U.S. government sifting through our private information is but a small inconvenience that we must sacrifice in order to protect our own freedom and safety. Domestic Surveillance roots back to the 1910’s, where the assassination of President McKinley, created a Bureau of Investigation that would trace the efforts of the Communists attempting an uprising in America. This would be the foundings behind Domestic Surveillance in America, and would continue on after World War II where the government created the NSA and CIA, with the main purposes
The America Government is not carrying out immoral, illegal or unethical acts by collecting data on its citizens. However, history has shown that such collections of data without correct supervision can easily be used in an unethical manner.
Online data tracking good because it allows companies such as Google, Yahoo, and Twitter to give you customize Internet service for better experiences. Online tracking allows advertisers to precisely target their consumer’s needs based on their b...
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).
The deontological ethical system, ethical formalism, articulates that what is considered moral is the motive or intent of the actor and not the consequence of the action (Pollock, 2012 pg 26). Philosopher Immanuel Kant states that the only thing that is good is good will, if a person does an act from good will; it can be considered moral action even if it results in bad consequences. Kant states that you should treat people as ends in themselves and not as only means to an end. In order to examine if governmental monitoring is ethical from a Kantian perspective, an examination of the why government is monitoring its citizens must be discussed.
Mass surveillance is a word that has been thrown around every so often in the last few decades, especially ever since George Orwell’s book Nineteen Eighty-Four. Although this book was released over 60 years ago, some aspects of the book are seeming to become true in the United States, and other parts of the world today. The idea of mass surveillance isn’t so taboo anymore, as there are several programs ran by sovereign countries around the world which monitor their domestic citizens, as well as citizens and leaders of other foreign countries. With all of our technological communication advances since 1949, this age of information is only going to get more severe, and more tracking and monitoring will be done. The biggest offender of doing this is the NSA, shortened for National Security Agency. The NSA is an organization that was made by the US Government to monitor intelligence, and collect, translate and decode information. What’s important about the NSA, is that this most recent summer, a program named PRISM was revealed by a whistleblower, and in summary, PRISM monitors everything it can, including our own citizens in the United States. This “scandal” had a lot of air time for many months, and is still in the news today. The revelation of what the NSA is doing behind our backs is what made the basis of this essay, and made me think of how similar this entire situation is to Nineteen Eighty-Four.
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”). The fight for privacy rights is by no means a recent conflict.
25 Privacy Rights Clearinghouse (2002) Employee Monitoring: Is There Privacy in the Workplace? . (6/3/2004)
Akash Rathod Wednesday Class Paragraph 1: Thesis Domestic surveillance is a very controversial topic that has many benefits yet it can also produce many negative results. The use of domestic surveillance can lead to the infringement or loss of privacy of many people. It perpetuates more hacking being done in encryption backdoors thus leading to cyber warfare, which can result in extinction of all life on Earth, and it strains the power and global trust the United States has as an Internet leader. Also, surveillance can violate the democracy in the United States.
Across genres and even within genres surveillance is presented in a multitude of ways and in diverse contexts. People feel entitled to keep surveillance on the world around them, to feel safe and secure, but feel as though their rights are being infringed on when they are the one being watched. There is a fine line between security and freedom, and one cannot expect both without sacrificing pieces of
There has always been surveillance of the general public conducted by the United States government, the usual justifications being upholding the security of the nation , weeding out those who intend to bring harm to the nation, and more. But the methods for acquiring such information on citizens of the united states were not very sophisticated many years ago so the impact of government surveillance was not as great. As a result of many technological advancements today the methods for acquiring personal information - phone metadata, internet history and more - have become much simpler and sophisticated. Many times, the information acquired from different individuals is done so without their consent or knowledge. The current surveillance of people
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.