Introduction
In the last several decades, technology has advanced rapidly, and personal privacy has become a major public concern. New technological developments allow the government to enhance national security, keeping track of all suspicious activity, both online and offline. The constantly occurring data breaches and information leaks bring to public attention that companies, government organizations, and security services have access to almost all information that is considered private. The fine line between personal and security matters has shifted towards violation of the constitutional right to privacy, with the government willing to intrude in all aspects of a person’s life when public safety is concerned (Santani, 2019). Security is important on the national level, but most people give the utmost value to their privacy, and it should be protected on all levels.
Main text
First, personal information is often gathered without a person’s fully informed consent. When accepting user agreements, people either do not read them or have no choice but to agree to the incorporated information collection policies if they need to use the app, service, or website. The same goes for mobile operators that gather information about their users’ messages and phone calls — people have narrow choices in limiting the company’s access to their activities. No one asks citizens’ permission to install surveillance cameras in neighborhoods, enabling security services to collect all possible visual information about people’s movements.
Second, the current security system is vulnerable to breaches, misuse, manipulations, and violations of all sorts. While possessing all necessary means to gather personal information, government and private organizations cannot guarantee their safety and often become victims of hackers’ and information terrorists’ attacks. The intended enhancement of security makes sensitive information conveniently located in one place, poorly protected, and within easy rich of bad actors.
Third, people do not trust the government and are unsure that it will protect their interests in ambiguous situations. When acting as Big Brother aiming to guard citizens’ privacy, the government often uses their data against them. For example, facial recognition software can single out protestors or individuals from a certain race. Information obtained for legitimate purposes may be misused by those who have access to it (Santani, 2019). It is not hard to obtain someone’s data because of the power and resources that federal security agencies have at their disposal.
Fourth, the constant collection of information by all digital means that a person has access to makes them feel insecure. Some people cover their laptops’ cameras and cars’ license plates, avoid uploading their photos and locations to social networks or do not register in them, and use anonymizers when going online to protect themselves. Many people feel like they are constantly being watched, which sometimes leads to serious mental health problems.
Conclusion
Overall, it can be concluded that the government does not exercise control over citizens’ personal information effectively. People’s privacy should be of primary importance to the state, and this principle is often violated when trying to enforce national security measures. People feel that they are responsible for their privacy themselves, and the government is not an ally but rather an enemy, from which their data should be protected in the first case. The existing national security system should be reformed to focus on the people’s rights and the security of their data rather than on the government’s interests.
Reference
Santani, S. (2019). The fight for personal data. Syracuse University School of Information Studies.