How Social Networks Are Invading Our Privacy - Essay Example

full Social Networking Sites and Invasion of Privacy 21 November (word count 884 of text only) IntroductionThe number of people using social networking sites keep increasing because people find these Internet sites very useful for them. These sites enable people to keep in touch with their families, relatives, friends, colleagues, and acquaintances. However, most people do not know how these sites capture the details of their private lives using information they provided. It is ironic and paradoxical how people upload sensitive information with hardly a thought of how other people are now able to access their personal details with ease and how the details might be used once the information has been uploaded. This paper examines four articles that discuss the issue of social networking and invasion of privacy as a relevant issue today. Discussion In his article that appeared in the American Quarterly in 1999, Rosenzweig argued that the digital revolution and the rise of the information superhighway has big implications on how people lived and worked. His article is actually a summary of four books describing the reactions of people at various times how technology will impact their lives. There were a lot of conflicting visions about what will happen with one side claiming a new utopia where people will be able to re-organize society and establish a new kinship of humanity by bringing people closer together (Rosenzweig 160) while critics feared new technologies, like what the telephone of an earlier era, will enable the government to have a listening box (eavesdrop) on its citizens and invade their privacy without the people knowing. The same critics said that a new technology like the Information Highway and the Internet will destroy home life, prevent people from visiting other people (instead use technology to keep in touch), and create a new nations of slugs too lazy to go out of their homes and offices. It is technology that had shaped societies in the past and it is the same technological changes that shape society today. The important thing about technology is that it is socially neutral and it is how people will use technology that determines the outcome or the ensuing changes that occur. Social networking sites operate and thrive under the open access policy of the Internet as the World Wide Web is conceived as the best example of liberal democracy where the individual person is a superior being entitled to protection of his rights as enshrined in democratic laws. However, this vital aspect of rights protection is conveniently ignored at times by some evil people who make other people who use these social networking sites particularly vulnerable. (305) This next article by Strahilevitz discussed the issue of what constitutes the public disclosure of private information and its twin or corollary question of what constitutes public intrusions upon seclusion or exclusion. Here, Strahilevitz brought up the first principles in law that often confound the courts when determining and deciding what happens if an information considered as private or secret by one member of an on-line community gets shared and gets exposed to other members of that community. Extremely sensitive private information shared to or with only one member can be libelous if known by a large segment of that community (Strahilevitz 920) and this article views such inadvertent access by another member who was not shared or given that specific information as a basis for tort. However, the question courts faced often when a plaintiff brings a case is whether a plaintiff had a particular expectation of privacy for an information he had shared in a networking site. The answer to this question has particular relevance on the side of a defendant who can claim that the information in question was already made public and thereby accessible by anyone. This article reviews the issues of privacy in social networking sites from a legal standpoint than from a social or sociological viewpoint. Admittedly, people share many secrets of themselves with their spouses, closest friends, parents, siblings, priests, and psychiatrists when they seek advice and yet they also consider such information as extremely private in nature. There are many situations people try to share their most intimate personal details in public situations and still consider these facts or information about themselves to be still private. As pointed out by Strahilevitz, examples abound such as joining a twelve-step group (like Alcoholics Anonymous) or entering on-line chat rooms to seek a personal opinion from other chat members. (307). The third article by Sonja Grabner-Krauter explores the issue of trust in most social networking sites which she termed as on-line social networks (OSN). It is quite incredible the way people who are members and users of most OSN have implicit trust in these sites to such an extent they upload and share great amounts of personal information (Grabner-Krauter 505). These members put their trust without any reservations of how these sites can invade privacy because they believed the advertising lines of these sites promoting and encouraging people to register as members. This article is a sociological academically-inclined tract that examines trust from the perspective of members of OSN in particular the role of social capital and value of relational exchanges prevalent in these types of digital sites. The structure of the Web 2.0 is largely user-generated, collaborative, and interactive. These aspects of OSN make these sites particularly vulnerable to persons with malicious intent (Grabner-Krauter 506). This is due to the sites having a common infrastructure with a huge membership base and because members of these sites share so much information about themselves that is often valuable to others. The dangers and risks posed by so much trust in these sites make people vulnerable to people with evil intent because their personal information can be used for other purposes such as hacking their on-line accounts. This constitutes a serious invasion of privacy such as cases of identity theft as the members themselves supplied their own information willingly without any second thoughts about taking any precaution. In any case, these virtual on-line communities allow the members to socialize which fills a basic human need for contact and sociability. These sites in effect offer an alternative universe where people can express themselves (two minutes of fame to gain attention or notoriety) and behave differently from the real world. (314) A fourth article written by Mnookin explores an interesting topic of on-line privacy in relation to social networking sites. In her article, she discusses how technologcy and issues of privacy are not mutually exclusive. Just because OSN promote openness and sociability on their sites does not mean people should accept this situation of vulnerability as a given. In the article, Mnookin argues how technology can be improved to promote social interactons and at the same time be safe for the users by specifically integrating into the basic technical structure the protective measures and mechanisms for privacy. In other words, there is no need for the trade-offs between technological advances and the diminution of privacy (Mnookin 828). The conventional wisdom is that privacy is diminished as an inevitable consequencewhenever new technology is used. This need not be the case if software programmers and site owners specifically employ privacy-enhancing technologies thar are now readily available. Personal data made available in OSN can be reduced to the level of system design but this approach will defeat the very purpose of OSN which is to share information. There is also a social-constructionist viewpoint discussed in this aricle that explains why technology is often not privacy-centric due to the belief of computer engineers and software programmers that an on-line world should mirror reality. In this case, information accessed on-line is quite similar to the information obtained in the real world and any such information can be traced to their owners and creators anyway so why bother with on-line privacy issues anyway? In the article, the issue of privacy is further emphasized as a nebulous concept difficult to define precisely that needs a legal regulatory framework to protect users but at the same time views privacy as the setting up personal boundaries by the users themselves. (308) Conclusion (report) Social networking sites exploit the vulnerability and gullibility of most people by the creation of privacy controls on their individual electronic or digital accounts. These privacy controls give the users of these sites a false sense of security and privacy when such controls are virtually useless and do not offer real protection and defense from hackers or from the site owners themselves. They (site administrators) can access anything on their sties especially sensitive information their users had uploaded or posted on-line. The exploitation of social networking site users shows a basic understanding of the human need to connect and communicate because humans are essentially social animals. Anything that has been posted on-line is further compromised by the ease with which hackers can penetrate the firewalls of these sites. All on-line information and activities can be traced, detected, accessed, and hacked even if these were deleted because there are digital imprints left that can be recovered. OSN are viable only if they can continuously attract new members to keep increasing their member base; it is a virtuous cycle of more members enabling these sites to get more members because obviously a site with only very few members in it is not that attractive to a potential member who is still considering which site to join and register. It is like a lemmings or bandwagon effect where people join a site because they know of someone who is also a member in which they conclude this site is safe from issues of privacy invasion without any further thought. They accept the promises of these sites about privacy as iron-clad guarantees. However, the trend nowadays is to post something on social networking sites only the things which can be considered as non-essential information to forestall the use of sensitive personal data by other users especially those with malicious intentions. The users of OSN are better advised that joining these sites is like a consumer buying any product or service. There is always a need to exercise caution like what is exemplified by the Latin phrase of caveat emptor which warns a buyer to always beware of anything that he might not know regardless of the arguments put forward by consumer advocate groups for protection (Gelber 48). A guiding principle is to post only what is considered safe or general information and not sensitive private information. Users must exercise their own responsibility. The above advice is useful to users who often post much senstitive information about themselves and their activities without considering the consequences. Canny users of OSN are aware of their vulnerability and take precautionary measures like posting inane or humorous pictures of themselves or of other people without revealing anything valuable. The general idea is not to expose oneself because many OSN do not expressly warn people of the dangers. Joining an OSN is merely a matter of personal choice and anybody can opt to sign in or not. There is no compulsion whatsoever to join although there can be peer pressure to join a site. It is always better to be safe than sorry when it comes social networking sites. (524). Works Cited Gelber, Steven M. Horse trading in the age of cars: Men in the marketplace. Baltimore, MD, USA: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2010. Print. Grabner-Krauter, Sonja. “Web 2.0 Social Networks: The Role of Trust.” Journal of Business Ethics 90 (2009): 505-522. Print. Mnookin, Jennifer L. “Technology and Privacy: The New Landscape.” Technology and Culture 41.4 (2000): 828-830. Print. Rosenzweig, Roy. “Live Free or Die? Death, Life, Survival, and Sobriety on the Information Superhighway.” American Quarterly 51.1 (1999): 160-174. Print. Strahilevitz, Lior Jacob. “A Social Networks Theory of Privacy.” University of Chicago Law Review 72.3 (2005): 919-988. Print. (due on November 22, 2014 @ 12:03 a.m.) Read More