Internet Surveillance Controversy

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.

Government surveillance in the past was not a big threat due to the limitations on technology; however, in the current day, it has become an immense power for the government. Taylor, author of a book on Electronic Surveillance supports, "A generation ago, when records were tucked away on paper in manila folders, there was some assurance that such information wouldn 't be spread everywhere. Now, however, our life stories are available at the push of a button" (Taylor 111). With more and more Americans logging into social media cites and using text-messaging devices, the more providers of metadata the government has. In her journal “The Virtuous Spy: Privacy as an Ethical Limit”, Anita L. Allen, an expert on privacy law, writes, “Contemporary technologies of data collection make secret, privacy invading surveillance easy and nearly irresistible. For every technology of confidential personal communication…there are one or more counter-technologies of eavesdropping” (Allen 1). Being in the middle of the Digital Age, we have to be much more careful of the kinds of information we put in our digital devices.

The topic of national security is controversial; in fact, the controversy on limits to national security still remains a central focus in society. Americans have mixed feelings about government surveillance (Wilson 6). Some people feel that surveillance is a violation of their Fourth Amendment rights against “unreasonable searches and seizures” (Wilson 5). People use this phrase of the amendment to argue their case for personal privacy, but it is purely individual interpretation. Although the concept of privacy is included in the Fourth Amendment, the word “privacy” is not written in the Constitution (Mills 196). On the other hand, the Preamble of the Constitution contains phrases regarding security, such as “insure domestic Tranquility,”

As technology changes the way we live, especially by making communication and transactions easier, the security of our personal information becomes an important issue if people are expected to trust the government, companies, and each other. Although scholars have provided several accounts of the importance of privacy, it still remains unclear how individuals view and value it. For the purposes of this essay, privacy is broadly defined as the controlled access to personal information or ideas. In this paper, I will examine Richard Posner’s article “Privacy, Surveillance, and Law” and Neil Richards’s paper “The Dangers of Surveillance.” Although both Posner and Richards begin with the same assumption that people fear public scrutiny, their different interpretations of this human nature lead to different conclusions. While Richards relates privacy to our fundamental rights so that he considers any surveillance dangerous, Posner’s belief that we value privacy as a possession that promotes other ends is more justified because it allows individuals to weigh the costs and benefits of surveillance.

The online world has recently changed from being able to make a phone call in privacy to having someone being able to hear your every word, without you even knowing. Our value of privacy has changed over the years as we have somewhat taken for granted the privacy we originally had. Some could even say that we have arrived back in the future in ‘Nineteen Eighty-Four’, with the lack of privacy that we currently possess.

The principle of freedom in the United States of America has always tied with one’s private matters. But with technology advancing at such a rapid rate, the idea of privacy might soon become something from a fairytale. Especially included, is one’s online persona. The American government has begun to derestrict itself from the bounds of an individual's personal matters online. In reception, many Americans feel that their natural given rights are being exploited. They feel that the government has no justifiable reasons to be vigilating information that is not intended for anybody’s eyes except its rightful owner. However, it is truly necessary for the government to observe what citizens are doing online because it protects both the United States

Is the issue of privacy in the context of our modern world easy to comprehend? Are privacy and cyber security one of the most pressing issues in our world today, or can we leave the task up to our government officials to regulate? These are all questions that law professor Daniel J. Solove attempts to answer. Armed with the help of privacy specialists, authors and blog commenters, Solove begins to unpack the nuanced dichotomy between privacy, surveillance and data collection. There are many opposing viewpoints that seek to sway the reader’s attention from the task at hand, which is demystifying the certain perils of our transparent world, which can be somewhat difficult to wrap the reader’s head around. The article’s rationale, while scattered, is consistent and layered in thought. While his credentials and literary examples bring an element of validity to the table, the nothing-to-hide argument messes with his rationale.

Joyce, who gives lectures at University of New South Wales in their law department is more than qualified to speak about this subject because the issues that online privacy pertains to is a serious matter since online surveillance is a real threat to private personal security. No person who is a law abiding citizen should be monitored for their online usage by their own government. The goal of this writing is to show awareness of online privacy concerns and how the US and

In the recent year and a half, citizens of almost every nation were exposed to information regarding the mass surveillance used by many governments to spy on their citizens. This information, released by Edward Snowden, confirms the long held theory that mass amounts of data regarding the personal habits and communications of individuals were being collected and stored. This revelation has given rise to a serious new debate: just how many civil liberties and rights should citizens allow their government to ignore in the name of “security”?

The relationship between government and citizens is often called into question when it comes to surveillance and the privacy of the people against the value of the information gained. This situation is echoed within the makeup of our online society, as we are given small benefits and social reasons to allow access to our information, while the government takes in as much data as they can to monitor people and use it as protection against possible outside threats, which results in a difficult balance. Through this, the government, commonly referred to as “Big Brother,” watches the habits of its citizens and while many think that the Internet is a battleground for privacy, the government holds much more weight because of their access to information,

The 21st century had brought an infinite number of technological advancements whose purpose is to make the lives of new, developed world much more manageable. These digital technologies that have revolutionized our daily lives have also created minutely detailed records of those lives. As a society, we are not quite sure why surveillance is bad and why we should be wary of it. To an extent, the answer has to something to do with privacy, but we lack an understanding of what privacy really means in this context and why it matters. We have been able to live with this state of affairs, mostly because the threat of constant surveillance has been condemned to the idea as science fiction and a failed totalitarian state.

After 9/11, the advanced technology accelerates the National Security Agency (NSA)’s ability to conduct live surveillance in order to closely track targeted individuals in the name of anti-terrorism, which, as a result, violates citizens’ rights to freely live their lives and intensifies the distrust between the government and citizens. Soma et al. in their article “Balance of Privacy vs. Security: A Historical Perspective of the USA PATRIOT Act,” point out that in the modern world, surveillance has advanced from “static telephone wiretaps to interception by filtration software…and eventually, …to real-time automated surveillance of voice-over-internet communications and continuous tracking of individuals by their own cellular phones” (285). It seems that technology makes it possible that the government can have access to any individuals’ private information at will without their permission. Edward Snowden, who is a U.S. former technical contractor for the NSA and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) employee who leaked details of top-secret U.S. and British government mass surveillance programs to the press, in his article “How the National Security State Kills a Free Society,” mentions that

Like every debate or dilemma there are two sides, the positive and the negative; the advocates and the opponents. In the dilemma of privacy verses surveillance, those in favour of government surveillance believe the government should be allowed to monitor and observe all public and private matters in order to gather security data, because they “believe in the primacy of security over privacy” (McNeil, 2016). Advocates also favour more government surveillance technologies and systems in order to target and prevent terrorist attacks, as many governments say that their surveillance technology “can be used to counter espionage efforts, hinder the spread of weapons of mass destruction and attacks-through terrorism” (McNeil, 2016). However those

These findings aim to better inform the reader of what constitutes true privacy in a surveillance, and raise concerns about violations to our constitutional right to privacy and security in the digital age. This work will also aim to identify the common methods that are used by Internet Service Providers to protect their customers’ personal information, and the lengths at which law enforcement and government intelligence agencies will go through to compromise that protection and

Today in society, people are expected to be able to protect their own privacy, but the very definition of privacy states that it is in no way completely attainable, nor will it ever be. And why would people want that when it has been proven that to achieve absolute privacy would mean to forfeit a place in society (Nehf)? But in recent years, privacy infringements through the Internet have gotten out of hand. Until privacy becomes a principal concern for Internet users, they remain unsafe, easy targets for deceitful scammers, other users, data collectors, and more.