Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Need for internet censorship
Government regulation and surveillance of internet
Internet censorship wrongs
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Need for internet censorship
" Internet Content
The internet content that we create as Americans are not private. Nothing on the internet is private, once it is given to the digital world you can’t get it back. The question is to what extent can the federal and local government have the duty to monitor internet content? This is a very sensitive question to the people of the United States because of what happened years ago with Edward Snowden. From the knowledge that Mr. Snowden provided for us, we have come to realize that the government has already been watching us without our permission for several years. In my opinion, the government can look all they want, I just believe they shouldn’t say anything about what we do as citizens if it's not illegal. On one side of this debate, many may say that the government watching us is invading our privacy and takes our freedom away as U.S citizens. That’s very true, knowing that the government is watching everything you do is invading our privacy. Parents are more concerned with “ Big Brother†watching because they know that their children are being watched. People now feel the need to watch everything they do because
…show more content…
What they might not understand is that the government is monitoring the internet for our safety. How else would the government find terrorists, school shooters, and other people that can harm citizens? While monitoring the internet, yes the government can see things that we do. Some of those things that we do we might want to hide or hide them thinking that no one can see them but the government can. The question is, is the government even going to care about what you do on the internet as long as it isn't illegal? They aren’t necessarily looking for you or your secrets, they are focused on looking for the bigger problem, looking to find someone who is a danger to
...rk with us. This can have a major impact on the economy, and may eventually lead to a weakened nation overall. However, it can be argued that the United States is not acting hypocritical through mass surveillance over the internet. While there's some overlap of the issues, the existence of surveillance does not cut off the freedom of speech on the Internet."One can recognize... there is a very large difference between censorship and spying... On some level, we know that spying and espionage is going to take place. This still doesn't mean we promote censorship." (Verveer, 2013) Undoubtedly, the censorship by the agency over the internet may make users think twice about what opinions to express, but as long as no major crimes are being planned, then the agency will not really care about what is said online, and internet users are free to say whatever they would like.
Government seems to take away more privacy than they say they protect. In 1984 the citizens were constantly being monitored no matter where they were, there was no escape. "It was terribly dangerous to let your thoughts wander when you were in any public place or within range of a telescreen. The smallest thing could give you away" (Orwell 62). Members of the party were constantly being monitored, at even the slight sign of disloyalty they would be apprehended by the Thought Police, striking fear into the people. People had no privacy due to the government and this can now be seen today. Referring to the NSA "The agency has circumvented or cracked much of the encryption, or digital scrambling, that guards global commerce and banking systems, protects sensitive data like trade secrets and medical records, and automatically secures the e-mails, Web searches, Internet chats and phone calls of Americans and others around the world"(Lopez np). Growing use of internet and technology makes it easier for the government to spy on us. Like in 1984 they will soon be able to track our every move. There is no way to completely remove ourselves from technology, there's are steps to take to protect privacy. A solution is to keep more records on paper instead of online. Also, what is posted on social networks should be limited. The less information you give them, the less the government knows.
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.
How much privacy do we as the American people truly have? American Privacy is not directly guaranteed in any manner under the United States Constitution; however, by the Fourth Amendment, Americans are protected from illegal search and seizure. So then isn’t it ironic that in today’s modern world, nothing we do that it is in any way connected to the internet is guaranteed to remain discreet? A Google search, an email, a text message, or even a phone call are all at risk of being intercepted, traced, geo located, documented, and stored freely by the government under the guise of “protecting” the American people. Quite simply, the Government in order to protect us and our rights, is willing to make a hypocrite of itself and act as though our right is simply a privilege, and without any form of consent from the people, keep virtual tabs on each and every one of us. In the words of Former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis “The right to privacy is a person's right to be left alone by the government... the right most valued by civilized men." Privacy isn’t just Privilege, it is nonnegotiable right, and deserves to be treated as such.
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
President Obama insisted that the government is not invading privacy but is just looking for potential terrorist activities that can be thwarted by preemptive measures. Even after this statement by the President there are those who speculate that the government is "snooping" into their lives and monitoring their internet activity. Although there is this paranoia that the government is "watching", it may actually make people more aware of what they do on their computers and cause them to practice safer internet browsing techniques.
Whether the U.S. government should strongly keep monitoring U.S. citizens or not still is a long and fierce dispute. Recently, the debate became more brutal when technology, an indispensable tool for modern live, has been used by the law enforcement and national security officials to spy into American people’s domestic.
Nowadays it’s hard to live a secret life. Every move we make is being watched. National security is the main reason why we are being surveyed. Our world has transformed to an internet revolution. We are engaged much in social media and internet more than ever. People are able to incite a revolution like the one in Egypt in recent years. The world we live in is much different to what it was twenty years ago. Internet changed the power of information exchange between us. Social media’s like Facebook and twitter connects the world tremendously. People exchange information in a matter of seconds. Therefore, the question becomes: Should our government go through our private emails and social media?
In conclusion, it is important that parents give their freedom to make sure kids learn to be independent and now days most teens spend a lot of their time in the internet so by parents not letting them have their privacy there, they are taking over all their lives without even giving them a chance to “explored their identity and the world” like Boyd mention. Parents, need to realize that by over protecting their kids is like sending them to war without weapons because they will not know how to confront the world and worst of all they will not know they things they are capable of doing by themselves.
The government gives each American citizen a set of unalienable rights that protect them from the government’s power. These rights cannot be broken, yet the government violates the Fourth Amendment daily to find ways to spy on the American public under the guise of protecting against terrorism. In 2007 President Obama said the American administration “acts like violating civil liberties is the way to enhance our securities – it is not.” Americans need to understand that their privacy is worth the fight. The people need to tell their neighbors, their congressmen, and their senators that they will not allow their internet privacy to be violated by needless spying. American citizens deserve the rights given to them and need to fight for the right to keep them by changing privacy laws to include Internet privacy.
There should be no such thing online which would prevent you from showing to the government. Illegal images, prurient videos, cyber bullying, cyber fraud should all be prevented and should not be free for all. It should not be used as a weapon. The society should be protected against all these dangers. It is not a big deal for us to give up a little of our liberties in exchange for some given protections to our fellow citizens. This great amount of freedom is not really leading to anything positive or benefiting us to a great
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
...onal privacy dead?” brings up many other questions along with it. But there is no doubt that the government is doing all of what they are doing for safety reasons. They claim to want to make the United States as safe as possible, and this has proved to ring true in many situations. But now the inevitable new question becomes: How far is too far? Is safety more important than privacy? To know these answers, one must ask themselves and know their own opinion on the situation. But whatever their answers may be, and despite the multiple other questions that are brought up along with the topic of personal privacy, there is still one thing that is known for sure: personal privacy is dead. And unless the use of technology becomes less critical to the United States, personal privacy will always be dead. The bigger the role technology has; the less personal privacy there is.
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.