At its core surveillance poses a real threat to citizens privacy. Privacy often affords people a degree of autonomy and allows them to interact with the greater society without fear of being watched. Surveillance networks work to gather, store, and mine through each person's data. People have no say in whether they want to opt-in or not. This, on the surface, seems merely routine and functional to most citizens. However, when people realize their data can be exploited or even manipulated for reasons unbeknownst to them then such acts are seen as what they really are, a complete breach of personal privacy. When considering surveillance people rarely discern that their personal vulnerabilities, private information, and day to day activity are being regularly gathered for whatever use the corporations and government deem fit without their input. Additionally, the all-encompassing privacy agreements of social media networking sites also threaten users privacy rights because they allow the sites to have absolute claims to their personal content …show more content…
In the name of security, the government has been deliberately proliferating its surveillance network. This perpetual need to have a secure state has also unknowingly led to the citizen's privacy being continuously exploited and eroded. This is clearly illustrated by the recent law passed by the Canadian government, to counter cyber-terrorism, called the Bill C-51. The bill outlines the government’s freedom to access people's information, alter their devices system how they see fit (i.e. through malware) and restrict their access to content. This shows the progression of surveillance and the resulting privacy invasion. Therefore, the continued proliferation of surveillance networks continues to undermine individuals privacy rights and its mere existence demonstrates that the expectation personal privacy is completely
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.
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.
The government is always watching to ensure safety of their country, including everything and everyone in it. Camera surveillance has become an accepted and almost expected addition to modern safety and crime prevention (“Where” para 1). Many people willingly give authorization to companies like Google and Facebook to make billions selling their personal preferences, interests, and data. Canada participates with the United States and other countries in monitoring national and even global communications (“Where” para 2). Many question the usefulness of this kind of surveillance (Hier, Let, and Walby 1).However, surveillance, used non-discriminatorily, is, arguably, the key technology to preventing terrorist plots (Eijkman 1). Government surveillance is a rising global controversy; and, although minimal coverage could possibly result in safer communities, too much surveillance will result in the violation of citizen’s privacy.
The feeling that someone is always watching, develops the inevitable, uncomfortable feeling that is displeasing to the mind. For years, the National Security Agency (NSA) has been monitoring people for what they call, “the greater good of the people” (Cole, February 2014). A program designed to protect the nation while it protects the walls within as it singles people out, sometimes by accident. Whether you are a normal citizen or a possible terrorist, the NSA can monitor you in a variation of ways. The privacy of technology has sparked debates across the world as to if the NSA is violating personal rights to privacy by collecting personal data such as, phone calls and text messages without reason or authorization (Wicker, 2011). Technology plays a key role in society’s day to day life. In life, humans expect privacy, even with their technology. In recent news, Edward Snowden leaked huge pieces from the NSA to the public, igniting these new controversies. Now, reforms are being pressed against the government’s throat as citizens fight for their rights. However, American citizens are slammed with the counterargument of the innocent forte the NSA tries to pass off in claims of good doing, such as how the NSA prevents terrorism. In fear of privacy violations, limitations should be put on the NSA to better protect the privacy of our honest citizens.
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
Throughout many years in the United States, there has been controversy over whether or not government surveillance and other technology is a violation of human rights. Ever since the publication of George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984, there has been an increase in debates on the subject. The novel itself exemplifies what a surveillance-based society is like, providing the reader with a point of view of what could happen to their own society. Discussion over the usage of information that the government has gathered has become one of the foremost topics being analyzed to this day. The information that is being viewed by surveillance would otherwise be private, or information that people would not want to be leaked out. Therefore, surveillance executed by the government and companies has become an infringement to the right of privacy, and United States citizens should take actions upon it before the world reflects the Orwellian vision of the future.
Part of the allure of the Internet has always been the anonymity it offers its users. As the Internet has grown however, causing capitalists and governments to enter the picture, the old rules are changing fast. E-commerce firms employ the latest technologies to track minute details on customer behavior. The FBI's Carnivore email-tracking system is being increasingly used to infringe on the privacy of netizens. Corporations now monitor their employees' web and email usage. In addition to these privacy infringements, Internet users are also having their use censored, as governments, corporations, and other institutions block access to certain sites. However, as technology can be used to wage war on personal freedoms, it can also be employed in the fight against censorship and invasion of privacy.
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.
“Identity cannot be found or fabricated but emerges from within when one has the courage to let go” – Doug Cooper. This quote symbolizes the courage it takes for people to find themselves; this is precisely the theme in “The Bell Jar” by Sylvia Plath, “The Yellow Wallpaper” by Charlotte Perkins Gilman and “The story of An Hour” by Kate Chopin. The main characters in these readings had to go through hell in an attempt to break the chains that society created against women. These women symbolize the will of women back in the nineteenth and twentieth century’s.
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.
Privacy is not just a fundamental right, it is also important to maintain a truly democratic society where all citizens are able to exist with relative comfort. Therefore, “[Monitoring citizens without their knowledge] is a major threat to democracies all around the world.” (William Binney.) This is a logical opinion because without freedom of expression and privacy, every dictatorship in history has implemented some form of surveillance upon its citizens as a method of control.
2) It is getting ever easier to record anything, or everything, that you see. This opens fascinating possibilities-and alarming ones.”
With continuing revelations of government surveillance, much has been said about the “trade-off” between privacy and security and finding the “right balance” between the two. As Michael Lynch, a professor of philosophy at the University of Connecticut, wrote in an opinion piece in the New York Times, “this way of framing the issue makes sense if [one] understand[s] privacy solely as a political or legal concept.” In this context, the loss of privacy might seem to be a small price to pay to ensure one's safety. However, the relevance of privacy extends far beyond the political and legal sphere. Privacy – or the lack thereof – affects all aspects of one's life; it is a state of human experience.
Privacy from governments has been under assault increasing amounts in the last 100 years. Technology has revolutionized the concept, as before we had microphones, telephones, wiretaps, video cameras, someone would actually need to trespass to violate your privacy. For example, you would need to actually be in someone?s house to eavesdrop on his or her conversation without technological help[1]. Privacy protection can be looked at as how far society can intrude into a person?s personal affairs.
In our largely digital and technology-driven world, surveillance reaches us at almost every (street) corner of our lives. In this paper, I will analyze the two most problematic types of surveillance that I encounter. As well as discuss the transparency and control of surveillance as the first step to solve the potential privacy harms that result from the existence of surveillance data. Nissenbaum puts privacy rather fluently: “protecting privacy is a matter of assuring appropriate flows of personal information, whether online or offline, and disruptions in information flow, enabled by information technologies and digital media” (Nissenbaum 2011). There is a cycle in which privacy, security, and surveillance are interconnected with one another.