Friday, November 9, 2012
(#7) Who Watches the Watchmen?
After reading Braden and Albrechtslund, consider any questions presented in the following prompt when responding: Many
would argue that the Internet is merely another window through which
the public may be spied upon by “big government” or by secret agencies.
Do you feel that Braden and Albrechtslund share a similar argument regarding
this issue? According to these authors, and in your opinion, what are
the weakest points (literally, sites) of the Internet? What are some
potential results of the Internet’s ability to replicate and publish
information? Do you feel that you participate in citizen-surveillance?
Do you contribute to content on the web? If so, what kind? What aspect
of the Internet are you most wary about? Use at least two, properly
cited textual examples in your response. (Due 11/13)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In the articles, Is The Internet The Harbinger Of Orwell Nightmares by Peter Braden and Online Social Networking as Participatory Surveillance by Anders Albrechtslund disguises about hoe social networks and how the government has a hand in it. Not all of the things we do or say on social networks such as facebook and other popular networks that people use are privacy. Both authors talk about similar issues. One is that they take about time, place, and location aspects of the social networks. Where people and the internet sites itself can locates anywhere in the world Braden (4) Albrechtslund (1). The government has access to all the information on facebook explains and can change information to many websites such as Wikipedia Braden (5).
ReplyDeleteI think that in Albrechtslund article there are many flaws because he does not have a lot of charisma in what he trying to say. He say says that he is going to talk about this and then that it does not have a good grabbing hook to the article (1). I think that a problem to me because that makes me not one to read it. In the articles, I found out that people also can change information on sights and things and that makes me a bit uncomfortable. I do not anyone should have that type of power that they can change information that others might need if there not true.
Both Anders Alberchtslund and Peter Braden talks about the internet and how dangerous it is. In the article " Online Social Networking as Participatory Surveillance" and " Is The Internet The Harbinger of Orwell's Nightmares?", it talks about how much time people spend on the internet, and how social networking sites now tend to tell people were a person is. It pinpoints the place and surroundings where a person is. It also talks about how the internet is a place for socializing with others. It also talks about cyberspace such as blogs, Wikipedia’s and many others.( Braden pg. 4 and Alberchtslund pg.1) Also Braden talks about how the government is involved in the information’s that is being published on the internet and such places includes Facebook, Wikipedia and many other sites.( Braden pg.5)
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, Facebook is one of the weakest sites of the internet. The reason is because Facebook does not require any experience but it entices a person once an individual fall into their traps. It is free to sign up for most social networking sites and yet it is so hard for people to break away from their usage. For example, it was so hard for people not to go on the internet when Hurricane Sandy hit not that long ago. People kept on complaining about how it was boring staying home without the internet. I think that once a person signs up for something on the internet such as emails, Facebook and many others, a person is automatically under the surveillance of the government and the people that created these sites. I am so wary about the use of Facebook because recently, I heard that all the information’s that a person put on it is not private and people can access it so easily
It is well known that the internet is just a place where the government can take information and spy on people at any time. Authors like Peter Braden and Anders Albrechtslund have different opinion when it comes to government surveillance. In Braden case he argues that people should have the right to privacy. In his article he states from the 1948 novel “ No one should be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, [and] home...” (4). This shows that privacy, family and home should be sacred and should not be touched or interfered with. With this quote Braden is explaining that he does not find it right for the government to meddle in people’s privacy. In the other hand the author Albrechtslund thinks other wise. He approves of the government surveillance on people’s privacy. In his article he clarifies by saying “ Government interest in online social networking is easy to understand. To profile potential criminals and terrorist, it is necessary to combine a wide range of information about people” (3). He is explaining how the surveillance is important for our safety. This is necessary to keep our and love ones live safe. In his eyes the government surveillance is not a bad thing but something that can protect us.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion the weakest sites in the internet are like Google or Yahoo websites because they do not demand any personal information of their users to be able to look up information. Some potential results that the internet can have when it replicates and publish information is that it can miss lead people. A perfect example of this is the popular website called Wikipedia. This website has a lot of information but most of it is changed and then published by the government. The government can change the way a person might think of something by just changing the information of the website. I feel that am as well part of the citizen surveillance because I also provide information of myself on the internet. I provide my name and where I live on Facebook. The aspect of the internet that I am the most alert is when it asks about credit card number or something like that.
Both Braden and Albrechtslund have stated the same issue about internet is that it is easy for people to know about your personal information; the word it uses in the article is “surveillance”. It is like a watcher looking at your private information. Braden says, “With such close ties to a government intelligence agency, it is no wonder that many people are so suspicious of Facebook; but the dangers of privacy violations many lie elsewhere.” (Braden 4). From this quote, we know that the government can get information through Facebook. Also, Albrechtslund states in his article, “Government interest in online social networking is easy to understand. To profile potential criminals and terrorists, it is necessary to combine a wide range of information about people.” This information includes social relationships, such as shared activities and circle of friends, as well as personal data about political views, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, and preferences regarding everyday life activities.” (Albrechtslund 3). From this quote, we can see that the internet is the best way for the government to spy on people or to know more about their life.
ReplyDeleteI think the weakest points of the internet it is easy to spread people’s personal information or private events. It is sometimes very dangerous when people replicate and publish information through the internet. For example, most people love to post pictures or videos on the Facebook, this is the best way for people to understand one another’s life.
ReplyDeleteWhether the public is or is not being spied by “big government” or by secret agencies through the internet it is still a debated topic. Both, Braden and Albrechtslund argue that privacy may be at risk. With the rise of Internet and social sites such as Facebook, people are engaging in online activities providing if not all, a significant amount of their personal information in the form of pictures, videos and comments which are stored indefinitely and may even affect employment.
Also, Braden and Albrechtslund argue how the informations provided by users are being used by the government and secret agencies. “Allegations have been made that companies have contacted Facebook asking for restricted information” (Braden 4). According to Albrechtslund, past online social networking will be damaging to an applicant’s chances for employment (4). The internet’s weakest point is the fact of so much information published being accessible to everyone, which is resulting in both positive and negative things. For instance being able to stay connected with family abroad, enhancing our knowledge, but also corruption, fraud and the breaking of privacy. As a contributor of web content in social sites through pictures, videos, posts published and filling out surveys reveal one’s interests which makes one a participant of citizen surveillance. The aspect of the internet that one should be more cautious about is privacy; once something is posted online the rights of ownership no longer remains with the actual owner.
Internet is being used throughout the world, especially for the social network sites. There are both positive and negative sides to the usage of the Internet and social sites within it. One of the major negative thing about social sites is that, it allows governments to spy on the users and take away their privacies. The articles, “Is The Internet The Harbinger Of Orwell’s Nightmares? By Peter Braden and “Online Social Networking as Participatory Surveillance” by Anders Albrechtslund, also argues that government is using social network sites for their own benefits and violating people’s privacies. Braden writes “these technologies will lead to the breakdown of privacy and freedom of expression” (1). In a similar way, Albrechtslund also writes, “the watcher controls the watched”(5). Albrechtslund refers “the watcher” as the governments, and “the watched” as the users. Here, he is basically trying to say that the governments are watching over the users through internet. Both of these authors state that the weakest point of the Internet is that it puts people’s privacies at risks. I also agree with these authors. This is a major problem of the Internet, because once a person puts their information of any kind, whether it’s a picture, or documents, it is being shown to the public or if not, the government. The information can also be published to employers, where they can look up the users in social network sites, and make a decision of whether they should hire them or not.
ReplyDeleteLike many people, I also participate in citizen-surveillance. I also use social network sites like Facebook and Instagram, where I share my pictures and information. The thing that wary me about social sites are that, often people judge you on what you post or share, therefore I have to be extra carful about what I share on these sites,in order to prevent the negative judgments of the people.
Braden and Albrechtslund can both agree that the internet is the main source used by the government for surveillance. They admit that “while privacy may be at risk in social networking sites, information is willingly provided” by us (Albrechtslund 4). The information that the government would have to search up to profile criminals is already available on social networks like Facebook and Twitter. They also both agree that what people put up on these social networks can later affect ones employment. Many companies do background checks on these same sites before hiring someone. Despite this, Albrechtslund does not see surveillance as something completely negative. He believes it is useful for the government to find criminals. He also sees surveillance as a way to stay in touch with friends. People do it every day when they scroll through pictures and statuses their friends have posted up. It is not necessarily just the government doing so. Although he knows that our privacy is at risk, he believes that they are worse things going on in the internet. On the other hand, Braden views surveillance as something negative that invades ones privacy. He thinks it is against human rights for the government to be able to spy on people in their own homes. “Watch someone long enough and you’ll find something to arrest – or just blackmail – them with” (Braden 4). Eventually after watching someone for a long period of time, you will find something to use against them.
ReplyDeleteOne of the results of the Internet’s ability to replicate and publish information is that even if you delete the original thing, it is still available somewhere on another website. If found by an employer or future boss, it can lead to one getting fired or not even getting the job to begin with. I think I do participate in citizen surveillance because with social networks, you are seeing what people are constantly up to with pictures and tweets etc. The aspect that I most worry about is how the internet can replicate and publish information. This worries me because anything I post up on Facebook can affect me later on in life. Even if I were to delete anything, it will still be stored somewhere in the computer’s memory.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe internet is everywhere, and anyone can have access to it.Social networking sites are very popular and have its own positives and negatives. We are able to interact with family and friends,post pictures, but we are also risking our privacy when using these sites.The government is able to keep an eye on everyone on these sites, which invades our privacy. The articles, "Is The Internet The Harbinger Of Orwell's Nightmares? by Peter Braden and "Online Social Networking as Participatory Surveillance" by Andres Albrechtslund, both have similar views in the sense that the government is using these sites to spy and everyone on these type of sites on the internet are being watched, where violation of privacy is occurring. Braden states "As society relies more and more on the internet for communication, genuine fears have been expressed that these technologies will lead to the breakdowns of privacy and freedom of expression"(1). Albrechtslund points out that the information the government has access to "includes social relations, such as shared activities and circles of friends, as well as personal data about political views, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, and preferences regarding everyday life activities"(3). Both authors argue over our privacy at risk, because the government has access to our personal information and we are being watched under the government. I agree with both Braden and Albrechtslund, i do think our privacy is at risk due to the technology, and the government has us under surveillance. The weakest point of the internet is that nothing is private on the internet its all public, once you post a video, picture, or write anything it stays on the internet. That's one of the big issues of these social networking sites, even with privacy control over your data it can be accessed easily.
ReplyDeleteI participate in citizen-surveillance, i use social networking sites and share pictures like everyone else. The aspect that i am most wary about is what i post on these sites, i am extra-careful on what i post or share
The internet is a big part of our lives. We all know how careful we have to be putting up personal information on social networking websites. The two articles, “Is the Internet the Harbinger of Orwell Nightmares” by Peter Braden and “Online Social Networking as Participatory Surveillance” by Anders Albrechtslund, describe different opinions of government surveillance on social networking sites. Braden argues against government surveillance. A quote from his article states, “As society relies more and more on the internet for communication, genuine fears have been expressed that these technologies will lead to the breakdown of privacy and freedom of expression”. (1) This quote explains Braden’s argument on how the government is spying on us with all of our personal information on the social networking sites. He believes this will lead to the end of our privacy and freedom. Albrechtslund agrees somewhat with Braden but mostly believes government surveillance is protecting us. A quote from his article states, “Social communication becomes a tool for the police, and criminal investigation becomes part of social interaction”. (3) Albrechtslund explains that the government surveilling our conversations and information will help them with their criminal investigations.
ReplyDeleteI feel like Facebook and Google are the weakest websites because in both sites you can search up a lot about a person. On Facebook, you post your personal information and it’s like your public diary for the world to see. Google can help the government with spying on you by looking through your history or even an attached email or blog. Anything that goes on the internet is staying there forever somewhere in the memory. I definitely participate in citizen surveillance which is what Facebook is all about. In order to communicate with friends I go through their pictures or profile to see what their up to and start a conversation. The only aspect of the internet I’m wary about is my privacy to the pictures I post and information that will definitely affect me later on in life when I try to go to Grad school or get a job.
The Internet is a major part of our lives. Sometimes we forget how such a novelty can also hurt us in the long run. With scoial networking today we have now become a "Tell All" society which we want to inform what we are doing at this very moment. Many companies and universities have taken notice in to what we post or, talk about on these social networking sites. Should everything we do be kept in priviate? Maybe.
ReplyDeleteIn the articles "Is the Internet the Harbinger of Orwell Nightmares" by Peter Braden and "Online Social Networking as Participatory Surveillance" by Anders Albrechtslund they have different viewpoints of how the internet and how the government views our ideas. Braden is full adavocate of priviacy he states " As society relies more and more on the internet for communication, genunine fears have been expressed that these technologies will lead to the breakdown on how the government is spying on us with all of our personal infomation on the social networking sites" This quote has a general statment saying that what the government is doing is wrong and that it totally goes aganist our 1st amendment rights. Albrechtslud has the idea that we should protect the right to say what we want, but if it is going to affect the welfare of people the government should interfere and take the proper action.
Braden and Albrechtslund both argue how internet user's privacy is at risk. The government is using our information and is violating our privacy. Brden states 'These technologies will lead to the breakdown of privacy and freedom of expression"(1). Albrechtslund also explains " The watcher controls the watched".(5). Both these authors are explaining how the government has to watch over the viewers because somebody has to. An example is like the three branches of the government: the executive, the legislative, and the judicial. Everybody has to keep an eye on eachother to make sure everybody is doing their job. Both of these authors state that the weakest point of the internet is peoples privacy put on the line. I agree with Braden and Albrechtslund. Privacy is a huge concern today.
ReplyDeleteOne example of a website that threatens our privacy is Facebook, but i think if you put you information online then its not private. I feel that i do participate in video surveillance. i can know where the person is, what there doing, what they look like. It is alittle scary how much information i can attain just by looking at somebodys profile. What iam most wary about it is the informaion that we put online can be used for blackmail, not just by the government but by anyone.
Based on what I have read, I do think that Braden and Albrechtslund share a similar point of view when referring to the topic of the internet being one window that the government or even secret agencies could use to spy on the public. Both authors seem to convey the agreeable point that although the internet can be greatly used against us, it can also be used in a positive light and all of this depends on the way we choose to use it: it once again referring to the internet. Based on my opinion, the weakest points on the internet are the social networking sites. Sites like Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, Tumblr etc. are just some of the numerously frequented spots on the web. The result of the internet’s ability to replicate and publish information, in my opinion seems to make news travel faster, whether good or bad. That might lead to diverse results, depending on the person or group of people involved. I don’t think it’s a matter of thinking I participate in citizen-surveillance. As long as I’m part of these online “weak spots” then I actively do participate in citizen- surveillance, whether by choice or not. This also refers to contributing to content on the web. I am a “statistic” on the web, together with the millions of other people, used to gain knowledge of what “they” need to do to improve the web experience, whether on a particular site or browser. I, personally, am in a state of indifference about aspects of the internet. “Men are only as good as their technical development allows them to be” (Orwell 6) and “the issues here are only the tip of an iceberg” (Peter 6) best seems to explain the “conclusion” of this entry.
ReplyDeleteReading and comparing both Braden's and Albrechtslund's articles I realize that though they share similar ideas they don't really totally agree with each other. In Albrechtslund's article he very clearly and boldly expresses that governments and organizations do indeed track our every internet move. However Braden seems to tip toe around the issue. He is in refusal to point fingers and place direct accusation on anyone for either censoring or tracking our virtual footprints.
ReplyDeleteOn a personal level I totally agree with Albrechtslund and do believe that our moves are being tracked and monitored if not by the government then by some other organizations. Just look at how when browsing the net most of the adds seem to veer towards our virtually explored interests. That’s simply because they were being monitored to "Best equip our server to serve our wants and needs". At least that is what research companies like Google and Bing tell us. The fact is that whether one clicks on the "do not track, or remember the web is now programmed to remembers anyway whether the user is aware or not. Also look at how one can use a computer to pay a bill and another person comes to sit at the same computer and attains all their credit info. Or just remember how fast they were able to apprehend those foreign cyber terrorists a couple years ago. Though at times it might be hard to defend internet tracking and monitoring is happening against the will of its users and collecting all sorts of info about its users and due to the claim for national security and research it doesn’t look like it’s going to stop any time soon. A week point would be in terms of online financial transactions and entering personal data such as addresses and social security numbers. When it comes to things like that I look for the certification seal or if I don’t have to fill it out online I just don’t. I also very rarely purchase things online. It’s as simple as that.
Internet communications Can quite easily be linked to social networking cites, especially now with all these technical advances. These social network blogs keep a record on one's profile containing personal information. I feel that Braden and Albrechtslund share a similar argument regarding the public being Spied on against the "big government". In his article, Peter Braden argues "As society relies more on the internet for communication, genuine fears have been expressed that these technologies will lead to the breakdown of privacy" .. (1). He insists that the dependency and use of the internet can risk one's social ties. These people are indeed, willingly giving out or sharing information with the world. Similarly, Albrechtslund asserts "Also, A majority of profile holders provides pictures of themselves And their friends as well as their hometown" (2). Many are likely to provide pictures with text, videos and images sharing their whereabouts. Google earth and geotagging can also help predators locate the individual within seconds." Geotagging Is a way to add geographical information To media such as websites" Albrechtslund (2). This can provide specific and extended details to Just about anyone. Moreover, there are devices like the one Braden mentions "The tool publishes information about users actions on a number of different sites back to a Facebook profile" (4). That would be as Albrechtslund notes, "Digital nature of online social networks makes it replicable."
ReplyDeleteI feel that the weakest points of the internet is the non-filtered searches on browsing and the access to possibly anything. Neither can we rely on source of information posted on sites like Wikipedia for the reason that anyone can modify the shared information. I am guilty in participating in citizen surveillance due to social networks like Facebook and instagram. I cannot help but log on to see the latest updates, events and of course pictures. Online, I am most wary about the amount of information I share or exchange. Mostly, I am careful about the tags of location, that I most definitely keep off.
In a country that so widely preaches security, one would think that its citizens are so very much protected. No one would think that we actually need protection from our own government and organizations. Everywhere in the US, information is being stolen traded and analyzed from the people of the nation. Not just any information, but very private and sensitive information. As they always say it is for the protection of the citizens to collect as much information about everyone as possible. I’m not the only one who seems to think this. Even Anders Albrechtslund In Albrechtslund (1) expresses similar views on the topic and discusses the distress he feels for the surveillance being put on our private web surfing. Although he tip-toes around the situation another author who shares similar views is Peter Braden. He writes on censorship. Analyzing this I feel that my privacy is being invaded by the government and cyber net organizations. If they wanted information from us and we knew it was for our own good couldn’t they ask us so we could freely give? Raises eye brows for me.
ReplyDeleteBraden and Albrechtslund do share a similar argument regarding that the Internet is merely another window through which the public may be spied upon by “big government” or by secret agencies. The weakest points of the Internet are its required user skills and the incomplete experience it offers. For instance, Twitter, all it consists of is following people that post about their every single move every day. What is point of that? What can you possibly gain from posting everything you do in your everyday life? Both authors have a similar argument regarding a number of negative consequences from the increasing popularity of social networking sites in the United States. I participate in citizen-surveillance because there are now social network sites that give people the chance to post their whereabouts and what they are doing every minute every day. When using the Internet I’m most wary about my privacy being invaded. Someone keeping track of where I go and what I do in my life or even finding out who I associate with.
ReplyDelete