Information Privacy And Government Surveillance In The Digital Age

Today, Canadian’s lives today are as translucent as ever. Most organizations especially the government constantly watches each and every one of our moves. By definition, surveillance is any systematic focus on any information in order to influence, manage, entitle, or control those whose information is collected. (Bennet et Al, 6). From driving to the shopping mall to withdrawing money from the ATM machine, Canadians are being watched constantly. With Canada’s commitment to advance technology and infrastructure in the 1960s, government surveillance is much easier and much more prevalent than it was hundreds of years ago. Even as early as 1940s, the Dominion Bureau of Statistics used punch cards and machines to determine who is available

Is anyone’s private information contained in their cell phone actually private? Are appointments, bank information, conversations, the user’s location or other sensitive personal information truly confidential? Is there a Big Brother watching? There is no definitive answer to any of these questions. From the beginning of time to now, privacy has become more and more scarce. Through new developments in technology, it is hard to believe that someone is not watching your move at any given moment. The government’s job is to keep Americans safe, but where is the line drawn? Where is the difference between having a reasonable doubt and accessing information solely because these government officials have the power to do so? The government has infringed upon the rights of the American people when it comes to this topic.

The founding fathers of the United States of America fought hard to achieve an independent nation. An independent nation containing freedoms and rights for citizens that only the constitution can guarantee. One of the crucial rights guaranteed to U.S citizens today is the right to privacy, or the right to be left alone according to Brandeis and Warren. The right to privacy is not specifically mentioned in the constitution, it is however mentioned in the bill of rights. The bill of rights is the first ten amendments of the constitution, which protects many civil rights and liberties of all U.S citizens. The debate today is whether the constitution protects the privacy of citizens from being regulated and invaded by federalism.

The United States is not surveillance society, but the government’s ability to collect data and “spy” on its people has reached an all time high in the digital age. Americans must continue to discuss and debate the government’s ability and limits in monitoring its citizens in the modern day. ()

In 1787, the constitution was born. The constitution has been America’s guideline to the American way of life. Our US constitution has many points in it to protect America and it’s people from an overpowered government, our economy, and ourselves. The only thing the constitution doesn’t directly give us, is our right to privacy, and our right to privacy has been a big concern lately courtesy of the National Security Agency (NSA).(#7) Although our constitution doesn’t necessarily cover the privacy topic, it does suggest that privacy is a given right. Some people say that the right to privacy was so obvious, that our founding fathers didn’t even feel the need to make a point about it.(#9) It also didn’t help

Ever since the American public was made aware of the United States government’s surveillance policies, it has been a hotly debated issue across the nation. In 2013, it was revealed that the NSA had, for some time, been collecting data on American citizens, in terms of everything from their Internet history to their phone records. When the story broke, it was a huge talking point, not only across the country, but also throughout the world. The man who introduced Americans to this idea was Edward Snowden.

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 primary goal of the government since its founding has been to ensure the safety of citizens. It has developed an array of methods, procedures, and systems to achieve that goal. Throughout the years there has been some form of criticism regarding its methods. The most recent cause for public disapproval and concern stems from government surveillance brought to the light by former contractor of the National Security Agency (NSA), Edward Snowden. Snowden has brought attention to the surveillance being performed by the government that involves the United States. Surveillance could significantly deteriorate relations with other countries and destroy the trust that is held between the citizens and government leading to the collapse in stability and possibly the country itself. The potential for surveillance being used as a tool for the protection of citizens can prove to be monumental, but is vastly outweighed by the negative repercussions it could inflict if misused.

Thesis statement: Government surveillance should be stopped because it is an invasion of privacy and gives the government control that is not enumerated in the constitution.

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 seemingly tangible evidence of a promising and greatly developed future society, technological advancement and innovation is typically celebrated and generously compensated by our contemporaries. In fact, individuals with a remarkable technological genius are deeply respected and almost venerated for their creations. Modern technology is, undeniably, used at the advantage of the American public, as it aids not only in disburdening the general population of the inconvenience of quotidian chores and in facilitating the accessibility of luxurious commodities to the lower classes but it also encourages the progression of the globalization of our society. Naturally, the government has also begun to have ready access to the newest

In January of 2014, news agencies reported on the National Security Agency's (NSA) use of “leaky” mobile phone applications to obtain private user information. The United States government has admitted to spying on its citizens, but claims that doing so is the best way to protect the U.S. from foreign threats. Certain smartphone applications, such as the popular Angry Birds game, inadvertently transmit personal user information, such as age, gender, ethnicity, marital status and current location, collectively known as the user's metadata, across the internet[1]. As part of their world-wide telecommunications surveillance for terrorism or other criminal activity, the NSA exploits these security holes in smartphone applications, by collecting and storing user data. While many users are unaware of the information leaks in their mobile applications, most people would certainly prefer to keep such information private [2]. Smartphones know almost everything about who we are, what we do, and where we go, but how much of that information does the government have the right to know and possess? Is it ethical for the United States government to collect and track the cell phone data of its citizens in the name of national defense, or does that violate the citizens' right to personal privacy? NSA surveillance of private user data of U.S. citizens is the best method of protection against terrorism and is also legal under the Constitution. By examining these two components, it is plain to

Privacy, as defined by the Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary is, “the quality or state of being apart from company or observation”("Merriam-Webster," 2011), and “freedom from unauthorized intrusion”("Merriam-Webster," 2011). 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 that do. Among them are the first amendment, that ensures the privacy or belief, the third Amendment, that guarantees the privacy of the home, and the fourth amendment, that guarantees the privacy of person and possession.

The right to privacy was not established as a constitutional doctrine until after the result of the Supreme Court ruling in the 1965 case of Griswold vs. Connecticut. The court decision was based on the interpretation of several amendments within the Bill of Rights. Although the Bill of Rights does not explicitly state anything about the right to privacy, a combination of its sections was used as the framework for establishing the right (“Griswold v. Connecticut (1965),” 2007).

First of all, it is important to know the definition of privacy, it is the right to control who knows what about you, and under what conditions. The right to share different things with the people that you want and the right to know that your personal email, medical records and bank details are safe and secure. Privacy is essential to human dignity and autonomy in all societies. If someone has committed a physical intrusion, or, in discussing the principal question, has published embarrassing or inaccurate personal material or photographs of the individual taken without consent, he is invading their right of privacy, which is in the article eight of the European Convention on Human Rights.