Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Easy history of internet
Effects of the internet on society
Government controlling people's internet
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Easy history of internet
Roughly forty years ago, the internet was invented and since then, it has been shaped into the internet that we have today. Since the invention of the internet, millions of people have used it, people ranging from government elites to everyday jo’s. It has become a necessity in the world; without it, the world the of the twenty-first century would collapse. The internet is an entity that has information about literally any subject imaginable, and any given user is only a few clicks away from that information. However, as a great source of information, it is a source of power, and people will seek to exploit it. In addition to being used to find information, the internet has been used to access information. National security agencies around …show more content…
Intelligence agencies around the world, particularly the U.S., have started surveillance on their own citizens to maintain national security. While stating that it is to protect the people, the government uses the internet to survey its own people to thwart terrorism, but at the cost of personal privacy. The idea of government surveillance in America has its roots in the 1930’s over a wiretapping case, Katz v. United States, where the police “placed an eavesdropping device on a public payphone” to record his illegal gambling operation (Esau 58). The Supreme Court ruled that the police “violated the Fourth Amendment,” and the case was thrown out of court (Esau 58). Today, there are rules, requiring warrants to be obtained before performing any surveillance by a “judge with jurisdiction over the matter” (Esau 58). Over the past years since 9/11, terrorism has increased worldwide, as has the effort to thwart it. After 9/11, the Patriot Act was implemented to streamline the efforts needed to obtain warrant. Proving ineffective, President Bush expanded “approving wiretaps without warrants” by
Adam Penenberg’s “The Surveillance Society” reminds Americans of the tragic events of September 11, 2001 and the instant effects the that attacks on the World Trade Center had on security in the United States. Penenberg discusses how the airports were shut down and federal officials began to plot a military response. Although those were necessary actions, they were not as long lasting as some of the other safety precautions that were taken. The Patriot Act, which makes it easier for the government to access cell phones and pagers and monitor email and web browsing, was proposed. Politicians agreed that during a war civil liberties are treated differently. From there, Penenberg explains that for years before September 11th, Americans were comfortable with cameras monitoring them doing everyday activities.
The aftereffects of the September 11, 2001 attacks led to Congress passing sweeping legislation to improve the United States’ counterterrorism efforts. An example of a policy passed was Domestic Surveillance, which is the act of the government spying on citizens. This is an important issue because many people believe that Domestic Surveillance is unconstitutional and an invasion of privacy, while others believe that the government should do whatever is possible in order to keep the citizens safe. One act of Domestic Surveillance, the tracking of our phone calls, is constitutional because it helps fight terrorism, warns us against potential threats, and gives US citizens a feeling of security.
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
Domestic Surveillance: Is domestic surveillance worth the hassle? In 2013, whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed to the American people that the National Security Agency had been spying on them. Not only that, but also on world leaders. Domestic surveillance is understood as the first line of defense against terrorism, but it has many downsides, not only it violates Americans lives, also it spies on our social media, it puts a fine line on their privacy, and it is a big stab at the freedom of speech. According to John W. Whitehead, “The fact that the government can now, at any time, access entire phone conversations, e-mail exchanges, and other communications from months or years past should frighten every American.”
Since the terrorist attacks at Sept. 11, 2001, the surveillance issue often has turned away the table in the debate of individual privacy or counterterrorism. By passing the Patriot Act, Congress gave President Bush an immense law enforcement authority to boost U.S's counterterrorism, and the President used his enlarged powers to forward specific programs in order to reduce the threat of terrorism and defend the country’s safety.
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
Likewise, Beeler used the exaggerated symbolism of eyes intimidatingly watching from every possible angle to represent that all of our actions are witnessed by the government. Alarmingly, with the domineering capacity of the government to spy on civilian lives, this can develop a society consumed of poisoning suspicion with one another. Furthermore, this analogy was highlighted to appeal for a defined boundary that restricts the government to snoop and have access to Americans’ private lives. Significantly, the inclusion of this analogical symbolism was intentionally used to accentuate the government violation of the fourth amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Notably, the fourth amendment states that without a warrant and probable cause or suspicion, the NSA has no power to access and invade a citizen’s privacy. Although government surveillance supporters may argue that the Americans should just cooperate for the greater good to prevent domestic terrorism, they fail to protect individual liberties. Hence, Nate Beeler bestow upon his audience one serious question: Is it acceptable to live in a
One of the many details shown is that mass surveillance has not had an apparent impact on the prevention of terrorism (Greenwald, 2013). Most of the information gathered has not been used to impede a terrorist attack. Surveillance does not protect the rights to life, property and so on from being violated by terrorists. However it gives the citizen...
After the devastating attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, this country scrambled to take action to provide future protection. New techniques had to be developed to protect the nation from the menace of terrorism. Along with the new techniques came the decision to enact laws that some believed crossed the threshold of violating civil liberties this county and those living in it were guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States. “On October 26, 2001, the Public Law 107-56, Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism, also known as the USA Patriot Act, was signed into effect” (Stern, 2004, p. 1112). While speaking to Congress, President George Bush stated, “Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorist” (Stern, 2004, p. 1114). Congress knew by signing the bill, they were expecting each American to give up a part of his or her guaranteed rights. Rights such as the right to privacy, free speech and the right to know when a citizen is being investigated by the government were just among a few. The act has been described as a “law enforcement wish list” (Stravelli, 2003, p. 1). The wish list allows law enforcement to “obtain people’s personal information and conduct surveillance, and in some cases impose secrecy on their law enforcement activities” (Update: USA Patriot Act, 2007, p. 1).
Domestic Surveillance Citizens feeling protected in their own nation is a crucial factor for the development and advancement of that nation. The United States’ government has been able to provide this service for a small tax and for the most part it is money well spent. Due to events leading up to the terrifying attacks on September 11, 2001 and following these attacks, the Unites States’ government has begun enacting certain laws and regulations that ensure the safety of its citizens. From the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978 to the most recent National Security Agency scandal, the government has attempted and for the most part succeeded in keeping domestic safety under control. Making sure that the balance between obtaining enough intelligence to protect the safety of the nation and the preservation of basic human rights is not extremely skewed, Congress has set forth requisites in FISA which aim to balance the conflicting goals of privacy and security; but the timeline preceding this act has been anything but honorable for the United States government.
After the September 11th terrorist attacks, Americans were consumed with fear. Unsure about what was going to happen next and consumed with fear, Americans looked toward their government for protection against any threats. This fear allowed for the passage of the Patriot Act less than 2 months after the attacks. The act “...increases the ability of law enforcement officials to intercept discussions of terror plans by granting them greater power to monitor telephone and Internet conversations of suspects” (“The USA Patriot Act”). Through this act, any person with an inkling of a reason to be suspected of criminal activity can be monitored by the government.
There has been a continuous debate on how tightly the government keeps checks on its citizens. The government has a defensive role to play, which is in spying. This has been conducted from the beginning of history and government spends too many resources building and maintaining the capacities to spy. Records of spying stretch too far that spying is frequently considered as the “second oldest profession.” In the holy Bible, Moses was told by God to send twelve spies to Canaan and investigate the Promised Land. However, resources that the governments put to spying are unprecedented. An estimate of $106 billion world’s spending by governments each year goes solely to foreign intelligence (Solove7). In 2010, the spending of the United States on foreign intelligence was at the peak at 80.1 billion, but in 2012, the country spend $75.4 billion more than all other nations combined. Although governments cannot do without spies and expect to remain secure, there is a darker and more sinister picture of spying by the governments, whereby they use spying to control every aspect of individuals’ lives, compelling them to act and think in ways sanctioned by the state. This paper looks at various principles of the US government spying, the morality behind it, and how they are institutionalized. It uses three literatures to compare and contrast issues underlying government spying. They include a tradeoff between privacy and security, use of digital technologies and aerial view of homeland security. The first article is by Best, and it focuses on the use of digital technology as a means of spying. The government uses it for convenient, but they will take away citizens’ privacy. The government should have focused more on persona...
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.
Internet privacy and security has become the concern of many individuals throughout recent years. There are a very limited amount of laws that have been enacted to combat computer or cyber related crimes. This has become an issue because as the internet grows increasingly popular so does the criminal and immoral behavior that abounds on it. With these crimes gaining in impact, effectiveness, and frequency, there needs to be more repercussions for these crimes. The United States government needs to increase restrictions on the amount and type of data on individuals from the internet, to prevent the government from invading privacy of citizens and to prevent companies from storing browser histories of individuals, to then sell that information to ad agencies and other companies.