Behavioral Tracking

Nicholas Carr uses his article “Tracking is an Assault on Liberty, With Real Dangers” to explain the dangers of tracking on internet users by using real life examples. The first example that Carr uses is about a man named Tom Owad, who found

He then uses ethos by discussing his role as “an operator of a small government-transparency Web site,” who does good for his site’s visitors when there is enough money to do so. Harper is a founding member of the Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee for the Department of Homeland Security and an expert in the legal complications surrounding new technologies. He offers us this role to persuade readers to perceive him as a trustworthy person. Harper begins his essay by stating that if you surf the Web, you are part of the information economy. His essay, which was published in the Wall Street Journal, argues that the business models and opportunities used to customize advertising justifies the use of data mining. Because of advertising and the use of cookies, which are files used to track users in order to customize their experiences, companies such as Google are able to spend millions of dollars on free

Over the past few years, the development of the Internet and the intrusive surveillance capabilities of these technologies have caused privacy to become a major political and social issue for millions of Americans who go online.  Companies employ a variety of tools to gather marketable information on American citizens.  Most of the use of this information is for personalized advertisement and to create databases of target audiences.  While these activities may appear to be nothing more than annoyances for a majority of Americans, there is the hidden danger of the loss of privacy.

Greenemeier starts by addressing, the cost of Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and other Internet company’s by the exchange of information for advertising revenue. Most internet users generally accept this trade-off of private data, which is when one clicks they agree to the terms and conditions. He says the dark side of bartering personal data, is that the internet user has no way to track who has control of their information. When visiting sites such as clothing and shoe stores, the data is read that one maybe interested in such stores. If one was to close the browser containing the store catalog, the next social media and/or website will have advertising specific to what one researched at the previous store. This information collection allows for easier ad revenue for the producers, because each click on the ads allows for a small percent of profits from the website that one had come from. Greenemeier also talks about five ways one can protect them from information

For my project I will be focusing on internet privacy laws and as to why they should not be weakened, instead strengthened. This day and age basically everyone has internet and cellphones that are used to actively track you. Consequently, companies such as Google use various algorithms that can detect if an advertisement you looked at online swayed your decision in buying the object, in store! Moreover, the FCC is also currently trying to weaken internet privacy laws greatly, and the vast majority of the public doesn’t seem to truly care. One common saying that is often thrown around is, “If you’ve got nothing to hide, then why hide it?” It’s not that simple, if the people were more informed on that matter, they would most likely care; but I’m not here to convince the people, I’m here to convince the current FCC chairperson why internet privacy matters.

Something similar is happening with our cyber information. Internet service providers can collect information from users such as browsing information, location, financial, health information, etc. and sell that information to marketing and advertisement agencies. Sites such as Facebook can also track user’s online activity and sell that information to advertisers and third-party sites, an example of this is anytime a user logs into a site using Facebook it allows that company to track their online activity. Ultimately, people should be made aware of what is happening with their personal

The government has been monitoring and regulating an every day’s persons website history and what we buy and look at on the Internet. With the Internet growing rapidly and the amount of users on the Internet increasing, the easier it is for the government to find out peoples’ interests. Many people argue whether or not we should have vigorous rules and regulations when it comes to the Internet. One of the main concerns people have when it comes to their Internet is their privacy. There are many people who want to do harm using the tools that the Internet provides us with. The Internet should be regulated but not as harsh as some

At the end of the two-week Tracking exercise, you will be given individual feedback results based on your experience tracking supportive behaviors.

Over the past decade the world has gotten much smaller due to the electronic communication the Internet has fostered. While this promotes business and international relations, problems arise regarding the protection of individuals’ personal information. Many countries around the world have developed privacy policies and laws protect an individual's information in the realm of electronic communication. Universal enforcement gets complicated because the Internet is not restricted to one country; it’s worldwide. As a result, concerns arise regarding the compatibility of various countries' privacy policies. This paper will discuss the current legislation in place for various major

The debate about online tracking is referencing the monitoring of customers' actions on their electronic devices, by organizations. Many customers feel that the organizations are invading their privacy, while organizations argue that they are just collecting information to aid in their advertising campaigns and what ads show up on a customer's device. There is a lot of grey area in this particular debate because there are always going to be those who try to violate the rules and regulations.

The words, “Arguing that you don’t care about privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say” were said by Edward Snowden who is a computer professional in America. Similarly, the essays “Tracking Is an Assault on Liberty,” “Web Users Get as Much as They Give,” and “Facebook Is Using You” from Nicholas Carr, Jim Harper, and Lori Andrews respectively points out that the internet privacy is good and bad. However, the articles by Carr and Andrews are based on the negative side of the internet privacy, which means that the internet privacy is not good. On the other hand, Harper’s article is based on the positive side of the internet privacy, which means that the internet privacy is good and scary, but people need to be careful of their own information and browsing histories, and websites. Jim Harper’s essay is more relevant and reasonable than the Nicholas Carr and Lori Andrews’s essays. However, Harper seems more persuasive to readers because he believes that the internet is good if people use it in a right way, whereas Carr and Andrews believe that the internet is not good at all.

Often we sign many things without reading the fine print. For example, I usually sign the End User License Agreement (EULA) for many of the applications I install on my computer without reading every paragraph in the fine print. I am not sure why I don’t pay attention to every paragraph, but I just do it. Corporations and retailers, I believe, will use this “loop hole” to keep tracking consumer behavior. Enforcing a simple “notice & consent” system by setting a privacy standard, could help consumers from having every move they make to be tracked.

In my estimation I think that the self-regulation need to be added by laws, because it is built on a pure-market model to preserve consumer privacy, consumer confidence, and raise business’ owner revenues. However, it is uncertain whether the competitive market model, utilized as an argument in favor of industry self-regulation, is applicable, due to the fact that, some consumers lack of basic understanding of Internet privacy. I don’t think it benefit for businesses to protect their privacy, if consumers do not understand the basics of online data collection and privacy. If they cannot make the difference, they will not definitely prefer a site with a stated privacy policy to another site. There are many problems with this system. First,

There is a continuous monitoring over the Internet in the United States. This is the potential and propositional controversy over the privacy rights. The laws such as Communications Decency Act (CDA) and ‘Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act’ is pertaining to the monitoring of internet is stated as an invasion of privacy, and it can be observed that this regulation is placed upon us for the context of limitation and a ban on certain websites. This is truly an example of a nanny state where one is being observed and is not free to surf and browse the internet, “The FBI on Wednesday called for new legislation that would allow federal police to monitor the Internet for ‘illegal activity.’” (Broache, 2016). While these laws are created for the so-called benefit of the users, they are often infringing the privacy of the users. These laws are unacceptable and conflicting as they infringe public privacy while the government tries to dominate the cyber world and are passed without proper public involvement or consent in developing these bills.

How would you feel, if someone is watching your every move, whether you are going to the store, to the bathroom, on a date, at church, while you’re sleeping, in a hospital or on spring break with your friends in Cancun, Mexico acting crazy and wild! Then taking your details to determine how to live, where to be and what to say. Behavioral targeting is something like that, but normally done by marketers in the marketing and advertising industry, companies and corporations. There are numerous companies, businesses, and firms that monitor masses