Tapping_Under_False_Pretenses

Tapping Under False Pretenses ENG101 November 20, 2010 Tapping Under False Pretenses It is difficult to imagine, back in the pre-internet age, that there would even be global social networking, let along the need for privacy laws to protect the public involved in them. It is even more absurd when it is our own government agencies that we need protection from. In the article, “Twitter Tapping” it is apparent that internet privacy laws are being violated by government agencies that are acting on information obtained by searching and monitoring social network and forum sites without the knowledge of the public, and at times, under false pretenses, and deception. The editorial, “Twitter Tapping” discusses the increased use of government agency monitoring of public networking sites such as, Facebook, Twitter, and MySpace. These network sites have gained popularity because they are a public way for long distance friends, relatives, and old classmates can find each other and share photos, video, and conversation. Some have even found romance on these sites. Facebook, in particular, is largely a private domain keeping information only visible to the people of the owner’s choosing. Still, old internet privacy laws allow government agencies to use social networking for investigations, data collection and surveillance. The writer of this editorial agrees that new privacy laws are needed in order to keep up with the ways people communicate today and to learn more about our government’s use of social networking sites. However, it also indicates that law enforcement agencies are within their rights to read and act on what is written to the public over the internet. (Twitter tapping, 2009). Government agencies choose who, what, when, and where to watch and collect information on a person, and what will happen with the information they find without any regard to the privacy of this person. It could be argued that criminals should not be aware of official investigations because they could run away, or worse, hurt someone in their need to escape. Yet there are still many of those who are not harmful criminals that are under surveillance. These people include tax delinquents, copyright infringers, and political protesters (Twitter tapping, 2009). For example, if you tell your Aunt Helen that you just got a raise, you would never expect that the IRS is watching to be sure that you claim this raise on your taxes. For all they know, you hadn’t talked to Aunt Helen for two years and you got your raise 18 months ago. If the IRS chooses to read your wall on Facebook, that shouldn’t be a problem, but acting on what was written seems like a waste of time and money for the amount of time it will take to investigate the information, and this is a violation of privacy. Even the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Samuelson Law, Technology and Public Policy Clinic at the University of California, Berkeley, and School of Law sued the Department of Defense, the C.I.A. and other federal agencies under the Freedom of Information Act to learn more about their use of social networking sites (Twitter tapping, 2009). We are not only learning that these government agencies are wasting time and money, but they are going to extremes in order to gain this information. When making comments on a forum, letting out frustrations on a blog, or writing on a friend’s wall in Facebook, subscribers really do not think about who will be reading this information. They think about their mother, brother, sister, or new boyfriend reading and commenting back with something comparably innocent. At least it is innocent until they find out that their new boyfriend was using a fake identity and is really a government agent. Government agencies have also tricked people into accepting Facebook friend requests (Twitter tapping, 2009). If the material written over the internet is intended for the reading of global cyber space, then these government agencies are within their rights to investigate. However, if they are acting on this information, especially under false pretenses and deception, they are invading the privacy of others. The enforcement of the current privacy laws is not enough to protect American citizens from our own government that is using and acting on information used without their knowledge and under questionable circumstances. After gathering their information, citizens should be made aware of the information before it is acted upon because what they read may not be true or could be exaggerated. New laws need to be written that include the invasion of privacy under false pretenses and deception that will inform subscribers of social networks who is watching them and why. If the investigation is of a harmful criminal act, this situation can easily be enacted through a court order, but everyone has a right to their privacy when possible. Even though networking sites are generally open to the public, and if the subscriber does not want others to know, then they should not make it public, it is still their right to know who their audience is. Whether it is the FBI, CIA, or even a mass murderer looking for its prey, any violation of privacy is a violation of the person and should be treated as such no matter the audience. References Twitter tapping.(2009). New York Times. Retrieved on Nov. 13, 2010 from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/13/opinion/13sun2.html'_r=1