1984 George Orwell Privacy Analysis

As human beings and citizens of the world, everyone values their privacy. It is a right that is often looked over and taken for granted by most. Since the beginning of time, there have been concerns about individuals’ rights to privacy and their personal information remaining confidential. Our founding fathers had concerns about this which is why, “…this right has developed into

Technology is apart of mostly everyone’s life and daily schedule, but often people fail to realize the fact that the government has the ability to monitor everything someone does through these devices. In George Orwell’s novel, 1984, a futuristic government spies on their citizens through technology found all throughout their homes. The government used secret microphones, telescreens, and the thought police, a group in charge of finding rebels against the party, in order to monitor what people say and think. There are many examples of this in today’s society: Amazon’s Alexa, Samsung Smart televisions, and social media apps. Amazon’s Alexa and Samsung Smart Televisions are voice recognition systems

In the modern society we are used to having privacy to a certain extent. In recent years, social media has opened up more sharing among individuals that ever before. However, where people are at all times, what they are thinking, and what people do in their homes are all completely private if they want it to be. That principle is the exact opposite in the classic futuristic novel, 1984 by George Orwell where every person’s action is seen. Similarly, the novel Little Brother by Cory Doctorow takes a look into the modern world's relatable experiences and how one action can slowly lead into the invasion of privacy. The characters in both of these novels do not agree with how society is ran, and want to change it.

Privacy and safety of citizens is common in today's society, as well as the government looking over their shoulder at all times. As an example, George Orwell wrote a book called, "1984" which in it gave an outlook of society being taken over by a party. Government surveillance is different from protecting and bringing safety to the citizens, it violates their freedom, privacy, and human rights.

Surveillance is not a new thing. In fact, espionage, tracking, and sleuthing were part of society ever since 5000 B.C. But in the rise of the modern era, the idea of surveillance in the public eye serves as a controversial topic of discussion. People everywhere complain about the existence of security cameras, government tracking, and the right to privacy. Such problems, however, are not due to the sudden discovery of surveillance, but the modern abuse of it. Seeing the disastrous effects of over surveillance from George Orwell’s 1984, the public rightfully fears societal deterioration through modern surveillance abuse portrayed in Matthew Hutson’s “Even Bugs Will Be Bugged” and the effects of such in Jennifer Golbeck’s “All Eyes On You”. The abuse of surveillance induces the fear of discovery through the invasion of privacy, and ensures the omnipresence of one’s past that haunt future endeavors, to ultimately obstruct human development and the progress of society overall.

NSA infringes on the 1st and 4th Amendment rights. America was the safe zone: a lot of people came to the United States so that they would have the freedom to express who they are, what they believe, and their thoughts without punishment. Edward Snowden, NSA whistle blower, wasn’t allowed that freedom when he made it know what the NSA was doing with Verizon’s phone records. Snowden did break the law but he brought awareness of this dilemma to the average citizen, villain, and hero. In the end, it caused the NSA to change some policies but it doesn’t even make a difference because still the administration continues to collect data without a cause. Correction: the NSA uses surveillance to protect United States of America from terrorist, terrorism and terrorism related crimes… The agency’s interpretation: anyone and anything under the sun.

Government surveillance is beneficial in moderation, but can quite easily become excessive. A well-known example of this is the controversy regarding the NSA monitoring U.S. citizens discreetly on American soil. This unwarranted watch crosses the fine line between monitoring criminal suspects for security, and blatant overreach of authority in spying common citizens. The personal infringement of information has been commonly associated with the NSA’s PRISM, but their MUSCULAR program is much more disconcerting. According to Harry Bruinius in “Why Tech Giants Are Now Uniting Against U.S. Surveillance”:

Greenwald does an exceptional job of diving into the meat and potatoes of the issue, and gets right at its core with an essential question we need to ask ourselves in our growing digital world: “Why does our privacy matter?” In his TED Talk: Why Privacy Matters Greenwald explains how the Internet, which has been hailed for the liberation it brought is now being used as a zone of mass discriminant surveillance (Greenwald, 2014). It seems as though whenever the topic is brought up most ignorant people immediately assume that if the government is watching, it is okay as long as you don’t have anything to hide. With this train of thought comes the idea that there are clear lines between “good” people and “bad” people in this world, and its essentially okay for a computer to determine whether or not someone is good or bad based on a collection of phone records, Google searches and associates on social media. The group of those saying that there is no harm done in the breaching of ones privacy are those who have accepted that they are in no way shape or form a threat to our government in any case. To me, that is something that is simply unacceptable in a functioning democracy. If people are so willing to give up every aspect of their daily lives to the government, it becomes easier to track the exact schedules and routines of certain individuals and on a grand scale, the impending results can be more than scary. Greenwald explains that there has been many studies held that prove that when humans know they are being watched, their behavior dramatically changes compared to if they think they are alone. After someone realizes they are being observed they quickly start conforming to their surroundings because they’ve become imprisoned in their own minds for fear of

It has been more than seventy years since the release of George Orwell’s 1984, a novel that imparts a lesson on the consequences of government overreach. However, today that novel reads like an exposé of government surveillance. Privacy and national security are two ideas competing for value on a balance; if one is more highly valued, the other carries less weight. Government desire to bolster national security by spying on its own citizens-- even the law abiding ones-- is what leads to the inverse relationship between civil liberties and security. In times of a perceived threat to the nation, national security becomes highly prized and people lose privacy. One case is terrorist attacks. 9/11 caused an understandable kneejerk reaction in Americans to bolster protection. Some of the the measures taken were observable, like greater security at airports, but others attempted to increase national security in a more intrusive way. Privacy should be more highly valued than national security, and America has reached a point where that is no longer true.

Privacy is what allows people to feel secure in their surroundings. With privacy, one is allowed to withhold or distribute the information they want by choice, but the ability to have that choice is being violated in today’s society. Benjamin Franklin once said, “He who sacrifices freedom or liberty will eventually have neither.” And that’s the unfortunate truth that is and has occurred in recent years. Privacy, especially in such a fast paced moving world, is extremely vital yet is extremely violated, as recently discovered the NSA has been spying on U.S. citizens for quite a while now; based on the Fourth Amendment, the risk of leaked and distorted individual information, as well as vulnerability to lack of anonymity.

As a growing topic of discussion, privacy in our society has stirred quite some concern. With the increase of technology and social networking our standards for privacy have been altered and the boundary between privacy and government has been blurred. In the article, Visible Man: Ethics in a World Without Secrets, Peter Singer addresses the different aspects of privacy that are being affected through the use of technology. The role of privacy in a democratic society is a tricky endeavor, however, each individual has a right to privacy. In our society, surveillance undermines privacy and without privacy there can be no democracy.

Total surveillance. Complete obedience. Absolute authority. The world of 1984 scared me when I first read the book last year. Never before had a book made me think so deeply about individuality, society, and government. 1984, a manifestation of my nightmares, described a totalitarian police state of resolute submission. The horror came when I looked upon our own society, and Big Brother glared back at me. We live in a world where every phone call, every text, every search, and every email can be monitored and recorded by our own government. The National Security Agency, or the NSA, was originally proposed to monitor threats outside of the United States, but the NSA began domestic surveillance shortly after the horrific terror attacks of 2001. This cleared the way for warrantless, unlawful tracking of American citizens. Initially, the program collected only the data of high-risk individuals in America with direct links to Al-Qaeda. Now, however, government data collection has spread to millions of otherwise innocent citizens. Government surveillance is a direct violation of the privacy of American citizens that is dangerous, immoral, and unlawful.

Imagine living in a world where you could not make your own choices, or be your own person. In the novel 1984, this is exactly what happened. In a place called Oceania where there is no such thing as privacy and personal freedom (Roelofs), the main character Winston Smith, is living a strict life under the demanding party known as Big Brother. Winston decides that he wants his life back to normal and tries to rebel against the Party. Meanwhile, he is thought to be a lunatic because he is living his life how a normal person would, but everyone else is now living under what is thought to be a utopia society. Throughout the book Winston strongly disagrees with the fact that every second he is being keep under surveillance. Though at some points he believes he is being discrete, in reality someone is always watching. In 1984, George Orwell depicts the lack of privacy and loss of individualism which affects the characters and the society as a whole.

A world beyond what George Orwell could imagine has been created in modern society through the use of not only government surveillance, but also corporate and consumer spying where users are often unaware of spying.. 1984 is set in a neo-communist society where the government controls production of goods and spies on its citizens in order to maintain power. In the modern era, surveillance takes a different form. Often the methods for spying on citizens in the US do not involve a direct line from the NSA to the citizen’s home, it usually takes a detour through a commercial setting. By partnering with major companies such as Facebook, Google, and Amazon, government surveillance programs are able to collect far more information than could be gained by simply tapping telephone lines. This is more disturbing since many companies including Verizon, AT&T, Apple, and Amazon do not require a warrant to supply information to investigators, and do not notify users of data requests.

Privacy either encourages or is a necessary factor of human securities and fundamental value such as human embarrassment, independence, distinctiveness, freedom, and public affection. Being completely subject to mutual scrutiny will begin to lose self-respect, independence, distinctiveness, and freedom as a result of the sometimes strong burden to conform to public outlooks.