The Ethics Of Privacy

While interpreting Should We Ditch the Idea of Privacy? by Don Tapscott, I had found that this article was my favorite. When it comes to choosing is one should stay private or keep their information public, I feel like that is up to that individual one hundred percent. In Should We Ditch the Idea of Privacy? Tapscott went over how many people should be more open and post more information on the internet to allow others to get a sense of what is going on. He believed Facebook is a “leading social-media site that promotes information sharing” making everyone’s life an open book for everyone to read and learn from. Additionally, to help is one is struggling with any mental health issues. Tapscott believes that by sharing personal information can

The right to privacy means controlling your own personal information and the ability to allow or deny access to others. As Americans, we feel it's a right not a privilege to have privacy. IT technology and the events of September 11, 2001 are diminishing that right, whether its workplace privacy or personal privacy. From sending email, applying for a job, or even using the telephone, Americans right to privacy is in danger. Personal and professional information is being stored, link, transferred, shared, and even sold without your permission or knowledge. IT technology has benefited mankind tremendously in so many areas, but its also comes with a price. Advancements in technology make all individuals vulnerable to

As a nation, we have had many first-hand experiences with terrorism and violence. The pain and suffering we are put through as a nation, people tend not to consider being subjected to government surveillance. Our security from future terrorist attacks is vital, then again, not as vital as our privacy. People shouldn’t be so quick to sacrifice their privacy rights, to allow the government to monitor national security. Giving the government the power of invading our privacy, creates an effortless way for them to violate their power and strip citizens of their constitutional rights. People will argue that the price one has to pay for safety, is giving up their rights to privacy. As Benjamin Franklin once said, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety” (Independence Hall Association). In other words, those willing to give up their privacy for security, deserve neither. We the people, those who assemble this nation, should not allow the government to invade our privacy or void our 4th amendment right.

The topic of this paper is privacy. It will talk about the ethical and legal reasons for maintain privacy. The audience for this paper is high school level teachers in a school with one-to-one devices for every student.

I, Savannah Parmelee believe an individual's right to privacy should be protected if they do not violate the law to a certain degree therefore, I plan to seek out evidence during my research that supports this controlling idea. I am greatly concerned about this topic due to the people’s privacy not being fully protected for both terrorist and by the government.In the video “Impact of drones on privacy rights” on “CBS This Morning” claims that “Lakota, N.D., is the first known site where a drone was used domestically to help arrest a U.S. citizen.” What the quote is saying is that drones helped arrest a U.S. citizen. The incident in the video proves that drones can help see illegal activities happening and can try to stop

In the book 1984, by George Orwell, privacy was a very rare thing and not a lot of people were able to have it. The book was based in a city named Oceania, which was controlled by a totalitarian government with its leader being Big Brother. In this dystopia, the citizens have no control over their lives. Privacy was never fully granted by the totalitarian government. To make sure the citizens were being loyal to their government, they were constantly being watched whether they liked it or not. They didn’t have a choice. Even the people’s thoughts were being monitored. The citizens were even being surveilled by telescreen in the comfort of their own home, excluding the exception of privileged Inner Party members. Throughout 1984, privacy

In today’s society, the word “privacy” has become ubiquitous. When discussing whether government surveillance and data collection pose a threat to privacy, the most common retort against privacy advocates – by those in favor of databases, video surveillance, spyware, data mining and other modern surveillance measures – is this line: "If I’m not doing anything wrong, what would I have to hide?" The allowance of the government’s gathering and analysis of our personal information stems from an inadequate definition of what privacy is and the eternal value that privacy possesses. The adherents of the “nothing-to-hide” argument say that because the information will never be disclosed to the public, the “privacy interest is minimal, and the security interest in preventing terrorism is much more important.” 1 In an era where the patterns we leave behind will inevitably become the focus for whatever authority, the issue of privacy affects more than just individuals hiding a wrong. In this essay, I will explore the state of online privacy in wake of the government’s warrantless data collection. Respectively, the nothing-to-hide argument and its key variants in more depth.

With social media growing there seems to be a lack of privacy. Everyone posts where they are and what they are doing and then everyone that follows reads the post and knows that is happening like they are there in person. In “Should We Ditch the Idea of Privacy” by Don Tapscott mentions the author of Whole Earth Catalog, Stewart Brand, who said “I’d be totally happy if my personal DNA mapping was published” (Tapscott 118). It is mind blowing how open many people are on social media. By, metaphorically, releasing one’s DNA mapping anyone has complete access to creating a clone. Unless someone has a couple thousand dollars laying around ones DNA mapping is far fetch, however by posting the street one lives on, on a public site is just as bad.

McGraw, Dempsey, Harris, and Goldman (2009) agree with this concept by stating that it is important for the government and health agencies to respond to privacy and security risks, not just to build trust and avoid embarrassment, but because good health care depends on it. Without measures in place to protect their information patients will refuse to give out their information to protect themselves. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 hinders the comfort ability of having electronic health records because the current regulations does not apply to the businesses from the outside the health care industry that are now handling health information. Even if HIPAA’s rules was strengthened, they would not be well suited to the new businesses because the privacy principles in the framework are too broad to work across platforms and business models (McGraw et al., 2009).

Everyone should have their own privacy in order to secure our personal and business. Most people do not like when some stranger is keep looking at you anything you do and talk. In 1984, that is called Big Brother is watching you through the telescreen. Telescreen can always see and hear whatever people are doing and privacy setting. There are no such as privacy and secrets because telescreens were everywhere such as streets, houses and restrooms. In 1984, the main character is Winston Smith who works at Ministry of the Truth. He believed that privacy should have in his society which against with Big Brother. Winston can not write his journals because writing journals are illegal. Therefore he needed to hide his journals in the corner of his house where telescreen could not see it. It can be sentenced by death and put in the labor campus for 25 years when people in 1984 who write journals. The right of privacy is most important than national security because citizens should have freedom, government has no right to control people’s business and people would be unsafe, unsecured under strict government.

How different countries and organizations are approaching privacy issues along with my predictions how it will unfold the future

"America is founded on the idea of a democracy BY and FOR the people. But when these people feel attacked that their rights are being stripped away from them by higher authorities, it is difficult to believe in that saying. With the recent explode in the use of social media platforms, many feel their private life’s are being exposed illegally and certainly unwillingly. Privacy is a key component to people being able to produce for the country and their societies. The right to privacy is most often cited in the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, which states: No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

As you could see in the above reflection of our privacy protection laws, currently, we do not have a direct cause of action for breach of privacy. However, I will explain other torts that may be available in court against the possible unlawful surveillance of you and your family.

In this section review the literature on ethical issues on privacy in life followed by studies done pertaining to this area of privacy related study. Mason (1986) lists four ethical issues of the information age: privacy, accuracy, property and accessibility (PAPA). The growth of the information technologies with their capacity for control, communication, information processing, storage and retrieval; and the increased value of information in decision-making might lead decision makers to try to acquire our personal information by invading our privacy. Accuracy is related to the correctness of information delivered through

Privacy laws are established because people have a right to privacy, to an extent. For many years people have argued over their privacy rights, from online videos, to people spying on them, even people stealing internet. People think that they should be completely secluded from others seeing what they’re doing, but in all reality, there’s no stopping people from seeing what you are doing. With more people using the flaws within our media and lives, we as a society must come to accept the fact that people are watching us.