Internet Privacy: Behind closed doors

Internet Privacy is a very huge issue today, because the generation today is a generation that live online and on-camera. The same way people in times past expect the mails and private correspondence to be private, so do people today expect what they do, even if it is online as long as it is tagged as private, it should remain so. The legal system has come a long way since the 1800’s, with every case a new precedence is set and it is adapting with the jetting changes of our time. Now MRI scan are admissible in court as evidence in to a defendant’s thought pattern, so privacy rights and human rights have over the years been eroded by the legal system.

Since the introduction of the Internet, the way we did many things before became obsolete. Even some words took a whole new meaning or where expanded in extent. Internet privacy has been an issue that has never been set in stone from the get go. It has been a very dynamic issue that is a continuum. Of all the human rights in the international catalog, privacy is perhaps the most difficult to define. Privacy is the state of being free from unsanctioned intrusion (Houghton Mifflin Company, 2009). Privacy is a fundamental human right. It underpins human dignity and other values such as freedom of association and freedom of speech. It has become one of the most important human rights of the modern age (Laurant, 2003). It is something everyone as a human being holds dear and cherishes, if it is allowed to be eroded then where is the sense of self and individuality?

This issue not only deals with privacy but also free speech, because if we are to worry about every thing we write and put out there, then where is our free speech? Facebook and many other sites like it, are the way the world lives today. With all the progress made with technology, trying to inhibit the outcome of it is simply ludicrous. With the advent of cyber social communities, the world has become a global village. Now people can keep in-touch with friends they otherwise would have lost contact with, and precious relationships saved. People even forge connections business connections and valuable networks. So putting personal information and a profile so that potential contacts and network circles can get to know you and add a personal touch to an otherwise impersonal form of communication should not be something to be punished for. As mentioned in the case the lawyer looking to obtain these personal writing is actually doing something that is unethical. If a person where going through a trauma and decides to open up to a few close people to facilitate healing, does that mean that everything they say is open to the public? Like Phillip Malone, director of the cyber law clinic at the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School, says the generation that has grown up online have different privacy expectations, and believe they can put material on the Internet with the expectation that only a limited group will see it (Stein, 2008). The world we live in today is a world where people have gotten used to living in front of cameras and the Internet. So because of these changes the notion of privacy and individuality should be done away with?

Networking online is not only limited to social sites, but also even ones where people go to escape the pressures of life and unwind. People relax in so many ways, some people play golf with golf buddies or poker with poker buddies, some people go surfing with other surfers, but most of the time they do these things with people the barely know but are united just by their love of a common sport or game. Now with technology in the mix new types or recreational activities have sprung up. People now go online to play games that help them escape, sometimes even assume a second identity. Second life is a virtual world developed by Linden Lab that launched on June 23, 2003, and is accessible on the Internet. A free client program called the King Bee[1] enables its users, called Residents, to interact with each other through avatars. Residents can explore, meet other residents, socialize, participate in individual and group activities, and create and trade virtual property and services with one another, or travel throughout the world (which residents refer to as "the grid"). Second Life is for people aged 18 and over (Wikipedia.org, 2009). It is an online game that has a community all of it own, here people take up pseudonyms and play characters that they create. So people escape into a world where they want to be able to say things anonymously and get some burdens off. If privacy does not apply here where else can people go to get the privacy they need?

Now begs the question, do we have a right to privacy when we share personal information with friends or family in real space? And does the same apply when we share this under a pseudonym in second life. With the way the world has changed the legal system has to pick up and not be left behind. Since the way most of our communication is made has changed new things have to be factored in when making a case. Yes the legal system is doing a good job to protect citizens better, but do they do it at the expense of the same people? When changes occur people should consider, what is replacing what? If a private conversation between two people could be considered evidence before then a phone call can used as evidence, if a private letter is admissible in court as evidence then emails and be used, if a public announcement is evidence then a blog can be an evidence.

In conclusion, when we are trying to adapt to changes it should not be used as an excuse to get rid of basic fundamental human rights.


REFERENCES
Houghton Mifflin Company. (n.d.). Privacy - definition. Retrieved April 6, 2010, from The free dictionary: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/privacy

Laurant, C. (2003). Privacy and Human Rights 2003: Overview. Retrieved April 6, 2010, from Privacy International: http://www.privacyinternational.org/survey/phr2003/overview.htm

Stein, M. (2008, February 05). Daily Brief. Retrieved April 06, 2010, from Portfolio.com: http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/daily-brief/2008/02/05/facebook-page-or-exhibit-a-in-court

Wikipedia.org. (2009, March). Second Life - Wikipedia. Retrieved April 06, 2010, from Wikipedia.org: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Life

Facebooking or facing the book!

With the way the world is structured today and the amount of technology available, trying to impose an age when kids should be exposed to the wonders of the internet is basically impossible. The way we grew up and the way kids today are growing is so vastly different; things we never knew into our late teenage years, kids  today know it at five.

Talking ideally kids should not be allowed to be on the internet and on online communities until they have a better sense of self and safety. The world we live in is very far from ideal, so the best a parent can do is to educate your child early to know the real fact, real dangers and how to keep safe. Sites like Facebook say kids under thirteen are not allowed to register on Facebook and some sites ban people under eighteen. How do they and other such sites know when a kid lies about their age?

All in all, parents are the ones to determine at what age their kid should be exposed to the cyber-world. Some parents seem to know the dangers and address them, but some think that ignoring it and blindly forbidding their children will solve their problems. With internet available everywhere and some parent who have no restriction on their kids (giving a ten year old a personal laptop, getting an eight year old an internet equipped cell phone), not educating your children on the right uses and safety tips on the internet is not advisable. If left to me, kids should not be allowed on the internet till they are thirty-five years.

Looking at the trends that are common today, where kids, teenagers and young adults who seem to have no knowledge or regard for the longevity and wide availability on information posted on the internet, go on to post damaging and potentially damaging data of personal nature for the world wide web. Everywhere we look today we see people who are posting incriminating and damaging information and data about themselves. Most of these information are posted during inebriated periods or thoughtless adrenaline exuberant times.Like the cases we see in the media, examples are: a fire house volunteer whose wife posed naked was outed three years later, by someone in South Africa who saw the pictures; the mayor of Arlington, Oregon whose racy fire truck picture after being posted on Myspace forced her eviction from office; and the case of Casey Anthony whose most damaging evidence where picture on social networking sites. Need I go on, everyday in the media around the world, we see the dire consequences of thoughtless moments made gawking exhibits for the rest of the world on cyber space. So should parents and authority figures take this more seriously and take a firmer stand, I believe it goes without saying.

 It is a known fact now that employers and potential employers do thorough searches on employees and potential employees, both on search engines and social media sites. With the advent of smartphones the chances of ruining your career or life have increased exponentially, with greater access to speedy upload of embarrassing and scandalous information. Today with just the click or push of a button people can successfully commit character assassination against themselves before they even realize it. So next time you have an itchy button finger, ask yourself who the collateral damage in your information are.

http://www.facebook.com/policy.php
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/aug/07/socialnetworking.facebook
http://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Censor/cens3.html
http://www.onlinedatinglaw.com/checklist.htm
http://www.ftc.gov/privacy/privacyinitiatives/childrens.html
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/23445683
http://statter911.com/2011/06/19/nude-fire-station-photos-continue-to-cause-trouble-for-pasadena-texas-fire-department-three-years-after-it-was-dealt-with-a-good-reminder-about-social-media-ethics-just-plain-ignorance/