Privacy in a Digital World
The history of privacy in the United States is a storied one. The context of the 4
th
Amendment to the Constitution has been debated for years to determine if the “right to
privacy” is a constitutionally guaranteed right. Additionally, many people are
technologically ignorant of what behaviors and activities will put them at risk.
The “Carnivore” is a good example of an historic digital technology that
generated privacy concerns. The Carnivore was a digital intelligence gathering tool that
was supposed to be used by the FBI to fight crime. People’s concerns about the tool
were so vocal, however, it was never used.
Currently, there are specific laws governing the protection of digital privacy. In
some cases, these laws protect the individual, and in others, they protect the
corporation or government entity intending to use digitally collected data to their
advantage. The Electronic Communication Privacy Act of 1986 and the Freedom of
Information Act of 1966 both address some privacy concerns.
One way digital privacy is compromised every day is the use of social or
professional networking sites. MySpace, Facebook, and other sites provide increased
access to people’s personal lives and information.
1
Page 2
The advent of electronic mail has also brought additional concerns to the
forefront. Do employees have the right to privacy in their work-related electronic mail?
And is electronic mail used by governmental agencies to be considered part of the
public record?
The future of digital privacy is extremely uncertain. While corporations and
government entities continue to try and compromise individual privacy, many people are
still unaware of the risks inherent in using digital me...
... middle of paper ...
...d Garson, 271-298. Hershey:
Idea Group Publishing, 2003.
SPSS, http://www.spss.com/
“Spying on the Homefront,” Frontline, PBS (Boston: WGBH Educational Foundation),
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/homefront/view/ (accessed September
28, 2007).
”The Patriot Act.” Jurisprudence: The Law, Lawyers, and the Court. Washington DC:
Slate, Washington Post/Newsweek Interactive, 2003.
http://www.slate.com/id/2087984/ (accessed September 28, 2007).
Tyson, Jeff. “How Carnivore Worked.” How Stuff Works. Atlanta: howstuffworks.com,
1998.2007. http://computer.howstuffworks.com/carnivore4.htm (accessed
1998.2008. September 28, 2007).
United States Department of Justice, http://www.usdoj.gov
Waldo, James, Lin, Herbert S., Millett, Lynette I, eds. Engaging Privacy and Information
Technology in a Digital Age. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press,
2007.
5
Latino grassroots politics in the academic realm has been considered as predominantly Chicano in nature. However, the geometry of this academic sector is no longer one dimensional, due to the formation of a Chicana feminist consciousness; the rise of an identified gay community within the Chicana/o student populace; and the emergence of “Latinos” in era of Chicanismo, The abrupt growth of Latinos (e.g. Spanish speaking of Mexican, Central or Latin American decent) in the United State’s educational system led the general population to characterize them as subjects on the cusps of political power and influence. But this widespread depiction of Latinos as an untapped potential is intrinsically linked to an impression of civic cohesion within the Latino student population. Although there is a correspondence between these parties in terms of the alienation they have felt and the discrimination they have endured throughout their academic careers, there is a minimal collective effort in confronting against their oppressive status. This is mainly a result of conflicting ideologies and social agendas within the Latino student community, as well as the relegation of Hispanic subgroups into the lower echelons. Latino students, nevertheless, have demonstrated their capacity, when both Chicanos and the marginalized Hispanic subgroups join efforts to reach a communal objective. This debunks the historical notion that Chicano students are the only group of Hispanics in the academic sphere that have been actively challenging the processes of social exclusion, and also displays the capacity of a collaborative effort.
Most importantly, U.S Citizen's fourth amendment provided under the U.S constitution protects the people's privacy from being invaded. H...
But not only is it difficult to prove that corporations are more efficient with their privacy than individuals are, this also circles back to the policy’s affect on individual autonomy. And I believe it is necessary for Posner to consider the implications of his argument for humanity: an ethics argument that does not propose the betterment of society is unlikely to lead to better laws. For although Posner could use his claim that “history does not teach that privacy is a precondition to creativity or individuality” to argue against privacy’s relation to autonomy, it is inevitable that his policy would impact society for good or bad (Posner 407). Posner needs to address the effect by presenting contemporary evidence to support the view that privacy is unimportant to human emotion and individuality since his historical argument is irrelevant. Early philosophers such as Aristotle recognized the important “distinction between the public sphere of political action and the private sphere associated with family and domestic life,” and so while privacy may not have looked the same in these past societies, it nevertheless did exist (DeCew). Since cultures and social conditions have changed dramatically since Aristotle’s time, it is difficult to make a relevant comparison between privacy then and
The personal connection Americans have with their phones, tablets, and computers; and the rising popularity of online shopping and social websites due to the massive influence the social media has on Americans, it is clear why this generation is called the Information Age, also known as Digital Age. With the Internet being a huge part of our lives, more and more personal data is being made available, because of our ever-increasing dependence and use of the Internet on our phones, tablets, and computers. Some corporations such as Google, Amazon, and Facebook; governments, and other third parties have been tracking our internet use and acquiring data in order to provide personalized services and advertisements for consumers. Many American such as Nicholas Carr who wrote the article “Tracking Is an Assault on Liberty, With Real Dangers,” Anil Dagar who wrote the article “Internet, Economy and Privacy,” and Grace Nasri who wrote the article “Why Consumers are Increasingly Willing to Trade Data for Personalization,” believe that the continuing loss of personal privacy may lead us as a society to devalue the concept of privacy and see privacy as outdated and unimportant. Privacy is dead and corporations, governments, and third parties murdered it for their personal gain not for the interest of the public as they claim. There are more disadvantages than advantages on letting corporations, governments, and third parties track and acquire data to personalized services and advertisements for us.
Privacy (Pri-va-cy) n.1.the state or condition of being free from being observed or disturbed by other people. Americans fear that technological progress will destroy the concept of privy. The first known use of wiretap was in 1948. It’s no secret that the government watches individuals on a daily bases. According to the constitution, the Fourth Amendment serves to protect the people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. Unreasonable is the word that tips the balance On one side is the intrusion on individuals’ Fourth Amendment rights and the other side is legitimate government interests, such as public safety. What we consider reasonable by law, the government might not think so. The word ‘privacy’ seems to be non-existent today in the 21st century; the use and advances of technology have deprived us of our privacy and given the government the authority to wiretap and or intervene in our lives. Our natural rights we’ve strived for since the foundation of this nation are being slashed down left to right when we let the government do as they wish. The government should not be given the authority to intervene without a reasonable cause and or consent of the individual
Privacy is a human right that must always be maintained. However, with continuously advancing technology, surveillance is only becoming easier. In current society, many are unaware of the power the government has over accessing information. Many also do not think that this is an important issue in today’s world. The well-known novel, 1984, by George Orwell reflects heavily on this issue. It illustrates a world where there is a complete totalitarian government. Similarly, The Truman Show starring Jim Carrey, is about the character Truman Burbank who unknowingly has a television show revolve around his entire life. These two stories demonstrate the extremes surveillance can lead to if not addressed properly. With the revolutionary increase of technology in today’s society, it is undeniable that government surveillance has a ubiquitous presence. These two stories contain haunting messages where they warn of the outcomes that are associated with the abuse of power. There are a
The word “privacy” did not grow up with us throughout history, as it was already a cultural concept by our founding fathers. This term was later solidified in the nineteenth century, when the term “privacy” became a legal lexicon as Louis Brandeis (1890), former Supreme Court justice, wrote in a law review article, that, “privacy was the right to be let alone.” As previously mentioned in the introduction, the Supreme Court is the final authority on all issues between Privacy and Security. We started with the concept of our fore fathers that privacy was an agreed upon concept that became written into our legal vernacular. It is being proven that government access to individual information can intimidate the privacy that is at the very center of the association between the government and the population. The moral in...
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”)
Previously it took a lot of equipment to monitor a person's actions, but now with technology's development and advancement all it requires is a computer. And there are many mediums which can be monitored such as telephones, email, voice mail, and computers.4 People's rights are protected by many laws, but in private businesses there are few laws protecting an individual's rights. 5 As an employee of a company there is an understanding of the amount of monitoring the employer does. The employer has to decide how much monitoring is necessary to satisfy the company needs without damaging the company's employee morale.6 With all the monitoring done by private businesses they are free to violate employee privacy since the Constitution and the Bill of Rights a...
LeRoux, Yves. "Privacy concerns in the digital world." 03 Oct 2013. Computer Weekly. 24 April 2014 .
As society has progressed, there have been many new innovative and unbelievable developments in almost all aspects of life that have ultimately created an impact. More specifically, advancements in technology have rather had a much larger and intense impact on society as it continues to grow. Technology has allowed for many great and useful applications that has made life much easier and convenient. However, many aspects of technology have given a rise to a number of social and ethical issues, causing numerous debates and concerns. One of the more prominent concerns deals with the issue of privacy rights.
Perhaps the founder of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, said it best when he claimed that privacy is no longer a “social norm.” Virtually everyone has a smart phone and everyone has social media. We continue to disclose private information willingly and the private information we’re not disclosing willingly is being extracted from our accounts anyway. Technology certainly makes these things possible. However, there is an urgent need to make laws and regulations to protect against the stuff we’re not personally disclosing. It’s unsettling to think we are living in 1984 in the 21st century.
Digital privacy concerns, which have been a major issue in our country since 2001, increasingly violate our basic human rights as global citizens. The growing amount of government surveillance has manifested in the enactment of acts such as SOPA and CISPA. Although their intent on stopping digital piracy and attacks were clear, both were immediately met with harsh criticism; they allowed big corporations to violate our privacy rights by sharing our personal information with both other companies and the government. Our President, although publicly expressing his acknowledgement of the issue, failed to discuss an array of other pressing dilemmas regulated by the recently exposed National Security Agency (NSA), especially those involving the mass data stockpiles and the rights of foreigners against immoderate and disproportionate surveillance by the US. Furthermore, the intentions of the NSA still remain unclear; why is the collection and the extended retention of this data useful? Those in power believe that the collection of this information allows them to preempt terrorist attacks; a very difficult claim to prove. Our lack of clear answers demonstrate the need for a larger audience who support government transparency. The NSA’s misconduct has dealt multiple blows to the rights of millions both at home and abroad, and the amount of secrecy involving this agency shrouds it in obscurity, inhibiting public debate about these crucial matters.
In September 25, 1789, the First Amendment protects people’s privacy of beliefs without government intrusion. The Fourth Amendment protects one’s person and possessions from unreasonable searches and seizures. On February 1, 1886 in Boyd v. U.S. Supreme Court recognized the protection of privacy interests under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. In the 1890s, the legal concept of pr...
Powell, Robert. "Four Ways Technology Invades Your Privacy." Lovemoney.com. N.p., 5 Oct. 2011. Web. 15 Apr. 2014.