Should Government Be Allowed To Monitor Social Media

Is anyone’s private information contained in their cell phone actually private? Are appointments, bank information, conversations, the user’s location or other sensitive personal information truly confidential? Is there a Big Brother watching? There is no definitive answer to any of these questions. From the beginning of time to now, privacy has become more and more scarce. Through new developments in technology, it is hard to believe that someone is not watching your move at any given moment. The government’s job is to keep Americans safe, but where is the line drawn? Where is the difference between having a reasonable doubt and accessing information solely because these government officials have the power to do so? The government has infringed upon the rights of the American people when it comes to this topic.

Should authorities search people’s phones and posts? Authorities should not be able to search through private posts and information or authorities should be able to view posts and information.

Government surveillance is beneficial in moderation, but can quite easily become excessive. A well-known example of this is the controversy regarding the NSA monitoring U.S. citizens discreetly on American soil. This unwarranted watch crosses the fine line between monitoring criminal suspects for security, and blatant overreach of authority in spying common citizens. The personal infringement of information has been commonly associated with the NSA’s PRISM, but their MUSCULAR program is much more disconcerting. According to Harry Bruinius in “Why Tech Giants Are Now Uniting Against U.S. Surveillance”:

There is a lot that can be learned about a person by looking at their personal social media sites. Quite often they set their sites up so anyone can see their information. When they click, “public” on their settings, anyone can access their information. If a person chooses to set their site on public, then it is completely ethical for anyone, including the government, police, or even school to monitor their page. By setting it on public,

Should the NSA and United States government be allowed to spy on and collect information on its citizens? The NSA stands for National Security Agency and they are in charge of security and protection of the United States. Some may ask where the title of privacy comes into play. Some may say that it is only for protection to keep the country safe, but in all reality should the NSA be allowed to without question invade of privacy and look through our cellular data over the internet? The privacy of the citizens of the United States are at play today, and this is a game that not everyone wants to play.

Imagine a world where your every move was being monitored. A dark world where it is no secret who you are, where you have been and who you associate with; now include who you love, who you pray to and what you just ate for dinner. The word privacy doesn’t exist in such world and it is such world that we are heading to.“Big Brother is watching you!” This quote by George Orwell couldn’t have been truer. Every aspect of our lives is being sorted through as Big Data this very moment. Government surveillance has prevailed by the name of security. But, is government surveillance of internet digital communications like social networks, cell phone calls, text messages, and emails really a public service of security? Or

"According to the First Amendment, Congress cannot prohibit the freedoms of speech, or the press. There has been controversy over the government overstepping its lines involving internet content. I believe that the government has the right monitor emails and social media accounts if there is a threat of potential terrorism. I also believe in net neutrality. But there is a stopping point. I do not think it is right for schools to monitor emails and social media accounts

"Americans are unique due to our technological advancement, which means we set the precedent of how this new technology is to be controlled. The internet is an invention that raises new questions everyday. One controversial issue is wether or not the government_Ñés interference online is necessary. On one hand, the internet is a place where people speak up and speak out, even if it is against the government. Should the government be able to spy on this? If we let them take control of the internet, is that the same thing as limiting our freedom of speech? On the other hand, the internet is the prime location for criminal activity that goes far beyond simple teasing. Do we need government interference in order to protect us from criminals who hide behind the keyboard? Would monitoring the internet actually help prevent criminal activity such as terrorist attacks?

"The extent that the government-federal, state and local have to monitor internet content would be a simple overview to make sure that everyone is alright and there is no alarming content that could be used to hurt others. Only an overview would be necessary to make sure that there are no obvious threats to anyone and if there are any suspected threats to anyone, there should always be a probable cause before any form of the government gets deeply involved into someones internet content because after all everyone should be entitled to privacy unless there is a specific reason that their privacy should be breached then the United States government should be allowed to view their content without restriction to keep people safe. The National Security Agency which is a national security agency that has intelligence over the country that is in the department of defense in the US and is directed by the Director of National

The first major reason why the government should be able to spy on its citizens is because It's not necessarily the spying that people think it is. It's not like your phone is being listened to by some agent. Unless there is reason to, like if keywords were picked up on your phone. (Should the government be able to spy on its citizens?)

The controversy on government surveillance is very controversial. Should the government have unlimited access to citizen’s personal information, conversations, and text in order to protect the country? Or should the government have more of a laissez-faire-type role in citizen’s private lifestyles? Across the world, there are different approaches on the government’s surveillance on people. Iceland’s policies are the least intrusive in the world, with almost no surveillance and laws protecting the people’s freedom of speech. On the other end of the spectrum is China, which is in the process of creating a constant surveillance system of all its citizens. Somewhere in the middle of this scale is the United States of America. Influences by other

The government should monitor the internet to the extent of letting people voice their opinions but not in a threatening manner. For example not letting people cyber bully others and having a happy environment on the inter web. The government should not over step the boundaries on the web but have still a role in controlling it. What we see on the internet is only 10% of what's really out there. The government maybe should take part in monitoring social medias with hate speech and other things. The world is a very horrible place and with others revealing their hatred venom it would help if forces would take their account down. The government is already involved in many aspects of the world they do not really need to take control of the inter-web

"As most people would say, ""The government is always watching whenever or wherever you are."" Although this statement may or may not be true, it is possible for the government to access whatever platform they want. In relation to the topic of the federal government, the internet is also a major platform used throughout the world that is possibly controlled by the government. What does this say about our country's regime? It is regulated to an extent, mostly for the good (hopefully) and other times for wrong. Though, there is an extent to how much they can monitor one's internet content. This may also be a form of violating one's privacy because it's exposing the private information one may wish to keep hidden. We as US citizens also have a

Now, the debate is if the government is violating our freedom when is come to privacy spying and recording our phone calls, text and internet activates, and can be more like banks transactions, credit card purchased and what kind of books are we getting from libraries. The true in my opinion is that we do not know at what level is the government is watching us, or the measurement of privacy the government think that we deserve. By the same token, there is the argument I guess, that if you are not doing something wrong and have nothing to hide, why would you care?

Do you ever get that feeling that you are being watched by someone or something, while you are right because little do you know the Government is always watching you all day everyday. The Government uses Cellphones,Laptops,even your Smart T.V.’s to spy on us even if you never been convicted of crime. They use the major companies such as Google,Verizon,Yahoo mostly all major companies that involve internet usage. The Government invades our privacy probably daily and that’s something crazy to think about even though you have the best password in the world they will manage to have access your personal information. This is explained like the Government in George Orwell’s book 1984 how Big Brother is always watching them like when we are watching