Skip to main content

Privacy from the government in the internet era

The internet seems to be a hot topic of discussion in our class. There are many grey areas when it comes to legislation and the internet era- privacy included. Chapter 5 discusses privacy and the government. On page 126 the texts states that citizens are protected from unlawful searches and seizures under the 4th amendment. Then it goes on to explain the electronic communications privacy act. The ECPA protects citizens further from electronic unlawful searches and seizures. This all sounds good to me, but I started to wonder if this legislation from '86 was enough to protect citizen's right to privacy online especially from the government.


When I started to think about privacy and the government I immediately thought about the Edward Snowden case. In The article titled Edward Snowden: the whistleblower behind the NSA surveillance revelations states "he believed that the value of the internet, along with basic privacy, is being rapidly destroyed by ubiquitous surveillance.....Once he reached the conclusion that the NSA's surveillance net would soon be irrevocable, he said it was just a matter of time before he chose to act. "What they're doing" poses "an existential threat to democracy", he said." (Greenwald, MacAskill, and Poitras). This case is very concerning to me because it shed light on government surveillance. I think this opened the door for discussion on what the government should be allowed to look at for the case of public safety and what should truly remain private. It seems again we are lacking solid legislation on what is ok and what isn't surrounding the internet and in this case internet privacy.


Citation:
Greenwald, Glenn, et al. “Edward Snowden: the Whistleblower behind the NSA Surveillance
Revelations.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 11 June 2013, www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance.        


                 Tedford, Thomas L., and Dale Herbeck. Freedom of speech in the United States. 8th ed., State College, PA, Strata Publishing, Inc., 2017.



Comments

  1. AnonymousOctober 3, 2017 at 2:45 PM

    The issue of government surveillance brings to mind the panopticon, and the idea that there is always the possibility that you are being watched. This changes people's behavior, it causes them to act in private the way they would in public. 1984, the novel by George Orwell, is an exploration of what this could look like, and what it does to people and to society.

    What Edward Snowden revealed was more than just the government surveilling people's behavior's on the internet-- that was part of it but, the NSA was actually collecting data about phone calls people were making. This revelation had the effect of making people more wary about the way they behave online, what they Google, post, etc. They don't want to do anything that would cause them to get flagged, and get into trouble.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Gamifying Citizenship

The historical context of freedom of speech is an extremely interesting one. Why is it that the concept of free speech has been an undying one and has span the history of human communication. Breaking free speech in to three traditional rationals makes the concept easier to understand and definitely makes sense. These three modes of freedom of speech are philosophical, political and individual. They are easy to distinct from one another and function in completely different ways. From a philosophical level, free speech is a device of truth. That if people are able to speak freely and let their ideas compete, "in the long run the truth will prevail" according to Tedford and Herbeck. I find this interesting, because in my mind, this is the most important facet of free speech. I say this, because I find free speech essential for any kind of societal advancements. If people are not allowed to speak their mind and share their ideas, or discredit others ideas, how is a society supp...
1 comment
Read more

Wedding Cake Court Case (make-up post)

Wedding cake court case involving a gay couple, Charlie Craig & David Mullins, and a cake baker, Jack Phillips, who refused to bake a wedding cake for the couple. Just all around, it's a tricky debate with many different angles due to the baker arguing on the grounds of the First Amendment---its protections for free speech and the free exercise of religion. In the end, I think it comes down to whether we consider baking a cake qualifies an exercise of freedom of expression. I would say that it depends on the situation/context of baking. If Mr. Phillips wants his cake baking to be categorized artistic expression that falls under free expression, he can just go bake a cake on his own. Only then when he's on his own private time does it qualify, but as soon as he offered his skills as a public service via his business, I'd argue he gave that right to expression up. Also, what's stopping other artisans/professional services to deny services? By Mr. Phillip's logic...
Post a Comment
Read more

Why is Freedom of Speech Important in a Democracy

While reading Chapter 15, I got the sense that the book was really coming full circle. In the first week of class, we established a meaning for freedom of speech and that shared meaning allowed us to navigate the classroom together as a classroom and a collective group. Creating a space that also involved mutual respect of opinons but encouraging difference in them as well. This brings me to an article I found about the importance of Freedom of Speech in a democracy. It is a basic human right to be able to express opinions and beliefs in our country. Although that is the main component, just like we established in class the first few weeks, in a government and democracy, Freedom of Speech also consists of the ability to listen to people with difference in opinions. In the article , editor Rachael  Jolly says, “ We are going through a time where people don’t want to be on a panel with people they disagree with. But we should feel comfortable being in a room with people who disagree ...
4 comments
Read more