Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The right to privacy essay
Government regulation of the internet
Daniel j. solove why privacy matters
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The right to privacy essay
Privacy has been a problem throughout the American history. It is natural for people to want their own privacy without anyone or anything to see what they look up on the internet. The people of the United States thought that at one point in their life they had privacy and that the government wasn’t looking through their phone calls or internet history. Yet, in 2013 a man came out and told the people of America that the government has every call, internet history and more. This made the people freak out and hate the government. But the government should be allowed to regulate, monitor, and censor the internet for the safety and care of the citizens of the United States even though the people have the right to privacy. Safety is one of the reasons …show more content…
Facebook, Twitter, even Xbox One has been used to recruited and empower terrorists (Sable). This has spread hatred and fear among the United States. That is dangerous and the government needs to make sure ISIS doesn’t have the power to kill innocent lives. On the other hand, TIME argued: ...online service providers are not experts on terrorism. They’re businesses, not intelligence agencies. And there’s no magical bright line that separates “good” from “bad” speech, no mystical algorithm possessed by Facebook to figure out exactly what speech should be reported to the state....Shutting down the accounts of terrorist organizations would actually deprive the government of an important source of intelligence. And it would certainly deprive Americans of the ability to see and challenge the views of terrorist organizations. It is a grave mistake to expect or require private social media companies to act as arms of the national security state. There is problem here because the people want protection, but at the same time we want our privacy; Josh Earnest, White House Press Secretary, said, “We are going to resist the urge to …show more content…
The number of hackers is increasing at a very fast rate. Nationwide, companies have been hacked and robed of important information of the company and people. Hacking victims include the likes of Sony Network, Target, Twitter, Wal-Mart and universities like UCLA. The number of people getting hacked is growing, “21 percent of people – that’s one in five – had had an email or social networking account hacked”. The government has to come in the picture to stop all illegal hacking to big and important governments. The government itself has been hacked, a service or a retailer can get hacked or a government employee loses a briefcase containing a laptop with people’s unencrypted personal information. Information of the government has been stolen and it is most caused by hackers. When it comes to trying to protect the people from companies and agencies being hacked or losing data, it is like a plane with passengers. The government needs the permission of the people to make stronger there regulation on the internet. If the government doesn’t strengthen its regulation then America can be exposed to hackers around the world. The social media has been hacked to harm people reputations and to steal information like, address, phone number, and pictures. Hacking is illegal and is a safety issues that the government needs to fix. Bank accounts have been also been hacked and people have lost hundreds, thousands, even millions of dollars. In a
“There are about 3 billion phone calls made within the USA every day” (Romano). Now picture you’re calling your friend on the phone. Sometimes we can take small privilege like this for granted. Now imagine that the government is listening to every single phone conversation that we make. Why wouldn’t this scare you? I know it terrifies me. Wiretaps are a problem that concerns every single person in the country. But it isn’t just wiretaps; with a program called Prism the NSA has obtained direct access to the systems of Google, Facebook, Apple, and other US internet giants (Glenn). Everything we search for on Google, every message sent or received on Facebook, every item purchased on Apple is all seen by the NSA. The government is overusing their power to spy on its citizens and it needs to stop.
...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.
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.
In America we take freedom and privacy for granted, we as people are unable to comprehend how safe our country actually is, especially in today's society. With that being said there is something that we must all understand, in this age of technology if people are not surveillanced it puts everybody else in our country and the country itself at risk. There are aspects of our privacy and life that we have to sacrifice in order to secure the freedom that we do have. The NSA and U.S. government needs access to our private information in order to ensure the safety of our country and citizens.
And the problem the social media sites are helping the NSA when we have put all of our trust and that easily it could be revoked. According to Rob D 'Ovido “Having traded our freedoms for a phantom promise of security, government eyes” (D 'Ovido). For example, Cameron Dambrosio, a teenager from Massachusetts posted a video online a rap he made about the Boston marathon bombing, the rap had references to the white house and the bombing itself, which resulted in his getting arrested in May 2013, and charging him with communicating terrorist threats, which could land him a twenty year sentence. One cannot argue that he used foul language, and said words that were ill-mannered, but that does not give the right to officials to arrest people on a basis of rap. What happen with freedom of speech? People out in the middle east are uprooting entire regimes, because they are not giving them the basic human right, like freedom of speech or privacy. For an example, look at Egypt, they have over thrown an regime that ruled for 40 years. I am not comparing those awful regimes to our government, all we need is to calculate our choices more, and the government should have more faith in the citizens. We live in an era where we are being watched by surveillance cameras 24/7, and also having our calls being tapped. Even with all the peeping toms, censorship, and the spying, freedom of speech
Current advancements in technology has given the government more tools for surveillance and thus leads to growing concerns for privacy. The two main categories of surveillance technologies are the ones that allow the government to gather information where previously unavailable or harder to obtain, and the ones that allow the government to process public information more quickly and efficiently (Simmons, 2007). The first category includes technologies like eavesdropping devices and hidden cameras. These are clear offenders of privacy because they are capable of gathering information while being largely unnoticed. The second category would include technologies that are used in a public space, like cameras in a public park. While these devices
After the horrific incident on September 9, 2001, the Patriot Act was passed to help “reduce” terrorist attacks, but they have only restricted us from our rights and feeling free. Regardless of whether we have anything to hide, we deserve to feel comfortable in our own homes. They can even hack into our TVs and cameras! This is unacceptable! We have been dealing with the violation of our privacy due the Patriot Act, but this act led to the abuse of governments’ power, violation of our natural rights, and the government has been going through our texts, internet history, social media, which is breaching into the laws of the constitution.
I understand that you have tried to speak to Sandy about your feelings but she has just accused you of not wanting to listen or be there for her. Although, it will be difficult it is important push the topic and share your true feelings with Sandy. I truly believe that by disclosing your feelings it will lead to a more balanced friendship.
Since the founding of the United States, our outlook on the way it treats its citizens has not changed very tremendously. Apart from the abolishment of slavery, and various other corrupt practices which were fixed, well for the most part. The concept of birthrights and unalienable rights is not very farfetched, yet our government continuously attempts to impede these rights in an attempt that should not be tested. The right to privacy is a very serious concern and could be taken more heavily especially if it involves the safety of an individual or that of a nation, is no big difference, but the government should not go to the point of impeding our rights or freedoms to acquire these measures.
Some believe that privacy and safety can go hand in hand, while others believe you can 't have one without giving up another. In our ever growing and ever changing world, these two sides continue to drift further and further apart when we are forced to ask the question, “What is too much”? When it comes to personal liberties and privacy, how much should we allow into the government 's hands under the promise of national safety and security? The NSA’s recent scandal has put this in the forefront of every American’s mind. Before we as a nation make a decision, we should consider every side of the problem.
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.
“Everyone is connected. Everyone is vulnerable.” Despite the 21st century 's myriad of beneficial technological advances, this same technology has been being used against us; most of us have access to the internet whether via smartphones, tablets, and/or computers which the government can use to spy on us. The government has told us that, under the Foreign Surveillance Act they would strictly spy on only those who are likely to be terrorists, but they have admitted that was a lie and admitted that they have been spying on everyone, violating both the First and Fourth Amendments (i.e. our privacy without our consent ). And after telling the “truth”, they have set off a chain of lies each time admitting what they previously said was wrong.
Privacy is a right granted to all American citizens in the Fourth Amendment which states “people have the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and lives against unreasonable search and seizures”. Although our founding fathers could have never predicted the technological advancements we have achieved today, it would be logical to assume that a person's internet and phone data would be considered their effects. This would then make actions such as secretive government surveillance illegal because the surveillance is done so without probable cause and would be considered unreasonable search or seizure. Therefore, access to a citizen’s private information should only be provided using probable cause with the knowledge and consent of those who are being investigated.
Keeping your privacy is getting harder and harder to do, but even though the privacy setting can help to an extent, they don’t always work the way they should. Putting information out for the public eye to see can be a risk but could also be used to the Facebook users advantage. With this comes a loss of privacy that the user has to deal with. No matter how many privacy settings are used or are changed they never a guaranty of full privacy. The only real way to guaranty this is to stay away from social media completely. With that we would lose the connected world we have today.