The internet is the connection of millions of computers around the world and the active sharing of information between them. While the internet was created to share information, there is certain data that is important to keep private lest this data is used for sinister reasons. Although the World Wide Web is very large and the sharing of data occurs easily, there should be some sort of privacy filters to help users have some control in the sharing of their private information. In this age of identity theft and personal experiences, individual privacy is crucial in order for a person to live his or her life without the fear of faceless individuals ruining their lives.
Of course, sharing some information can be important for some people. Esther Dyson, the author of “Reflections on Privacy 2.0,” believes that there are new and compelling reasons for people to disclose private information in order to share detailed and accurate health information from medical histories (Bloom, and Smith 379). There can be a benefit in disclosing private information. Doctors and hospitals can find medical history much quicker and can possibly cure the patient faster with this information. Retrieving info on certain ill people from certain regional areas may find causes for these afflictions. If the water supply of a community is causing them to be sick, their medical histories can clue the doctors in on where their illness is coming from.
While sharing this information can be useful in finding a cure, there still must be some sort of discretion with their medical pasts. Diseases such as HIV should be kept confidential for the sake of the individual. Diseases like those carry a discriminatory element with them and patients usually wish to keep it a secret. The individual should have some sort of control over his or her own privacy. Most people know that others can view some of their information such as doctors, specialists, pharmacists. Daniel J. Solove, the author of “The End of Privacy?” stated that people leave a paper trail wherever they go and that the individual’s information is shared with others but they should retain some sort of control (Bloom, and Smith 388).
Patients are also concerned about the privacy of their medical past for financial reasons. Many medical insurance companies raise premiums or flat out reject coverage to those who have preexisting medical conditions. This situation has lead people to attempt to hide their illnesses when applying for health care. Falsifying their applications due to privacy reasons is problematic and can lead to charges of fraud. People would not care about medical privacy so much if revealing the truth about their health did not expose them to costly medical bills and insurance premiums (Bloom, and Smith 379). Recently, the health care bill that would force insurance companies to overlook preexisting conditions was declared unconstitutional ("Foxnews.com"). Legislatures must find a balance between competition and offsetting medical insurance premiums from patients with previous illnesses so that patients do not have to worry about privacy with their medical conditions.
There is also the problem of young individuals who share information that could affect their lives sometime in the future. Dyson states that some of the adolescents are aware of the risks of using social-networking web sites but do not take them seriously (Bloom, and Smith 386). Many youths post up unflattering pictures on their Facebook page or even nude pictures on photo-hosting websites such as Flickr or Photobucket. They can also post tweets or status updates with offensive posts. In addition, a friend could post the embarrassing photo or an unflattering blog post. That blog could haunt the individual sometime in the future. An employer who searches the internet for information on a potential employee could find this negative data, which could influence the decision of the employer. Solove himself states that “having your personal information may fail to improve my judgment of you. It may, in fact, increase the likelihood that I will hastily condemn you” (Bloom, and Smith 386).
How does one anticipate avoiding a situation like this? That job has to go to informed parents. Dyson claims that it is likely that some kind of statute of limitations on foolish behavior will emerge (Bloom, and Smith 383). However, a statute of limitations can only go so far. An employer may forgive a time of binge drinking, but getting into many fights can hurt a job applicant. Elevated visibility that comes with living in a transparent online world means you may never overcome past mistakes (Bloom, and Smith 387). Parents need to become more aware of technologies that can ruin their children’s lives. It is their job to protect them.
Informed parents can protect their children’s future simply by employing a few strategies. For instance, there is the recent epidemic of teenagers sending each other naked pictures with their camera phones. A parent can disable the picture messaging option by purchasing a family plan and restricting the photo emails. Phone companies have become aware of the problem of “sexting” and placed picture-blocking options for only the adult to access. Another way they can protect their children is using internet filters. Websites such as netnanny.com gives parents the option to block any website they feel is inappropriate for their children, including photo sharing sites. They can also block social sites such as Facebook. However, if the parent lets their children use Facebook, they can remove any name tagging in order to avoid internet search engines from finding their name attached to photos.
Embarrassing photos posted on Facebook may not be the only reason why one needs to control their own privacy. Discrimination against a person who is affiliated with a particular group is another risk with unrestricted access. A job applicant who is affiliated with a certain political party could be turned down. If the employer is a Republican and the applicant is a left wing Democrat, that person could be denied the job without the employer ever giving out the real reason for the rejection. On the other hand, the employer could be an Atheist who despises Christians and the applicant happens to be Christian. It is obvious on how this situation can be abused without any sort of privacy restriction.
Another way on how privacy can be abused is with the situation with Facebook and Social Ads. In Solove’s article, he described the situation where advertisements were used with profiles that existed on Facebook. Many users were upset that their profiles were used in this manner without permission and rightly so. No one should have his or her profile used without confirmation. A situation could occur where a user purchases a product and because of the purchase, the company approves using that profile in their advertisements. However, if the product is unsatisfactory, the user may hate the product and become enraged when they see their profile in the advertisement. The user may become so angry; they may try to bring up a lawsuit against the company. Although a person’s name or image can be used in news, art, literature, or on social-networking sites, the appropriation tort protects against using someone’s name or picture without consent to advertise products (Bloom, and Smith 388). The user would probably be successful in that lawsuit.
Some people may feel uncomfortable with specific information out in the public while others may be okay with it. There could possibly be ways to accommodate both groups. As more people are introduced to the internet, more information will become available to those who are interested. Social-networking sites such as Myspace, Facebook, and Twitter are still in their infancy and privacy issues have to be ironed out as time goes on. This idea on privacy restrictions is very important, but common sense when publishing information on the internet will go a long way.
Works Cited
"Judge Rules Health Care Law Is Unconstitutional." Foxnews.com. Fox News Network, 31 Jan 2011. Web. 18 Mar 2011.
Bloom, Lynn, and Louise Smith. The Arlington Reader: Contexts and Connections. Third. Boston, MA: Bedfordst Martins, 2011. 379-389. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment