Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
compare utopian and dystopian
government surveillance expsitory essay
utopia versus dystopia
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: compare utopian and dystopian
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 technology and has thus begun to implement it into domestic as well as international policies. However, recent observations by learned scholars have revealed a rather disturbing trend in the usage by government of these devices. They have discovered that instead of protecting and furthering the fundamental ideals of individual rights and limited government that are ingrained in the Constitution, our government has used technology to bypass a myriad of restrictions in surveilling common civilians--all in the name of security and efficiency. This newly-developed form of governance has been termed “The National Surveillance State.” Amongst the citizens of this country, there is a growing concern for the issue of privacy with such a pervasive form of surveillance, as they feel that they are experiencing a severe infringement on rights that they had previously considered impenetrable. In order to address these concerns, Congress must enact legislation that seeks to reconcile the government’s use of techn... ... middle of paper ... ...emen.” The New York Times. n.p., 2011. Web. 16 July 2012. Mears, Bill. “Court affirms protection of Google/NSA communications.” CNN. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc., 2012. Web. 16 July 2012. Monk, Linda R. The Words We Live By: Your Annotated Guide to the Constitution. New York: Linda R. Monk and the Stonesong Press, Inc., 2003. Print. Shapiro, Ben. “Suspicionless Searches of Travelers Protect Civil Liberties.” Townhall.com. 27 July 2005. Rpt. in Privacy: Opposing Viewpoints. Ed. Jamuna Carroll. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, Inc., 2006. 47-51. Print. Sullum, Jacob. “Are you camera-ready?” Townhall. Creators Syndicate. 2002. Web. 16. July 2012. “U.S. Department of Homeland Security.” White House. n.p., n.d. Web. 10 July 2012. Westin, Alan F. Privacy and Freedom. New York: Directors of the Columbia Law Review Association, Inc., 1966. Print.
Adam Penenberg’s “The Surveillance Society” reminds Americans of the tragic events of September 11, 2001 and the instant effects the that attacks on the World Trade Center had on security in the United States. Penenberg discusses how the airports were shut down and federal officials began to plot a military response. Although those were necessary actions, they were not as long lasting as some of the other safety precautions that were taken. The Patriot Act, which makes it easier for the government to access cell phones and pagers and monitor email and web browsing, was proposed. Politicians agreed that during a war civil liberties are treated differently. From there, Penenberg explains that for years before September 11th, Americans were comfortable with cameras monitoring them doing everyday activities.
Taylor, James Stacey. "In Praise of Big Brother: Why We Should Learn to Stop Worrying and Love Government Surveillance." Public Affairs Quarterly July 2005: 227-246.
According to a recent article by Scott Shane, “The U.S. is pushing to make sure that cyber programs comply with international law and international standards.” This quote shows that the government wants to make sure that cyber programs protect the citizens to the same degree as other international laws. The government wants cyber programs to have the same standards as international law and international standards to give citizens the sense of security that they are being protected. According to a recent article by David Francis “...Congress retroactively immunized the nation’s telecom giants for their participation in the illegal Bush spying programs, Klein’s claims (by design) were prevented from being adjudicated in court.” This quote means that telecom giants such as Verizon and AT&T participated in Domestic Surveillance in order to help protect citizens. Telecom giants play a role in giving US citizens a sense of security by helping the National Security Agency. Others may believe that the tracking of our phone calls does not give US citizens a sense of security; however, according to a recent article by Marshall Honorof, “Counterterrorism is not the only function of the NSA's widespread surveillance. Although it cannot report exact numbers, Lewis theorizes that the data-mining has allowed the NSA to put a stop to a number of international espionage plots.”
Edward Snowden is America’s most recent controversial figure. People can’t decide if he is their hero or traitor. Nevertheless, his leaks on the U.S. government surveillance program, PRISM, demand an explanation. Many American citizens have been enraged by the thought of the government tracing their telecommunication systems. According to factbrowser.com 54% of internet users would rather have more online privacy, even at the risk of security (Facts Tagged with Privacy). They say it is an infringement on their privacy rights of the constitution. However, some of them don’t mind; they believe it will help thwart the acts of terrorists. Both sides make a good point, but the inevitable future is one where the government is adapting as technology is changing. In order for us to continue living in the new digital decade, we must accept the government’s ability to surveil us.
Whether the U.S. government should strongly keep monitoring U.S. citizens or not still is a long and fierce dispute. Recently, the debate became more brutal when technology, an indispensable tool for modern live, has been used by the law enforcement and national security officials to spy into American people’s domestic.
Ravinsky, Jeremy. "Snooping states: NSA not alone in spying on citizens." Christian Science Monitor 12 June 2013: N.PAG. Master FILE Premier. Web. 15 Nov. 2013.
Current advancements in technology has given the government more tools for surveillance and thus leads to growing concerns for privacy. The two main categories of surveillance technologies are the ones that allow the government to gather information where previously unavailable or harder to obtain, and the ones that allow the government to process public information more quickly and efficiently (Simmons, 2007). The first category includes technologies like eavesdropping devices and hidden cameras. These are clear offenders of privacy because they are capable of gathering information while being largely unnoticed. The second category would include technologies that are used in a public space, like cameras in a public park. While these devices
The same surveillance state has become the new normal in America and is disturbingly recognizable today. Over six hundred state, local, and federal agencies conduct intelligence operations through Joint Terrorism Task Forces and Fusion Centers. In 2004, the ACLU discovered an FBI spying on political advocacy groups and found out that the FBI lied to hide these improper activities from Congress and the American public. The Senate report found the intelligence gathering at Fusion Centers was “flawed, irrelevant, unrelated to terrorism, and posed a serious threat to privacy (Rhode, 2017).” The Thought Police watch people in their public and private lives through the use of telescreens, microphones, and cameras and enforce loyalty and
MacAskill, G. G. (2014, April 28). NSA Prism program taps in to user data of Apple, Google and others. Retrieved from The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data?guni=Network%20front:network-front%20main-2%20Special%20trail:Network%20front%20-%20special%20trail:Position1
Solove, Daniel J. “5 Myths about Privacy” Washington Post: B3. Jun 16 2013. SIRS. Web. 10
"The Right of Privacy: Is It Protected by the Constitution? ." n.d. Exploring Constitutional Laws. 12 September 2013.
Most of the American citizens and residences are prone to security threats regardless of their location in the world. In this case, the authorities justify the utilization of the surveillance content to enhance the security of its citizens within the United States borders as well as in different parts of the world. Despite the importance of surveillance to the national security, some individuals view the initiative as a reflection of moral decay among the lawmakers (Norvell, 2008). Obtaining personal data from the citizens without their authority is an indication of the inability of the authorities to uphold the guidelines of the rights of the
Video cameras are being deployed around the nation to help with crime solving, but some people are concerned about their privacy. Having cameras to monitor public areas have shown to be useful in situations such as identifying the bombers of the Boston marathon in early 2013. There have also been issues with these cameras however, as people are concerned they are too invasive of their privacy and have been misused by police officers in the past. Some people want to find a balance in using cameras in public so that they can continue to help with crime solving while making sure they are not too invasive and are properly used.
However, government agencies, especially in America, continue to lobby for increased surveillance capabilities, particularly as technologies change and move in the direction of social media. Communications surveillance has extended to Internet and digital communications. law enforcement agencies, like the NSA, have required internet providers and telecommunications companies to monitor users’ traffic. Many of these activities are performed under ambiguous legal basis and remain unknown to the general public, although the media’s recent preoccupation with these surveillance and privacy issues is a setting a trending agenda.
Hughes, Kirsty. "A Behavioral Understanding of Privacy and Its Implications for Privacy Law." Modern Law Review 75.5 (2012): 806-836. Academic Search Complete. Web. 6 Apr. 2014.