Jessica Sensi
Blog Post 5
In this day and age, privacy is very
hard to achieve, however I do not think that The United States Government
violates privacy through data collection. Mostly it is not violated because
corporations already have this data and with the rise of the Internet, it is
very easy to track the movement of people and what they are doing. The
hindrance of privacy due to the rise of technology is inevitable and many
“agree” to this hindrance by using the Internet.
In his article, Ethan Zuckerman
explains how corporations are using the Internet and surveillance to target ads
to consumers. Telephone providers and Google have contracts with The United
States Government in order to pass along our data in order to maintain national
security. Many American citizens are upset with this because the corporations
are using our information in order to make a profit, however, I don’t think
there is anything wrong with giving our information to the government if it is
being used to keep The United States safe, especially if the information is out
there already. In terms of Facebook, people willingly put their information
online. We check-in at places and set status updates that let our friends know
what were doing and where we are. The whole premise of Twitter is to “tweet”
what you're doing and what is on your mind at the moment. While bank statements
are not posted on Facebook, most people are comfortable putting their
information online, or sending it to others via cyber mail or other cyber
pathways. With this rise of technology and the use of Internet, the
reconceptualization of privacy is necessary. Many American citizens are angry
because most of things done online lead to their data being collected by
corporations, and in turn the government. However, there isn’t much privacy
when you're using the Internet. As stated earlier, people spend a lot of their
time shopping online, checking in on Facebook, and tweeting what they are
doing. We use our credit cards online and search things on Google that say
little things about us. Many argue that this is not something the Founding
Fathers wanted, that the right to privacy is something that should be
maintained and the government does not have the right to collect information
about us. The right to privacy shouldn’t be eliminated, but it needs to be reconceptualized
because of the times we are living in now. The Founding Fathers were not living
in a time where technology was at the level that it is now. Privacy and the use
of the Internet is a give and take and there needs to be a balance between them
if national security is at stake.
On another note, even though mass
data is being collected on people in The United States, the amount of data
being collected makes it hard for corporations and even the government to look
at each person individually. There is so much data that it is nearly impossible
for them to sift through it all thoroughly. They wont be looking through the
data pertaining to the everyday American citizen, but those who are suspicious.
Because not all of us are being watched with a close and careful eye, our
privacy isn’t being hindered. They are paying attention to potential threats to
the country and its people, and while some of our information may be looked at,
I don’t believe they do anything with it. Personally, I am okay with the bulk
data collection because I believe it is not much to give up in order to
maintain national security. Hasan Elahi touches on this fact during his TED
talk. Elahi posts pictures of his life so that it is easy to see what he is
doing and where he is at all times. They are posted on his website for all to
see, and whenever they want. This shows how he took being detained and turned
it into giving the federal government what they wanted. Elahi said, “By putting
everything about me out there, I am simultaneously telling everything and
nothing about my life.” This made me think a little as we do this everyday
anyway through our social media, more or less he is posting pictures and this
is what we do on Instagram. Instagram even has a map function where you can see
where all your pictures were taken. His philosophy is that the more information
you give, the more privacy you will have because the government won’t have to
track you. I agree with him because soon people will give so much information
while using the internet, that the United States wont have to collect all this
data on us, and they will focus on those that are a threat.
I would agree that posting on Facebook and twitter is one giving up his privacy and checking in is another great way of giving up your pricvacy. However, I do not think it is fair that the government should be able to get all the list of websites you have visited. I think the government should be notified by google when you try to buy guns, bombs, drugs, or other illicit items. But why does the government need access to everything i search, talk about, or where i am. Personally, I couldn't care less if the government was watching me because i have nothing to hide. But i do feel like the government is circumventing laws from the 70's which are outdated anyways, to get this information from these companies. Its sad that in this day and age if you want to be somewhat relevant in this world everything you say and do is recorded and reviewed by someone at some computer.
ReplyDeleteHi Jessica,
ReplyDeletePrivate companies have not only collected private information but they have used it in ways so as to cause American consumers harm. Do you think this warrants some type of response?
On another note, I agree with you that with changes in technology, our definition of privacy has to change as well. It is not possible to live with the same degree of privacy as we did before.
Finally, about your point that the government collects so much information that it is impossible for them to sort through everything anyway: Greenwald discusses this issue when he describes the Panopticon. He says that the government doesn't actually need to look through people's private information in order to create the psychological effect on the population, thereby suppressing dissidents and activists from speaking out against the government. Is this a cause for concern?