Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Aiman Syed
Professor Martin
English 1101
28 November 2018
During this day and age, people have become heavily reliant on internet usage and this
raises several concerns on privacy protections, as well as how much information the government
has of a person’s private life. Obviously huge companies such as Apple, Google and many
popular social media apps attract many users and also make billions of dollars in profit, but the
real question to be answered is whether they are trustworthy or not. With all the awareness of
privacy protection and security methods, people are beginning to open their eyes to reality and
consider the possibility of their private information being shared with the government for
whatever reasons. The government should not be allowed to demand companies such as Apple
and Google to share users’ data because it’s an invasion of privacy and the government cannot be
As more people begin to use the internet, specifically the younger generations, they have
started to use it for purposes other than surfing the internet. Young people now begin to use it as
a platform for bullying, or as a way to find personal information on someone they seek to date.
Peoples’ personal and private information can now travel halfway across the globe without a
single approval of consent. As Solove states, “with the internet, anybody can reach a global
audience” (Solove, para. 5). This quote begins to explain how information that people don’t
usually pay attention to can literally travel across countries and become exposed, making much
more accessible to the government. There are already many known cases of government
Syed 2
surveillance, looking for unusual behavior leading to private information such as, records of
employment and birth and marriage certificates being monitored by companies like The National
Security Agency (Solove, para. 11). Cases like these are just beginning to surface and come
across users’ thoughts, but many are still quite unaware of it.
Daskal states in her article, “Surveillance is the prerogative of not just governments. It is
something that was developed, relied on, and institutionalized by private actors as well (Daskal,
Para. 4). Although what was mentioned is somewhat true, it was disregarded that privacy is also
equally the prerogative of not just governments. It may be possible that in several circumstances
the protection of the public’s safety and security were protected by handing over some useful,
private information, however, in all cases the government decides when it is necessary for
information to be handed over which may not always be deemed necessary for the public. More
so, there most likely will be times where several peoples’ personal information is unnecessarily
handed over, which will result in angry people because they were unaware the entire time. Even
with national security, there are always ways to attain vital information while still protecting
peoples’ privacy. According to Solove, “the information is often stored in public records, making
It readily accessible to anyone” (Solove, para. 11). This makes the public’s information more
likely to be hacked and accessed by someone other than government authority which can cause
The government has a clear, authoritative position and with that power and control, it
cannot be determined what extent they could go to and how they could use it as an excuse to
attain private information on people. As Letaru says, “even the most secure and hardened device
can do nothing to stop an intelligence agency armed with a court order from forcing its
manufacturer from turning it into a remote microphone or using its metadata to understand a
Syed 3
target’s contacts” (Leetaru 3). As more people have their information exposed, the less freedom
they feel they have since privacy is a right, whether it may be on the internet or in real life.
I do agree with Brewster’s statement, as he says, “Google should also inform users of its
data retention policies and, in the case of sensitive Nest data, dispose of it in a short time frame
that is noticed to users” (Brewster 3). Although it may occur, this statement cannot be confirmed,
and also may be disregarded when the government demands information with a warrant or court
order. Brewster does mention that it is an invasion of privacy for the government to seek
information from the Google nest, but then contradicts his argument by mentioning the use of
warrants for governments to seek information which is still invading an individual’s privacy
Most people don’t seem to notice when their privacy is being invaded or are completely
oblivious. Google, as a search engine, has made so many people dependent on it that most people
have to search simple things to verify its truth. As stated in the article, “How Google Dominates
Us”, “Google seems to be everywhere and seems to know everything and offends against
cherished notions of privacy” (Gleick 11). With so much government power, people will
continue to remain left in the dark with information on government surveillance and it’s
concerning to think no one will ever suspect how much of their privacy is being invaded.
were succeeding and which were not (Gleick 7). Gleick is discussing the matter of
advertisements on Google and how it uses them as a discreet method of collecting users’
information. While Google is leaving so many of its users uninformed with how much
information they are collecting, no one can say the government isn’t doing the same thing or
even demanding companies for information discreetly, keeping users’ completely unaware.
Syed 4
In conclusion, government surveillance is a very debatable matter, but in the end, I feel
it’s more beneficial for the government to avoid surveillance and it shows respect for the public’s
privacy and protection. The government’s power and control pose as a threat to peoples’ privacy
where they can be so unaware of how much of their privacy is being invaded. The more
information the public allows to be exposed, the more people will take advantage, especially the
government, who most likely finds it helpful to monitor the public for various reasons. Privacy is
a right to everyone and it should be protected, even from the government because personal
information does not have an exception towards authority. Internet usage is definitely not going
to end, in fact its usage will only increase by the day, which means users’ private lives will
become more public with personal information becoming exposed. Now the people have to
decide whether they want to live with the permanent effects of their information being exposed.
As Solove says, “people must now live with the digital baggage of their past” (Solove, para.14).
Syed 5
Works Cited
Leetaru, Kalev. “Will Governments Turn Our Smart Devices Into A Massive Surveillance
Network?” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 10 Oct. 2018,
www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2018/10/09/will-governments-turn-our-smart-devices-into-a-
massive-surveillance-network/#39675f0026b6.
Gleick, James. “How Google Dominates Us.” The New York Review of Books, The New York
Review of Books, www.nybooks.com/articles/2011/08/18/how-Google-dominates-us/.
“Public and Private Eyes.” Foreign Affairs, Foreign Affairs Magazine, 12 Jan. 2018,
www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/review-essay/2017-10-16/public-and-private-eyes.
Brewster, Thomas. “Smart Home Surveillance: Governments Tell Google's Nest To Hand Over
Data 300 Times.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 15 Oct. 2018,
www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2018/10/13/smart-home-surveillance-governments-tell-
Googles-nest-to-hand-over-data-300-times/#34338b552cfa.