Online Privacy: An ALA Interpretation Of The Library

"Our nation was founded and still thrives on the basic ideas of freedom of speech and privacy. However, it has recently been revealed that the NSA and CIA are searching through many American’s emails, phone conversations, and browser histories. Although this may seem shocking, this was not the first time the American government hampered the freedom of speech. During WWII, a massive censorship program was put in place, and thousands of American’s letters were read and “adjusted” to make sure no sensitive information was being leaked.

Many times in the past decade and a half since the Act was passed, there have been numerous reports of suppression of the rights protected by the First, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth amendments of the Bill of Rights, directly threatening the freedom of association, information, speech, and the right to legal representation as well as the right to liberty. This is simply unacceptable - what is the point of having a law of the land if we create and ratify legislation that destroys that supreme law? For instance, in clear violation of the Fourth amendment, the library surveillance introduced by the Patriot Act allowed monitoring of library’s public computer terminals and use of secret search warrants to seize any tangible thing in a library without probable cause and court procedure. It also imposed a gag order on booksellers and librarians to prevent them from disclosing details of surveillance.()CITE The extent of surveillance in libraries is just another reason Americans need to realize that their privacy rights have been snatched from them under the disguise of the Patriot Act. It is important to realize that the surveillance does not stop at the district or township libraries. It has reached our residential doorsteps without us realizing it. In this era of digital communication, most people rely on technology to stay connected with the rest of the world. The Patriot Act allows federal agents to monitor electronic communications, which includes wireless phones, email, and internet, without much oversight. It also allowed the government to seize business records of telecom companies as well as customer records from the Internet Service Providers.

 A survey was conducted to show how librarians really feel in some situations where their resources can be used by terrorist etc. Only 4% withdrew elements that could aid any terrorist.

Technology has become very effective for a thriving generation, but it also possesses a handful of flaws that counter the benefits. Technologies help people post and deliver a message in a matter of seconds in order to get a message spread quickly. It also gives individuals the power to be the person they want to be by only showing one side of themselves. But sometimes information that had intentions of remaining protected gets out. That information is now open for all human eyes to see. This information, quite frankly, becomes everybody’s information and can be bought and sold without the individual being aware of it at all. However, this is no accident. Americans in the post 9/11 era have grown accustomed to being monitored. Government entities such as the NSA and laws such as the Patriot Act have received power to do so in order to protect security of Americans. However, the founding fathers wrote the fourth amendment to protect against violations of individual’s privacy without reason. In a rapidly growing technological world, civil liberties are increasingly being violated by privacy wiretapping from government entities such as the NSA, Patriot Act and the reduction of the Fourth Amendment.

(Sales, Nathan A). They also claim something similar to very hot topic related to search the reading habit of a library patron. They understand that The Patriot Act can be applied to libraries and bookstore but it is not very alarming and gave reference to one 1990 case where grand jury in New York ask for library records (Sales, Nathan A).

Also, the ALA doesn’t see how suppressing ideas makes America a democratic society, and fully supports educating library staff to preach about user privacy (ALA). The ALA also feels strongly when other privacy issues of the Act are brought forth. They argue that privacy is essential in the promotion of an individual’s seek of free speech, association, and thought without being scrutinized, therefore they are prepared to educate as many as possible about the surveillance of library users (ALA). “The USA PATRIOT Act and other recently enacted laws, regulations, and guidelines increase the likelihood that the activities of library users, including their use of computers to browse the Web or access e-mail, may be under government surveillance without their knowledge or consent, so the ALA suggests to “urge all libraries to adopt and implement patron privacy and record retention policies that affirm that "the collection of personally identifiable information should

Modern Americans see privacy as one of the greatest freedoms. When Edward Snowden revealed the NSA surveillance program, the citizens of the United States were appalled by the extent of access the NSA had to personal information. However, according to Dan Tapscott in his essay, “Should We Ditch the Idea of Privacy?” we post just as many details daily on our numerous social media outlets. The majority of the information we freely post is not meaningful and does no harm to us by being public, yet there is a dangerous side to our open-book nature.

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

America was founded of the ideals of free speech and equality, but if one tries to exercise these rights to the fullest extent, one’s privacy would be jeopardized. The purpose

Technology has come a long way since the early 90’s. With modern advances, technology is just about incorporated in everything we do in our day-to-day lives. Since technology has been incorporated into our everyday lives, it may raise some concerns about what may be happening in the background. One of these concerns would be privacy, we all may take it for granted but it is our constitutional rights as Americans. But this all changed after the September 2001 attack on the twin towers.

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.

During the past decade, an issue has arisen from the minds of people, on which is more important? Privacy or national security? The problem with the privacy is that people do not feel they have enough of it and national security is increasing causing the government to be less worried about the people. National security is growing out of control which has led to the decrease in people’s privacy and has created fear in the eyes of U.S. citizens. “Twelve years after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and amid a summer of revelations about the extent of the surveillance state built up to prevent others, leaders, experts and average Americans alike are searching for the right balance between security and privacy” (Noble). Americans should be able to live their daily lives without fear of an overpowered government or a “big brother” figure taking over. “According to a CBS News poll released Tuesday evening, nearly 6 in 10 Americans said they disapproved of the federal government’s collecting phone records of ordinary Americans in order to reduce terrorism” (Gonchar). While it is good to keep our country safe with security, American’s privacy should be more important because there is a substantial amount of national security, the people 's rights should matter first.

Plaintiffs claimed that constitutionally protected materials were wrongly blocked and that the Loudoun Policy violated their First Amendment rights. The court agreed and found the Loudoun Policy of filtering for all patrons unconstitutional. The court held that there were less restrictive means available to achieve the privacy level demanded by the Loudoun County community than interfering with free speech. Less restrictive, in the court’s opinion, were privacy screens for computer monitors and a certain degree of physical monitoring by library staff.

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.

In today’s society, the word “privacy” has become ubiquitous. When discussing whether government surveillance and data collection pose a threat to privacy, the most common retort against privacy advocates – by those in favor of databases, video surveillance, spyware, data mining and other modern surveillance measures – is this line: "If I’m not doing anything wrong, what would I have to hide?" The allowance of the government’s gathering and analysis of our personal information stems from an inadequate definition of what privacy is and the eternal value that privacy possesses. The adherents of the “nothing-to-hide” argument say that because the information will never be disclosed to the public, the “privacy interest is minimal, and the security interest in preventing terrorism is much more important.” 1 In an era where the patterns we leave behind will inevitably become the focus for whatever authority, the issue of privacy affects more than just individuals hiding a wrong. In this essay, I will explore the state of online privacy in wake of the government’s warrantless data collection. Respectively, the nothing-to-hide argument and its key variants in more depth.