The growth of technology is revolutionizing the world. Just about everything we do and the ways we function in society is all based around it. Big corporations have also created a foundation with the use of technology to its full capacity and as a result have gained millions and even billions of dollars in revenue. Governments are also utilizing the vast benefits of technology to govern and secure the people. This brief description of the effects of technology on the world may have you thinking that it is perfect but that is not the case. Like all good things, there is a horrible downside that will have you contemplating on whether the trouble of the downside is worth the good things. In this case it is privacy. Every time we use technology, it stores all our data and personal information. When that data gets into the wrong hands, it can be detrimental to our personal lives. The use of technology and the breach of privacy are basically one in the two. You cannot have one without the other it seems. If your life is solely based around the use of technology, like it is for many people all over the world, then it is inevitable that your privacy will eventually be breach. The arguments concerning technology and privacy have gotten so bad that it reached the judicial level here in the United States and has become a major issue the government is still trying to solve. Just recently the European Union have crated the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and this is what I believe will be the solution for this problem. GDPR can be thought of as a shield of reforms that protects the data of everyone behind it from corporations and governments alike from mishandling our personal data. After researching all the defensive factors that are being implemented by the GDPR reforms and using the concepts of the ethicists Michael Palmer and Elizabeth Buchanan all while being mindful of the deontological tool for moral reasoning, I believe that the United States should adopt the principles of these reforms in their government.
Elizabeth Buchanan, an ethicist at the University of Wisconsin-Stout, was very convincing with her concerns on the United State\u2019s views on the gathering of people\u2019s data through social media website Twitter. In her research documents, she discusses the ethical panorama of large data mining by terrorists and the United States government on Twitter. Terrorists were using social media to target specific individuals and groups based upon their demographics and interest to join them and grow their organization. To combat this situation, the United States government also resorted to doing the same thing. The United States government created what they call big data researchers, whose job it was to gather data on everyone, to capture the terrorists in the act and to prevent their citizens from being influenced by these organizations. Buchanan argues that the openness for both groups to be able to access the user\u2019s data without their consent is unethical and is an invasion of people\u2019s privacy. She understands that the government\u2019s use of big data researchers is to fight against terrorism but the way they were obtaining their data is not right and make them no different from the terrorists. She wants the government to take responsibility for their actions. Although they can justify their course of action it still does not remove the fact that they are breaking the law and invading people\u2019s privacy. This dilemma has caused a huge uproar within the US ethics boards and they are still trying to figure out a solution. With the adoption of the General Data Protection Regulation, I believe that the US will finally be able to solve this difficult situation. GDPR is central core that protects every aspect of our online data and rightfully punishes anyone who tries to manipulate or access this data without our consent. The great thing about the GDPR reforms is that it targets the corporations that are providing these online services and making sure that they are doing everything to guaranteed privacy protection of their users. People\u2019s private data on these online interfaces are too accessible. With GDPR in place these corporations will begin to take their privacy policies more serious and make the protection of their user\u2019s data a number one priority. If not, they will be fine billions of dollars and may even be banned from the entire country. This is a risk that no corporation want to take so they force to work harder to protect their users. As a result, the government will not have to worry as much about terrorist or anyone being able to breach people\u2019s data. The GDPR reforms does not go against any ethical values, and it acts in favor of the good of the people without any malicious intentions. It also singles out the source of the problems which are the cooperation and makes them do the right thing. People like Elizabeth Buchanan will finally be able to feel satisfied knowing that the protection of people\u2019s data is fully protected by their government.
To test the privacy vulnerability of their website, Facebook decided to give a group of researchers from the Harvard University and the University of California permission to experiment on their site. The researchers constructed a project concerning the rich availability of data on social networking sites. The goal of the project was to see how much identifiable data they could collect from a group of anonymous college students attending an undisclosed university during a four-year period. Basically, they were data mining random students based on their Facebook profile without any use of personal identifying information to see if they could figure out who these students were. During the four-year time frame, the researchers were able to gather the demographic and cultural data of all the students and they even created a code book that categorizes all their personal information. Even though they started off with no information on the students, the researchers were able to identify who the students were and what school they went to. They proved how uncomplicated it was for hackers to be able to identify a person by an anonymous set of data. They released all the data collected during their research to the public to show how easy data can be accessed. The data released cause a lot of controversy among the students who attended that particular university because all their personal information was being seen by the public without their consent. The researchers argued that the data they released was all public information that could be seen on their Facebook profiles by anyone. They found nothing wrong with what they did and believed that the experiment was all for learning purposes. I believe that the researchers are right but at the same time wrong for what they did. In the sense that they could have kept the results of their project to themselves and not release it to the public. Releasing all the personal data of the students, as a whole for the world to see is much worse than visiting each of their personal Facebook profiles and seeing the same information because of the ease of access. They never stopped to wonder the fact that the student\u2019s profiles were public because they wanted to be visible to friends but private to the rest of the world. Although no crime was committed by the researchers, they still needed to have the decency to act morally as human beings and show respect to the well-being of their fellow peers. They failed to realize that people are vulnerable and that you can wrong someone without harming them by undermining their dignity. Facebook can view this situation as a learning experience on the morality of handling people\u2019s personal data. All of this could have been avoided with the implementation of the GDPR reforms in the United States. Facebook should be accountable for this situation because they were too casual in giving permission to the researcher to carry out their experiment. GDPR would have demanded Facebook to be more responsible with their user\u2019s data. It is understandable when a data breach occurs and at times inevitable but in this case, GDPR would have demanded that Facebook face penalties for the misuse of their user\u2019s data.
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) applies to organizations, all member-states, and has implications for businesses and individuals. It provides and ethical solution to all problems concerning the exploitation of people\u2019s personal data and punishes rightfully. It also understands that data breaches are bound to happen, so it demands corporations and the people to be more responsible with the use of data. Everyone that uses technology, and the internet has their data stored for the world to see but just because you can see it, does not mean you can do whatever you want with it. The GDPR is not there just to inflict a penalty or sanction on individuals and corporations, rather, it is there to remind everyone the importance of privacy in relation to the changing effects of society. No matter the technological advances of the world, the ethical views of privacy will always be a the same. The GDPR reforms is a modern reminder that everyone should know what is right from wrong when dealing with privacy.
\t
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The growth of technology is revolutionizing the world. Just about everything we do and the ways we function in society is all based around it. Big corporations have also created a foundation with the use of technology to its full capacity and as a result have gained millions and even billions of dollars in revenue…. <\/p>\n