Select Page

   Recently in my Comm409 Media Ethics and Law class, we have been challenged to think a great about the concept of privacy. One could argue that in our generation, the idea of privacy has been greatly altered from what it once meant. The rapid advancements in technology and the sudden presence of social media has definitely attributed to this shift. Humans are much more open to sharing their personal information than they ever were before. However, it is important to acknowledge that we are often sharing information with tech companies and the government without us even being aware of it. A prime example of this is consistent cell phone use. With this being said, I read an article titled “It’s Tracking Your Every Move and You May Not Even Know” in which prompted me to reevaluate the motives of cellphone companies and their ability to collect and share data with whomever they chose.  After reading this article I found it interesting that telecommunication companies in the U.S. are not required to report the information that they collect. This loose regulation could breed a deceptive nature among cell phone companies and other tech companies. Yet many companies justify their excessive data collection by arguing that it helps better refine the user’s experience. From a media ethics perspective, collecting such information without the source’s knowledge is completely unethical. However, it is important to consider the agenda of tech companies which is to provide the best experience for their customers and cater to their needs and not to be guided strictly by ethical principles. 

    Likewise,  there has been news that privacy law within the digital age may be completely altered depending on the outcome of the Carpenter v. the United States Supreme Court Case. In this specific case, in 2010 a man was caught robbing a series of RadioShacks across the country because the police were able to tap into his cellphone’s GPS and track his every moment. Thus, the case is testing the idea if one can argue that the fourth amendment protects one from the government gaining access to their GPS tracking information via mobile device. The outcome of this case could completely transform privacy law and further define the fourth amendment. I am curious to see how this pans out and how the perceptions of privacy continue to become more complex due to factors such as technology.