What should I do with the diary I’ve kept for 50 years?
Don’t put it on the internet, although I guess some people would! “Don Tapscott can see the future coming ... and works to identify the new concepts we need to understand in a world transformed by the Internet.” (“Don Tapscott” Ted Conferences LLC) Tapscott is an Adjunct Professor of Management at the Rotman School of Management and the Inaugural Fellow at the Martin Prosperity Institute. In 2013, Tapscott was appointed Chancellor of Trent University. He has written extensively on the topic of information security in the digital age over the past fifteen years. In his essay entitled, “Should We Ditch the Idea of Privacy?”(Tapscott p.117). Tapscott considers a new, emerging theory
…show more content…
Jeff Jarvis is a journalist, professor, and public speaker. In his book, “Public Parts”, Jarvis’s own opinions on “publicness” are stated plainly. He sees both social and personal benefits to living a totally public life on the internet. David Kirkpatrick is a technology journalist and author. He offers no opinion of his own on subject of total public disclosure. He has written two books on the social media giant Facebook. Kirkpatrick’s book “The Facebook Effect” was reviewed by David Pogue in The New York Times, Sunday Book Review. Pogue wrote, “You come away with a creepy new awareness of how a directory of college students is fast becoming a directory of all humanity — one that’s in the hands of a somewhat strange 26-year-old wearing a T-shirt and rubber Adidas sandals.” His book may leave readers more cautious than ever about what information they themselves are uploading to the …show more content…
We now accept the sharing and digital storage of our personal information as a necessary evil. We continue to incorporate, into our lives, technology that uses this data. Microsoft and Google are envisioning and developing ways to commercialize the use of even more of our stored personal information.
As we move through a typical day, this information is collected in thousands of ways. Charles Duhigg’s article “How Companies Learn Your Secrets” describes the collection, purchase, storage, and use of our personal information by the major retailer, Target. We all should know that we have agreed to the storage and sharing of our personal spending habits. The policies are disclosed in the Privacy Agreement of the stores shopper’s card, which most of us have.
I do not believe Tapscott’s feelings on the matter of privacy were ever in danger of being changed. He reaffirms his position three times in his final thoughts: under current social and legal conditions, “a life plan of “being open” is probably a big mistake.”, we are responsible for the management of our own security by retaining control of our personal information, and “each of us needs a personal privacy strategy that governs what information we release and to whom” (Tapscott
Rosen makes the argument that people surrender all privacy through “self-revelation” (Rosen), they destroy their privacy to fit in with society and to join the naked crowd. Rosen defines social media as a place where people surrender privacy to “achieve trust through self-exposure” (Rosen). In his eyes, people are simply giving away privacy to become transparent within society. I believe that people are actually exchanging one type of power for another. Foucault’s complex analysis of power can be simplified into “Power is everywhere” (Foucault). People exchange the power of privacy for the power of connection. The author of the journal article agrees with the exchange of power, “Trust is indeed achieved within Facebook in the way Rosen argues; however, this trust is the product of an exchange of power.” (Brittany). Social media allows us to connect instantly with people all over the world. As with any situation, humans assess the risk factors and the benefits of any decision they have to make, they will...
Using the informal tone he enhances his argument by providing several thought-provoking statements that allow the reader to see the logic in the article, “Social media is designed for the information shared on it to be searched, and shared- and mined for profit… When considering what to share via social media, don 't think business vs. personal. Think public vs. private. And if something is truly private, do not share it on social media out of a misplaced faith in the expectation of privacy” (134). The reader should agree with Edmond that when posting or being a part of the social media bandwagon, you’re life and decisions will be up for display. Moreover, the business vs. personal and public vs. private point is accurate and logical, because evidently if you post something on any social media outlet you should expect that anyone and everyone can see it, regardless of your privacy settings. Edmond highlights that Facebook along with other social networking sites change their privacy settings whenever they please without
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.
How much privacy do we as the American people truly have? American Privacy is not directly guaranteed in any manner under the United States Constitution; however, by the Fourth Amendment, Americans are protected from illegal search and seizure. So then isn’t it ironic that in today’s modern world, nothing we do that it is in any way connected to the internet is guaranteed to remain discreet? A Google search, an email, a text message, or even a phone call are all at risk of being intercepted, traced, geo located, documented, and stored freely by the government under the guise of “protecting” the American people. Quite simply, the Government in order to protect us and our rights, is willing to make a hypocrite of itself and act as though our right is simply a privilege, and without any form of consent from the people, keep virtual tabs on each and every one of us. In the words of Former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis “The right to privacy is a person's right to be left alone by the government... the right most valued by civilized men." Privacy isn’t just Privilege, it is nonnegotiable right, and deserves to be treated as such.
The personal connection Americans have with their phones, tablets, and computers; and the rising popularity of online shopping and social websites due to the massive influence the social media has on Americans, it is clear why this generation is called the Information Age, also known as Digital Age. With the Internet being a huge part of our lives, more and more personal data is being made available, because of our ever-increasing dependence and use of the Internet on our phones, tablets, and computers. Some corporations such as Google, Amazon, and Facebook; governments, and other third parties have been tracking our internet use and acquiring data in order to provide personalized services and advertisements for consumers. Many American such as Nicholas Carr who wrote the article “Tracking Is an Assault on Liberty, With Real Dangers,” Anil Dagar who wrote the article “Internet, Economy and Privacy,” and Grace Nasri who wrote the article “Why Consumers are Increasingly Willing to Trade Data for Personalization,” believe that the continuing loss of personal privacy may lead us as a society to devalue the concept of privacy and see privacy as outdated and unimportant. Privacy is dead and corporations, governments, and third parties murdered it for their personal gain not for the interest of the public as they claim. There are more disadvantages than advantages on letting corporations, governments, and third parties track and acquire data to personalized services and advertisements for us.
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.
Solove, Daniel J. “5 Myths about Privacy” Washington Post: B3. Jun 16 2013. SIRS. Web. 10
This world has changed, even as 20 years old, I am afraid of where technology is going already everyone is glued to it; as a kid computers were new, but we didn’t care we played outside, and cell phones were for emergencies, not fun. Due to technology privacy almost doesn’t exist in this day of technology anymore, there are secret spy cameras being placed in homes by jealous friends or family; social media sites pushing you to spill your age, looks, feelings, life story, and more, and “Big Brother” and “Little Brother” everywhere. Everyone has to be careful because everywhere there is someone trying to steal someone’s identity whether the reason is for money, for legality in a new country, or even to hide a past troubled life. Privacy in the world has been, is now, and always will be extremely important. Growing up in school after getting my first cell phone I was fascinated with new technology and couldn’t wait for the next cell phone to be released. I was always highly interested in what was next, but that was then when I was a young and obvious little kid, now as a young adult in this day of age I have an entirely different feel for all of it; privacy no longer exists and technology is the primary blame.
As older siblings, friends, and cousins were denied position at school and in the work force, we realized that adults and employers had found Facebook. Our uncensored character was on display for future bosses, colleges, etc. and they were there to stay. Instead of references being the test of character for a job, it was the online identity that determined whether or not the application got even a second glance. In light of this revelation, we changed. Our Facebooks no longer reflected our true selves, but rather the person that we thought colleges and employers should see. Much like hiding our dirty laundry from prying eyes in the halls of high school, we could no longer wear our proverbial hearts on our internet sleeves, for the future was at stake. Much like what had once been the Old West, the internet was now connected with railroads—each leading back to the offline person. Tame and orderly.
Perhaps the founder of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, said it best when he claimed that privacy is no longer a “social norm.” Virtually everyone has a smart phone and everyone has social media. We continue to disclose private information willingly and the private information we’re not disclosing willingly is being extracted from our accounts anyway. Technology certainly makes these things possible. However, there is an urgent need to make laws and regulations to protect against the stuff we’re not personally disclosing. It’s unsettling to think we are living in 1984 in the 21st century.
The privacy of the individual is the most important right. Without privacy, the democratic system that we know would not exist. Privacy is one of the fundamental values on which our country was founded. There are exceptions to privacy rights that are created by the need for defense and security.
Myhre, Julie. "Technology Is Invading Our Privacy." Direct Marketing News. N.p., 20 Sept. 2013. Web. 14 Apr. 2014.
Despite existing laws and privacy enhancing technological methods, the US is progressively taking full advantage of its dominant position not just as the home of companies like Facebook, Google and Twitter but also acknowledging jurisdiction on all websites registered in the US. Therefore, countries such Brazil, Iran, Russia, India and China “are now challenging United States hegemony of the Internet and even calling for the creation of a new governing body to oversee Internet policy” (Brooke, 2012, p.245).
Stout, Kay. "The battle of full disclosure on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Plaxo, Orkut et al." Another Point of View. N.p., 20 Nov 2009. Web. 1 Apr. 2014. .
Mundie, Craig. "Privacy Pragmatism: Focus on Data Use, Not Data Collection." Foreign Affairs Mar. 2014: n. pag. 5. Web.