Debate on Internet Privacy - Essay Example

Debate on Internet Privacy Name Institution Internet Privacy Increasing advances in technology accompanied by advances in application of technology especially in social media and the modern smart phones has changed how collection and dissemination of information is done. It is easy to collect and disseminate personal information very rapidly than before. It has changed the way people think about protection of private personal information. There are many technologies handling personal information that is potential to have a damaging effect on one’s privacy over the internet. The effect can be good or bad based on the technology used (Young & Quan-Haase, 2009). Internet has really made sharing of information very fast and easy. It has thousands of uses and applications in the modern day world. Moreover, new internet uses and applications come up every day. Such developments cause privacy and security concerns resulting from application of internet (O’Neil, 2001). High-speed internet connections allow flexibility in terms of working location and working hours. Assessing information from the internet can be anywhere and everywhere by using gadgets such as mobile phones, cellular routers, data cards to mention but a few. Education is key while addressing privacy concerns in the internet. There are education materials for all levels of schooling form nursery to post-doctoral. Internet has made it possible to practice distance education. Moreover, people do their assignments self-guided and in their private rooms (Caudill & Murphy, 2000). Internet compromises instances where students should do assignments and exams privately. It allows you them to consult and take each other’s opinion before submitting their individual work to the teacher. Through emails, students can share assignments and submit to different lecturers at a low cost and almost instantaneously. Ability to access other computers and information remotely from their stores is another advantage of internet as well as its major weakness in promoting privacy of company information. Workers can access company information at their residential areas. The big concern is not what they do with it but who do they share this information with. Company information gets to the wrong hands in such ways among other means. The right to personal privacy while displaying information concerning an individual, storing or providing to third parties entails internet privacy. Privacy can comprise personally identifying information or non-personally identifying information. Privacy is very vital to protect an individual from enemy, to protect business from thieves and competitors or to protect people from abuses by those in power as explained by Bruce Scheier in his essay The Value of Privacy (Caudill & Murphy, 2000). In Facebook alone, billions of people sign up and divulge endless details about themselves and their lives. Important to note is that some of this information is provided by friends, business companies and organisations or institutions that someone is affiliated to. The same thing is happening in Google, twitter and other companies that connect people and enable them share personal data (Young & Quan-Haase, 2009). Several governments and institutions put immense effort to educate people on the importance of ensuring internet privacy and ignoring attempts to share person-identifying information on with unknown or suspicious individuals over the net. However, such repeated warning has become a cliché and people continue putting their personal identifying information on the internet at higher rate than before (Brown, 2000). Individual complacency is to blame. People are ignorant of the real risks of putting personal information in the internet and how much trouble it can cause. Many people are enticed by immediate satisfaction of interacting with friends, knowing their whereabouts, knowing important changes in their lives online as well as them getting to know what is happening in our lives too. Nevertheless, people ought to consider how such personal and private information can be dangerous if used against them because the possibilities of the later are frightening (Brown, 2000). More to peoples’ complacency is the massive campaign by organisations that make earning out of people sharing personal information in the internet. They try to advocate sharing of personal information as a new culture of living, swag and brand it with all manner of advantages without a single warning of the impending danger of the information if used against the individual. It is not that people are so much willing to share such information nowadays but it is because nobody pays attention to think about the effect of sharing that information. This acts much to the satisfaction and joy of internet based companies. To such internet-based organisations, institutions, and governments that benefit if people develop a culture of sharing information, we have given them what they wanted from us without any resistance. The death of our privacy is our own mistake. Nobody is aware of the long-term trend and consequences of making so much of our vital information known to the entire world (Caudill & Murphy, 2000). Nobody should dismiss internet threat to personal privacy as mere paranoia or intention to reduce gains made by internet-based organisations. We have seen a lot happening. We have seen people stalked through internet and killed ultimately. Thousands of e-commerce customers witness their credit card numbers sold online. Conflicting interests, technology snafus make internet privacy a complicated issue. We sites are interested to know all about people. Criminals who break into such sites further complicate the matter. They steal private information and use it for their own gain (Solove, 2007). Internet was born as an open research tool. It never was to allow breakage into individual’s privacy or security. However, it offers a perfect anonymity and users use it as if they are not seen. In the internet, people often do or say things that they cannot do or say in the real world. People post notes in the in chat rooms and social websites that they do not wish their children, spouses or bosses should see. Only to find out later that the squabbles they are facing is because the information leaked and reached to the wrong people (Young & Quan-Haase, 2009). Internet privacy does not always result from criminal activity. Some are useful in getting the criminals. It is possible to track down the former owner of a car that you are driving. For instance, if a car has some damage, you can find out whether it has ever had an accident before you bought it. With the car identification number, you can be able to look up the original owner (Caudill & Murphy, 2000).Privacy over the internet is synonymous to freedom. People never realise its worth until it is gone. Those who have been victims of internet privacy know how painful it is and take the necessary measures to avoid sharing too much personal information with the world over internet. Web companies that collect data for marketing purposes are the center of debate on internet privacy. People are not sure what would happen if these companies were ill intentioned or careless with the information. Moreover, collecting data surreptiously creates a bad reputation for a company. Microsoft and Intel were forced to turn off features that track customers in the internet (Paine, Reips, Stieger, Joinson, & Buchanan, 2007). Consumers in the internet expect the organisations to protect their privacy. However, these companies have lost their abilities to protect their client’s information. Hence, customers are the big losers. Trying to limit amount of information required in such sites opens another battleground. Internet-based organisations argue that they require personal information to provide personalised services. Which is true. Web users are very concerned about their privacy than anything else. They are afraid that their personal information will be misused. However, internet-based organisations argue that people are exaggerating internet privacy. They believe there are greater privacy concerns online than offline. For example, people steal letters from a mailbox and government security agencies tap phone calls (Caudill & Murphy, 2000). Breaking someone’s internet privacy is a very uncomfortable experience for the victim. It is synonymous with someone following you on the shopping mall with a hidden camera to check what you are picking. It would be that disturbing. It is worse when you do not know that someone is stalking on you. Similarly internet customers most of the times are not aware that they are being stalked. It is normal to receive uninvited communications in the internet, which suggests that it is possible for people to surreptitious invade your internet privacy rights (Baird, 2014). Job interviews are becoming very difficult for interviewees. This is because the interviewer can check online what the interviewee did on during his/her teenage years. Nevertheless, it helps companies to get the most suited candidate for the job. Many have lost jobs and regret up to today on why they posted a certain update on social websites. This is because an update can suggest your thinking, character, and attitude towards one’s job. If it gets to the attention of one’s boss, he/she should be ready to receive the consequences of his/her online work (Brown, 2000). It is interesting to note that billions of people use free applications and free services on the internet without getting concerned how the owner earns from it. Nobody seems concerned that we pay money for products and that man makes nothing is that free. What people do not understand is that if you get a product if you pay money. However, if you do not pay money, then conclusively we can say you are the product. The big question here is that you need to sacrifice your personal information to get the so-called free services on the internet (“Security experts raise privacy concerns about Internet connected technology,” n.d.). Those who are quick to understand the secret behind free online services become alert and concerned on what kind of information to share online. The future of ethics and democracy on the internet is worrying. It is predictable that it will be worse than it is today. This is because institutions, governments, and internet-based organisations threaten our privacy by continually inventing perva sive commercial surveillance system with citizens being aware (Young & Quan-Haase, 2009). People interpret internet privacy in their own different and unique ways. A key example is the European versus America understanding of privacy. In Europe, privacy is a right enshrined in the constitution. This is because of what happened with Hitler and communism. There are adequate civil safeguards concerning privacy. Although privacy is a form of right in America, it remains a free market, which is used to determine most of the policies concerning internet (Caudill & Murphy, 2000). It is debatable to conclude that Europeans are driving the policy debate while the Americans are trying to lobby people to accept ideas that there can be a stable world with self-regulation and to trust internet-based companies just to grow the economy. This drives the debate into commercial imperatives (Brown, 2000). Why would some click yes or agree to a privacy policy without reading and understanding what it really means. Internet-based organisations are clever on this. They write very long privacy policies just to discourage customers from reading them. Customers have the responsibility to find out contents of a privacy statement before installing or using programs online. However, these organisations fail to honour or guarantee privacy policies despite having them. Thus, they make customers vulnerable to online criminals, fraudsters and other people interested with their private information (“​Online privacy demands global action, just as with apartheid - UN human rights chief,” n.d.). Use of CCTVs participates in violation of internet privacy. It usually keeps a record of our movements and presence everywhere we go. Cameras are located in the streets, supermarkets, and works stations to monitor us. Cameras installed on mobile phones are the worst in internet privacy adherence. Every time there is a scene on the streets or other places, people capture videos and photographs posting them in YouTube and social online sites. This can greatly affect the privacy rights of the victims (Caudill & Murphy, 2000). Some governments are doing their best to curb internet privacy violations. Nevertheless, nobody knows whether their best is adequate to protect citizens from the rapidly changing and dynamic internet applications. In USA, Obama administration announced new online privacy rules. It is comforting to see the white house having the right intentions to protect their citizens from internet privacy menace (Young & Quan-Haase, 2009). Another setback is that people companies change privacy challenges often. Therefore, consumers are not aware which challenges are applicable at a certain period. Moreover, the government policies rely on companies’ goodwill to commit not to track someone. There is no explicit law that bar companies from tracking their customers. Hence customers are still left vulnerable and at the mercy of those companies. Internet privacy remains a mirage with hopes of it happening remaining largely a mirage (“Getting to root of privacy debate,” 2014). People do many things online that they would want to keep secret and private. Many people want to use search engines, chat, and view websites without anybody stalking on them. Those who support various parties would not want their friends, colleagues or seniors know their political stand because of the anticipated consequences. Others would want to visit their health websites to check symptoms and management of certain health conditions. They would feel embarrassed if anybody can tell which condition is affecting them by just following their search history (Young & Quan-Haase, 2009). Internet companies have recently acquired nickname digital dossiers. They reveal people’s information anyhow, a cult that needs to be put to a halt at whatever the cost. It is unbecoming to allow these companies possess all the information regarding the websites we visit, the friends we chat with and everything we have ever searched without them letting us know how much they know us, where they take this information about us or with who they share that information (Schauer, 1997). It is worth knowing why personal information is the new internet’s gold mine. Some argue that it is useful in personalized advertising to internet consumers. With more proving, internet companies reveal that they sell this data to shadowy data brokers. How those brokers turn it into cash remains unknown to us. The investment by internet companies to oppose bills that seek to regulate internet privacy gives an impression of much money they generate from personal information in the internet (Brown, 2000). With more public education campaigns, complacency is declining. The public inclination to demand more privacy rights is a welcome gesture towards promotion of internet privacy. Laws that compel the government to seek search warrants before intercepting someone’s calls or e-mails are welcome and promote privacy of its citizens. In contemporary life, our private activity are becoming public record because of keeping a blog or because we cannot control tracking ability of the internet companies (Caudill & Murphy, 2000). Digital literacy is important to ensure people use internet in respect to ethical pillars such as maintaining privacy. It could be true that too much privacy hides information useful in creative projects but too little privacy devalue innovation. There is need to maintain a balance to promoted personal privacy as well as achieve the benefits of reduced privacy among people(Young & Quan-Haase, 2009). References ​Online privacy demands global action, just as with apartheid - UN human rights chief. (n.d.). Retrieved January 10, 2014, from http://rt.com/news/online-privacy-protection-pillay-849/ Baird, D. (2014, January 4). Should Edward Snowden’s revelations really have come as such a shock to us? The Toronto Star. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2014/01/04/the_unreasonable_expectation_of_online_privacy.html Brown, K. (2000). The Internet Privacy Debate. International Journal of Communications Law and Policy, 6. Retrieved from http://www.ijclp.net/files/ijclp_web-doc_11-6-2001.pdf Caudill, E. M., & Murphy, P. E. (2000). Consumer online privacy: legal and ethical issues. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 7–19. Getting to root of privacy debate. (2014, January 8). The Toronto Star. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com/opinion/letters_to_the_editors/2014/01/08/getting_to_root_of_privacy_debate.html O’Neil, D. (2001). Analysis of Internet users’ level of online privacy concerns. Social Science Computer Review, 19(1), 17–31. Paine, C., Reips, U.-D., Stieger, S., Joinson, A., & Buchanan, T. (2007). Internet users’ perceptions of “privacy concerns” and “privacy actions.” International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65(6), 526–536. Schauer, F. (1997). Internet Privacy and the Public-Private Distinction. Jurimetrics, 38, 555. Security experts raise privacy concerns about Internet connected technology. (n.d.). http://zeenews.india.com. Retrieved January 10, 2014, from http://zeenews.india.com/news/net-news/security-experts-raise-privacy-concerns-about-internet-connected-technology_902765.html Solove, D. J. (2007). The future of reputation: Gossip, rumor, and privacy on the Internet. Yale University Press. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=F6liiKZwX_oC&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=internet+privacy+debate&ots=weuk8cncAK&sig=JPFboLvmEJy55F6-Is-libTIrAk Young, A. L., & Quan-Haase, A. (2009). Information revelation and internet privacy concerns on social network sites: a case study of facebook. In Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Communities and technologies (pp. 265–274). Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1556499 Read More