The Issue Of Privacy Invasion

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.

Whether it is calling someone on your phone or online shopping on the computer, people are more connected than ever to the internet. However, a person might be oblivious to the fact that they are being watched using these technologies. The NSA (National Security Agency) is an intelligence organization for the U.S. to protect information systems and foreign intelligence information. Recently the NSA has been accused of invading personal privacy through web encryption, tracking, and using personal information for their own uses and without permission. The surveillance of the NSA produces unlawful invasion of privacy causing an unsecure nation.

With the seemingly exponential propagation of inexpensive digital communications technologies over recent years, the general public is becoming more aware of the issues surrounding information privacy and government surveillance in the digital age. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry with a smart-phone has to be wary of how they use their private information for fear of that information being collected and used in a way contrary to their wishes. "Leaky" smartphone apps that transmit private information across the internet can be unethically used by government agencies. The issue of privacy is a balancing act; the public usually wants increased privacy and the government usually wants increased access.

While I trust the government and support their policies, you, the federal government, have failed us Americans. When attempting to gain information for an investigation, nearly 22.1 million innocent Americans have been exposed to the public with their personal information hanging by a thread, according to the Washington Post. You politicians may assume that justice is served by providing victims with incentives of extra security technology, but the federal government should not be allowed to gain information from personal devices for their investigation. Furthermore, the use of malware to hack these innocent Americans is an invasion of privacy, ruins devices and their data, ensues lawsuits and their costs with unnecessary breaches, and may even put people’s lives at risk.

We’ve all heard the conspiracy theories. Alien aircrafts are kept in Area 51. Obama can control the weather. Neil Armstrong never landed on the moon. Some people see these theories as a product of irrationality but they’re really a product of fear. Ever since 9/11, Americans have been desperately searching for a sense of security within the country that was taken from us. We’ve been so desperate in fact that we’ve given up some of our basic rights in order to restore that sense of security. When you walk through a metal detector at an airport and they scan you for any metal items, would you consider that an invasion of your privacy? Would you sacrifice that privacy to feel safer on an airplane? Most of us would because when the choice is life or death, the decision becomes a lot simpler.

Government surveillance has not contributed to a decrease of percentage in crimes, but has created a controversial topic instead. Online surveillance has been an invasion of privacy, because everything the users access is seen without their consent. Due to the fact the stored data is not used, government surveillance in the united states has not been very impactful. Crimes and terrorist attacks were not stopped, and the mass storage of personal data within the last year has violated privacy laws 2,776 times (Government Surveillance 722). Surveillance online is not only unsuccessful in America, but in UK, and Canada as well. Out of every 1000 security cameras, only one camera is actually used to catch a criminal (Government Surveillance 722). However, there are several solutions that can be made to allow the usage of government surveillance without the violating the rights of Americans. Some of the solutions have already taken action, and will give users more freedom online.

" Nowadays, it can be perceived by society that the government is in utter control of our daily actions; however, there is a boundary they cannot traverse. Since the internet is ordinarily part of our everyday lives, many citizens of the United States believe the branches of government should be regulated on their extent of viewing internet content. It would be unethical if the government invaded privacy by monitoring our personal messages, facing prosecution based on information gathered without a warrant but, it would be essential if the government monitored folks who already have a criminal or terrorist record trailed behind them.

We have all experienced it. The tingles down your spine while your sixth sense picks up someone’s harsh eyes scanning you. You are being watched. As the little hairs stand up on your neck and the chill of judgment floods your body, you choke on the insecurity that comes over you. Some break out in a nervous sweat and drown themselves in doubt; others do not hesitate to send beams of criticism back. Many stare with innocent intentions while others purposely hope to provoke anxiety. However, if you did not know that someone’s cruel eyes were on you, would it be just as bothersome? Since 2000, internet security has been an issue that many feel is a violation of their privacy. This controversial topic has hit almost all newspapers with

I think invasion of privacy is a criminal act. How can people do such a thing when there are other criminals that we call hackers? Every day I used use Facebook as a way to communicate with other. Most of the time I like to post positive things so that others can get a good piece of inspiration. So do these stockers get anything out of what I post? I hope because they are truly sinister and need a reality check.

Where is the line between people’s individual rights and the common good? People argue that officials should not have the opportunity to invade a person’s privacy. Police and school officials should be able to use information from private devices or social networking sites in order to protect the community.

ince the early 1900’s, technology has advanced monumentally. The world went from barely having cars to now having cars that can drive themselves all in a little over a centuries work. Our technology is so advanced that the police are using it to detect crime almost immediately. In the city of Long Beach, the police has over four hundred cameras spread throughout the city. Some have said that by having cameras all over the city is considered an invasion of privacy like Big Brother. In the book 1984, the citizens are always being watched through a telescreen. A tele screen is similar to a tv but you are always being watched by the government called Big Brother. Shutting the tele screen off is a crime. The chief said it won’t be a case of “big brother is watching,” because the camera feed will only be activated when the police have a report that a crime is in progress. Our world is slowly turning into an Orwellian society with the consent of governments.

As citizens of America we are all entitled to our rights of privacy. When something threatens this guaranteed privacy we tend to take extra precautions to prohibit prolonged violation. As the advancing world of technology continues to grow and expand, so do the amount of cases involving privacy invasion. Technology drives these privacy-invading crimes; however, crime also drives technology, creating a vicious cycle. Without technology an invader could not enter that of a stranger’s life. Conversely, without technology that same criminal would evade the law enforcers. So does technology protect citizens’ privacy, or does it expose one’s entire life? In regards to this question, one must

Privacy laws are fairly new to humanity. We can take a look at the animal world, of which

Companies involved in targeted advertising also have to deal with ethical issues. According to a study conducted by JL Davis on decision making in advertising, most of advertising experts were influenced only by legal actions, while ethics contributed as the minor factor. Based on the study of Wallace Snyder, advertising ethics, especially targeted advertising, is often given little attention until the company is compelled to make a response when challenged by the law (Snyder 2008). Some consumers haven’t been aware of that their privacy are stolen. Even if consumers were aware of online

Invasion of privacy is something that is a major concern among Americans. In this paper I will discuss Steve, who has recently joined a church. The church doctrine is such that members are to reveal indiscretions from their past. Steve has told them of some of his indiscretions but Steve is not happy about this and decides he would rather leave the church. The church leaders have told Steve even if he leaves his neighbors as well as members of the church will be notified of his past. In this paper I will discuss which privacy torts are involved as well as if this is a libel case. I will also discuss whether the expectation of privacy applies to