Privacy In Mike Gasher's Mass Communication In Canada

With the rise of the internet, some people argue that privacy no longer exists. From the 2013 revelations of government surveillance of citizens’ communications to companies that monitor their employees’ internet usage, this argument seems to be increasingly true. Yet, Harvard Law professor Charles Fried states that privacy, “is necessarily related to ends and relations of the most fundamental sort: respect, love, friendship and trust” (Fried 477). However, Fried is not arguing that in a world where privacy, in its most simple terms, is becoming scarce that these foundations of human interactions are also disappearing. Instead, Fried expands on the traditional definition of privacy while contesting that privacy, although typically viewed

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

Privacy is defined and interpreted differently depending on the person or persons involved. The one thing that is agreed upon is that privacy in all forms is a right and shall receive equal protection for all people under the laws of the constitution. This includes the right to our personal affairs to be let alone, financials, medical records, opinions, privacy of worship, privacy in our homes and intimate interactions. However right to privacy extends far beyond our personal lives and information being left alone and out of the public eye. In the past privacy was not something that was thought of so

Privacy, as defined by the American Heritage Dictionary, is the quality or condition of being secluded from the presence or view of others, and the state of being free from public attention or unsanctioned intrusion. Interestingly, the Constitution of the United States does not expressly protect a person 's right to privacy; there are however some provisions to privacy within the Bill of Right and the Amendments to the Constitution. Among them are the first amendment, that ensures the privacy or belief, the third amendment, that ensures the privacy of home, and the fourth amendment, that ensures the privacy of person and possession.

Privacy (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/privacy) is being by ourselves. “The state of being free from unwanted or undue intrusion or disturbance in one's private life or affairs; freedom to be let alone.” “Freedom from damaging publicity, public scrutiny, secret surveillance, or unauthorized disclosure of one’s personal data or information, as by a government, corporation, or individual.” Having a state of concealed/secrecy.

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.

In order to balance privacy in democracy, trust, willingness and honesty should be maintained. In Visible Man: Ethics in the World without Secrets, Peter Singer makes the argument that, “…we have developed a desire for more privacy, quite possibly as a status symbol...” (Peter Singer 426). Singer gives an example of an American house having rooms for each member of the family and an extra room for

Throughout time, privacy and security have been two heavily debated topics. There has always been a struggle to find middle ground between a private environment and a secure environment, but the dawn of technology and the Internet has made this struggle even more difficult. The Internet has drastically decreased the expectation of privacy of any and all individuals that have ever used it. Technology in general can pose a threat to an individual’s physical and virtual security. The Internet has also brought forth a sense of anonymity to those looking to conceal their true identities, some of which plan to commit horrific crimes. Privacy and security go hand in hand, however security is by far the most important.

There are several ways to evaluate the term of privacy since it has an extensive and diverse history cultures. Privacy has been discussed by philosophers, anthropologists, journalists, legal specialists, governments, and organizations. The definition of privacy has changed over the years based on moral, legal, and social rules. Nowadays, technological innovations have overtaken everyone’s privacy, and the government and companies can track people in ways that were once impossible. However, the debate between the good and the bad of privacy was notorious in Greek society by the period of Socrates, Aristotle, and Plato. LaFollette states “Socrates and Aristotle defend the view that a life of intellectual and private pursuit was a worthwhile life…

Today, individuals are sacrificing privacy in order to feel safe. These sacrifices have made a significant impact on the current meaning of privacy, but may have greater consequences in the future. According to Debbie Kasper in her journal, “The Evolution (Or Devolution) of Privacy,” privacy is a struggling dilemma in America. Kasper asks, “If it is gone, when did it disappear, and why?”(Kasper 69). Our past generation has experienced the baby boom, and the world today is witnessing a technological boom. Technology is growing at an exponential rate, thus making information easier to access and share than ever before. The rapid diminishing of privacy is leaving Americans desperate for change.

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.

I define the meaning of privacy as a basic human right to be able to keep one’s personal information, activities and communication protected against public observation. Oxford English Dictionary defines the meaning of privacy as: “The state or condition of being alone, undisturbed, or free from public attention, as a matter of choice or right; seclusion; freedom from interference

What is privacy? Many people are aware of the term but do not understand what it means. Warren and Brandeis defined privacy in 1980 as “the right to be alone”. Buchholz and Rosenthal defined privacy as “the concept of being in control of information that is available about oneself”(2002, Jan). Whereas most recently Boscheck determined the meaning as “one’s ability to isolate oneself from others and their views. To have no privacy means to be exposed, out of control and possibly open to coercion” (2011, Oct). The use of privacy term can be related to many other terms such as confidentiality, isolation, and secrecy.

Everyone dreams of earning fame and fortune. People who are popular by virtue of their professions, whether it is acting, sports or politics, try their best to earn the admiration and respect of the public. This is because a huge fan base following can always use their advantage irrespective of whether you are an actor or a politician. However, this fame and fan following comes at a price: the loss of their privacy. Shakelford defined privacy as, “Privacy is a vast concept encompassing freedom of thought, freedom of bodily integrity, solitude, information integrity, freedom of surveillance, and the protection of reputation and personality”.(Shakelford,132) Many newspapers, magazines, television programs, make money by reporting on private lives of public figures such as politicians, sports person, celebrities, entertainers, and others. Does public means no privacy? Before answering to this question we can turn on the television and see lots of details about celebrities and public figures. The fact is that a reporter always tries to discover the private lives of famous people. Privacy is one of the most important things on earth. When one invades the privacy of another it causes a reaction of betrayal in the eyes of a person whose privacy is being invaded. But does it apply to the public figures? In my opinion I believe that public figures such as