Social Media or Social Strain?
A family sits around their dining room table on your average Thursday evening, sharing a meal together. But as you look more closely, the family is not sharing with each other, but instead sharing on their devices. The hard-working, bread-winning father has his laptop out, conferencing with some co-workers in an effort to finish his work that is due the next morning. His son is typing away on his smart phone, texting his friends about how boring his life is, while his sister chats on the phone with her boyfriend. This leaves their mother plenty of time to update her Facebook with the latest photos of their family vacation.
In Meghan Daum’s, I Don’t Give a Tweet What You’re Doing, she addresses the issue the world
…show more content…
Daum, being a member of the minority anti-Twitter epidemic, does not solely disapprove of Twitter for being seemingly useless, …show more content…
Millions of people resent the government for being somewhat of a Big Brother, making accusations of spyware programs and hacking, supposedly regulating our every move, yet freely share exceedingly personal information publicly. It has become common practice to post about your family members, location, phone number, email address, workplace, political affiliations and so much more, reaching far beyond the simple question “what are you doing now?”. Although many sites like Twitter and Instagram have a delete button, your postings are in actuality never erased permanently, but instead are gone from your so-called timeline. Daum notes in her essay that, “in a world without boundaries… privacy as a cultural or even personal value has been going out of style for quite some time now” (233). It is almost hypocritical in a way how our society pretends to value secrecy and discretion, yet people of all walks of life exhibit very little self restraint when it comes to filtering the kinds of information they post about
“The standards of what we want to keep private and what we make public are constantly evolving. Over the course of Western history, we’ve developed a desire for more privacy, quite possibly as a status symbol…”(Singer) Technological change leads to new abuses, creating new challenges to security, but society adapts to those challenges. To meet the innate need for privacy, we learn what to reveal and where, and how to keep secret what we don't want to disclose. “Whether Facebook and similar sites are reflecting a change in social norms about privacy or are actually driving that change, that half a billion people are now on Facebook suggests that people believe the benefits of connecting with others, sharing information, networking, self-promoting, flirting, and bragging outweigh breaches of privacy that accompany such behaviours,”(Singer) This is obvious by the continuous and unceasing use of social media platforms, but what needs to be considered is that this information is being provided willingly. “More difficult questions arise when the loss of privacy is not in any sense a choice.”(Singer) When the choice to be anonymous it taken away through social media, the person loses the ability to keep their personal information
Dr. Restak seems perfectly content to let this problem go unmitigated, and Dr. Samuel tries to offer solutions, though they don’t truly get to the heart of the issue. Mr. Richtel, though, doesn’t seem content to let people go about their lives without realizing the potential ramifications overuse of technology might have on their lives. By shining a spotlight on an actual family, he seeks to show his readers how families in the modern age truly exist, and perhaps to have his readers recognize behaviors similar to those described in the article in themselves, and make a conscious effort to try to change their habits. By explaining the medical underpinnings of this behavior and how it affects our physical health, he gives explanation for why such behaviors are so pervasive in our
It has become comfortably accepted, without any regard to tact, to divulge even the most sensitive information to a complete stranger. For example, in her article, “Friending: The Changing Definition of Friendship in the Social Media Era,” Xinran states, “I think I know most of them, but I actually don’t,” after thoroughly examining her many cyber relationships (Xinran 208). With no consideration of discretion for public reveal “social media relationships take place on display” forsaking all privacy (Vatel 2). The cloak of social media has allowed for these interactions to take place in our own comfort zones; thus, falsely allowing the sense of protection from damaging or even dangerous
It is the way of life in this age, to search the internet for leisure, research and general amusement. When you are not able to communicate with someone face to face, you pick up the phone. When you venture out of your house for any reason and into populated areas, you are recorded by businesses, photographed by red light cameras, and recorded by traffic cameras. The government has the capacity to watch all of this use. Last year, Edward Snowden’s leaked documents proved it that Big Brother is indeed watching. (Orwell 1)
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.
“Human beings are not meant to lose their anonymity and privacy,” Sarah Chalke. When using the web, web users’ information tend to be easily accessible to government officials or hackers. In Nicholas Carr’s “Tracking Is an Assault on Liberty,” Jim Harpers’ “Web Users Get As Much As They Give,” and Lori Andrews “Facebook is Using You” the topic of internet tracking stirred up many mixed views; however, some form of compromise can be reached on this issue, laws that enforces companies to inform the public on what personal information is being taken, creating advisements on social media about how web users can be more cautious to what kind of information they give out online, enabling your privacy settings and programs, eliminating weblining,
If a stranger would approach someone on the street, would one casually offer personal information to him? Would one allow him to follow and record one’s activities? Although it may be obvious in the concrete world that one would not allow it, the behavior of the general population on the Internet is strikingly different. While surfing websites such as Facebook, Twitter, and Google, many people provide personal details to enhance their online profile? These websites retain vast amounts of personal information from their users. Although this practice benefits the user as well, unrestricted profiling can become an alarming catastrophe. Unless the threat to internet users privacy are shown to exceed the benefits, we should not regulate the internet, rather we should educate the public how to be more responsible about their identities.
The United States government is up to its ears in the personal information it has collected from its citizens. Americans are becoming increasingly “aware of these slowly eroding walls of privacy,”(Hirsh) and more than half polled admit concern “about the overall accumulation of personal information about them “by […] law enforcement, government, […] and other groups,” though “they accept it as an unavoidable modern phenomenon” (Hirsh). The question is, how far is too far to trust the government with the collection, proper storage, and usage of this information? Studies show that “Americans believe that business, government, social-media sites, and other groups are accessing their most personal information without their consent” (Hirsh). People should be given the ability to admit or deny access to their personal information. The government does not have a right to use whatever information it wants for any purpose it wishes. Michael Hayden, once the NSA director for seven years, says, “Even I recognize that it's one thing for Google to know too much, because they aren't putting me in jail. It's another thing for government, because they can coerce me” (Hirsh). The United States government's ability to collect information about its citizens and residents should be restricted by what kind of information it can take, how it can acquire it, and what it can use it for.
When you are little, it’s sharing your toys, then in school, it’s sharing your ideas with classmates and teachers, and as you settle into a career, you are expected, like in The Circle, to share your ideas to benefit the company. It seems everyone wants or expects a piece of you. Technology, such as phones, computers, tablets, and cameras, play a major role in staying connected or sharing with each other, but this obsessiveness is not always a good thing. When does sharing become over-sharing and detrimental to our “self” and society? From the early 1980’s to the present, the use of cell phones has grown exponentially and become increasingly dominant in today’s society. Today, it would be rare to know an individual who didn’t have a mobile phone or smart device. At first, cell phones were used only for voice communication; however, smartphones, as they are referred to today, interface with almost every aspect of our lives. Sharing has exploded! People can’t help sharing every single thing they do in their daily lives. Cameras, like phones, are everywhere, every street corner, every building, every pocket via cell phones and even in space attached to satellites. Cameras take high resolution photos, most record full high definition video and some even record 4k video. Today there is video taken of everything that happens in
...onal privacy dead?” brings up many other questions along with it. But there is no doubt that the government is doing all of what they are doing for safety reasons. They claim to want to make the United States as safe as possible, and this has proved to ring true in many situations. But now the inevitable new question becomes: How far is too far? Is safety more important than privacy? To know these answers, one must ask themselves and know their own opinion on the situation. But whatever their answers may be, and despite the multiple other questions that are brought up along with the topic of personal privacy, there is still one thing that is known for sure: personal privacy is dead. And unless the use of technology becomes less critical to the United States, personal privacy will always be dead. The bigger the role technology has; the less personal privacy there is.
Are the benefits of electronic communication at the expense of our privacy? How does the Internet affect the availability and use of our personal information? The Internet brings another dimension to the issue of privacy. Whether you are voting on-line or buying a book from Amazon.com you must consider how much personal information has been collected about you, with or without your consent, and how it can be used. Policies governing privacy on the Internet are still not clearly defined and many on-line users do not understand how the information they provide will be used. How much...
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.
There are many people who disagree with social networking sites being controlled by the government. They believe this because the public considers it an invasion of privacy. Freedom has been an issue for centuries. Is it right for the government to know all of our private information? As technology has developed and become essential to our society, many government commissioners dread social media and its authority and power in our society – but does this give them the authority to monitor online content? This means that the government would have access to personal and confidential information that the public display on the internet. Tom Baker, a liberal democratic MP, stated that social networking sites have replied that social networking sites consist of hypersensitive exclusive details about its users and Mr. Baker troubled that the data could possibly be exposed from all government-controlled database. Another newspaper, The Independent, cited him stating related strategy to keep phone and email files threatened to be the "most expensive snooper's charter in history". "It is deeply worrying that they now intend to monitor social networking sites which contain very sensitive data like sexual orientation, religious beliefs and political views," Mr. Bake...
The growing popularity of information technologies has significantly altered our world, and in particular, the way people interact. Social networking websites are becoming one of the primary forms of communication used by people of all ages and backgrounds. No doubt, we have seen numerous benefits from the impact of social media communication: We can easily meet and stay in touch with people, promote ourselves, and readily find information. However, these changes prompt us to consider how our moral and political values can be threatened. One common fear among users is that their privacy will be violated on the web. In her book, Privacy in Context, Helen Nissenbaum suggests a framework for understanding privacy concerns online. She focuses particularly on monitoring and tracking, and how four “pivotal transformations” caused by technology can endanger the privacy of our personal information. One website that may pose such a threat is Facebook.
As technology penetrates society through Internet sites, smartphones, social networks, and other modes of technology, questions are raised as the whether lines are being crossed. People spend a vast majority of their time spreading information about themselves and others through these various types of technology. The problem with all these variations is that there is no effective way of knowing what information is being collected and how it is used. The users of this revolutionary technology cannot control the fate of this information, but can only control their choice of releasing information into the cyber world. There is no denying that as technology becomes more and more integrated into one’s life, so does the sacrificing of that person’s privacy into the cyber world. The question being raised is today’s technology depleting the level of privacy that each member of society have? In today’s society technology has reduced our privacy due to the amount of personal information released on social networks, smartphones, and street view mapping by Google. All three of these aspects include societies tendency to provide other technology users with information about daily occurrences. The information that will be provided in this paper deals with assessing how technology impacts our privacy.