In a recent artricle on guardian.co.uk, Daniel Nasaw reveals the newest tactic in finding and prosecuting criminals. U.S. government agents are being trained to log onto social networking sites and search for information needed in criminal cases, such as finding evidence, tracking suspects and finding witnesses in crimes. Social networking sites such as Facebook, Myspace, and Twitter are just some of the targets of these law enforcement agents. FBI agents are creating fake identities and accounts in order to befriend their suspects and lure them into confessing or revealing clues needed. This without a doubt violates some of the sites’ rules. In addition, Facebook is now being used by many companies as a means to do background checks. The US Cyber-Security prosecutor recently stated that agents should be able to go uncover as much as they want, but some rules should be made. Many are worried that this recent new method in investigation will take away from the very reason social networking sites exist; to create personal relationships with others.
While reading this article, I am reminded of the first amendment of the constitution. “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech or press.” As discussed in class, there are some things that are seen as restrictions to the freedoms provided in the first amendment. Things like slander, incitement, threats to national security, and offensive speech are seen as cases in which the government can step in. The overall role of the government is to keep order and peace, and I guess this sometimes means invading our privacy and freedoms for the better of all. This sometimes means violating rules installed by companies, such as Facebook, in order to “protect” others. The government has a fairly big role in regulating media content and distribution, but should they also be allowed to scrutinize personal information and violate some of their own rules to solve a crime?
I’m not sure how I would feel if I knew my latest friend on Facebook was really an undercover FBI agent studying my page for any information he/she may need to solve a crime. How would you feel? Even worse, how would you feel if you knew the company you were applying to work for was examining your Facebook wall for information that may cause them to not want to hire you? Sometimes privacy isn’t so private. Is this fair? Should the government have access and the ability to view whatever information they want, whenever they want?
While reading this article, I am reminded of the first amendment of the constitution. “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech or press.” As discussed in class, there are some things that are seen as restrictions to the freedoms provided in the first amendment. Things like slander, incitement, threats to national security, and offensive speech are seen as cases in which the government can step in. The overall role of the government is to keep order and peace, and I guess this sometimes means invading our privacy and freedoms for the better of all. This sometimes means violating rules installed by companies, such as Facebook, in order to “protect” others. The government has a fairly big role in regulating media content and distribution, but should they also be allowed to scrutinize personal information and violate some of their own rules to solve a crime?
I’m not sure how I would feel if I knew my latest friend on Facebook was really an undercover FBI agent studying my page for any information he/she may need to solve a crime. How would you feel? Even worse, how would you feel if you knew the company you were applying to work for was examining your Facebook wall for information that may cause them to not want to hire you? Sometimes privacy isn’t so private. Is this fair? Should the government have access and the ability to view whatever information they want, whenever they want?
No comments:
Post a Comment