Bryant, Connolly, Pestelos 1

Alexis Bryant
Joseph Connolly
Chad Pestelos
CST 373
March 11, 2015
Privacy Challenges

The concept and values associated with privacy in the United States have changed

dramatically throughout the years. These changes specifically relate to events that occur in our

society and the technology that continues to enhance. Since the devastating terrorist attack of

September 11th, the values of personal privacy have been at stake. After the tragedy of the

September 11th attack on the US, the Patriot Act was established to prevent an event like this

from ever happening again. Along with the Act came policies that could potentially limit

civilians personal values of privacy. Additionally, technology involved with tracking personal

devices is constantly getting more and more advanced and this challenges personal privacy as

well. Since our society has become so dependent on the technology that we have developed, it

has become impossible to escape or avoid.

There are a few different types of privacy I think of when it comes to my ideas of

privacy. This includes personal space, personal property and personal information.

BusinessDictionary defines privacy as:

The right to be free from secret surveillance and to determine whether, when,

how, and to whom, one's personal or organizational information is to be revealed.

In specific, privacy may be divided into four categories (1) Physical: restriction

on others to experience a person or situation through one or more of the human

senses; (2) Informational: restriction on searching for or revealing facts that are

unknown or unknowable to others; (3) Decisional: restriction on interfering in

 Bryant, Connolly, Pestelos 2

decisions that are exclusive to an entity; (4) Dispositional: restriction on attempts

to know an individual's state of mind. (BusinessDictionary.com)

Comparing this definition to my ideas of privacy, they both have the same principal about

categories of privacy. My idea of privacy and personal space is that any person should have the

right to their own space; for example, one should not enter anothers space (office, room, car,

purse, etc.) without permission from the person who owns the space. When it comes to personal

property, one should not take or borrow personal property without asking. Finally, when it comes

to personal information, one should not share sensitive information about another without the

permission of the parties involved. An example of sharing sensitive information would be the

spreading of news of a terminally ill friend or family member.

The three categories of privacy I just described can also be looked at in terms of virtual

privacy. Virtual privacy has become a main concern in the recent years as technology has

become a role in everyones day to day routine. The idea of virtual privacy should be respected

in the same way I described above. For example, one should respect anothers virtual privacy by

not looking over their shoulder while their neighbor types up an e-mail, or dig through a friends

phone to see what kind of risque pictures or text messages are being sent. Privacy, as a whole,

is a value that everyone should respect and be respected.

The Patriot Act was passed with little debate during the aftermath of September 11th and

because of this, people did not know the threats to personal privacy that came along with the new

Act. According to an article from townhall.com:

Under the Patriot Act, the government can conduct warrantless private property

without even your notice. A section of the law grants the government the
 Bryant, Connolly, Pestelos 3

authority to force any company to release private records about their customers.

Google could be sharing your Internet browsing history with the FBI. You have

no way of knowing and Google is legally prohibited from informing customers!

(Borowski)

From the statement made by Borowski that Google could be sharing your information without

your consent clearly illustrates the way technology has challenged personal privacy.

Another issue with the Patriot Act and privacy concerns is that it is said to violate the

Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment is, The right of the people to be secure in their

persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be

violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation,

and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized

(Legal Information Institute). With the Patriot Act in place, this right is challenged; the Patriot

Act allows FBI agents to get approval from a judge and search a person's home or business

without their consent. The Patriot Act was put in place to prevent terrorism and according to an

article from NPR titled As It Turns 10, Patriot Act Remains Controversial, less than 1 percent of

these sneak-and-peek searches are happening for terrorism investigations... ...They're instead

being used primarily in drug cases, in immigration cases, and some fraud (Johnson). This

statement illustrates that the Patriot Act takes advantage of its rights in that it is not being used

only for terrorists acts but invading the privacy of American citizens. From another perspective,

the text The Limits of Privacy by Amitai Etzioni, the author explains that the interpretation of the

Fourth Amendment has changed over time. Etzioni states, more and more legal searches are

conducted for which neither warrants nor even specific suspicion are required. Examples include
 Bryant, Connolly, Pestelos 4

drug testing, screening gates in airports, and field sobriety checkpoints (204). Although

interpretation does change over time, the Patriot Act clearly challenges the Fourth Amendment

rights.

The increasing advancements in technology have also challenged personal privacy. The

ability to track our information on the Internet and sell it to the highest bidder has become quite

popular and easy to do. As the American Civil Liberties Union puts it, With more and more of

our lives moving online, these intrusions have devastating implications for our right to privacy.

But more than just privacy is threatened when everything we say, everywhere we go, and

everyone we associate with are fair game (ACLU). Technology achieves this personal

information in a number of ways including online banking, shopping, medical records, phone

records, and anything you could possibly think of, even your smart TV! Year after year, the

capabilities of technology go above and beyond the previous years ability. These new

enhancements in technology benefit our advancing world, but also come with the price to pay:

privacy.

Values of privacy vary from culture to culture. In the United States, privacy is extremely

important to its citizens and always has been, but this has changed due to other changes in the

culture, especially the drastic event of September 11th as well as technology. Many cultures

concepts are different than the United States. The following paragraphs will discuss the

differences and similarities of privacy in the Chinese, Filipino, and Arabian cultures in

comparison to the values in the United States.

The People Republic of China has come a long way since its establishment in 1949

under the rule of Mao Zedong. During Mao Zedongs ruling was a time when people were
 Bryant, Connolly, Pestelos 5

persecuted and imprisoned not only for what they said, but for who they were (Goldman). Mao

saw any of separate thought from the beliefs of the Peoples Republic an enemy of the state.

Including any with separate thought into persecution, according to Goldman this included

landlords, entrepreneurs, believers of feudalism and capitalism. We will have to appreciate the

freedoms that we enjoy in the United States. That we are free to live our private lives and our

private thoughts and express our opinions. The article The long march to privacy states:

It is a remarkable development, considering where things stood just a few decades

ago. When Chinas communist rulers came to power in 1949, they set few limits

on their freedom to pry into the lives of ordinary people. In the heyday of state

control, the Chinese had their employment, housing, health care, food rations and

travel all micromanaged by bureaucrats, and their lives were open books. Women

of childbearing age even had their menstrual cycles monitored so the state could

ensure that those without permission did not getor remainpregnant. (The

Economist)

Furthermore, take a look at Chinas Real Name Internet Policy. Is it to improve the

internet or control the content of the internet? The internet has always been the Wild West and

filled with a bunch of traveling unknowns. With Chinas new Real Name Internet Policy, users

are required to register their real names before they speak out on an Internet platform. These

platforms consist of blogging websites, instant messaging services, posting comments, and

contributing on forums. It seems China wants to grab hold of what is said and hold people

accountable for what they say towards a new report in the comments. This policy seems to be
 Bryant, Connolly, Pestelos 6

created to stop people for thinking differently and posting their opinions for others to read. As in

the Wall Street Journal article it says, including anything that harms national security, involves

national secrets, incites ethnic discrimination or hatred, or harms national unity (Chin). The

statement seems to be very vague and the policy words can be twisted to make a case towards a

comment against the beliefs of the government pursued in court and be punished. Users will

also be required to agree to respect the law, the socialist political system, social morality and

truth before being allowed to use a given service (Chin). Just like the state of Californias DMV

statement on driving, driving is a privilege not a right. The Chinese have adapted a system that

using the Internet as a privilege and privileges can be molded to fit the government idea of

information control.

Public privacy is another issue in China that greatly differs from public privacy in the

United States. China has a few different public privacy issues as stated from The Economist:

The countrys public lavatories are often open-plan affairs where locals

unabashedly squat elbow-to-elbow as they tend to their business. In hospitals,

modesty is often thrown to the wind as treatments are carried out in full view of

milling crowds. In the most casual of social interactions, complete strangers think

nothing of asking each other detailsabout their salary, weight and so onthat

most westerners would not share even with close friends.

The two different ways of how things are carried out in public would be the results of the

different cultures. The Chinese and the Peoples Republic have had a different mindset on how

people go throughout their lives. With the Communist takeover in 1949 under rule of Mao, the
 Bryant, Connolly, Pestelos 7

government has been instructing its citizens how things should be done in the eye of the

Peoples Republic. The difference between the United States and Chinas public privacy is a

matter of culture and the uprising of the generations. The public privacy differences between

China and the United States in the matters mentioned above are cultural; differences will always

be seen when compared between any two cultures that do not practice the same methods.

Compared to other asian cultures, Filipinos almost have a sense of no privacy within the

immediate family. Even those who are remotely related to the a family member are widely

recognized throughout the family tree. Within a Filipino culture, belonging to a place or family

is a very strong sense among family members (The Gorgon). Parents sometimes have such

difficulties letting go of their children because of the remarkable closeness that grows over the

years. It is very common to see grandparents living with their children and grandchildren. This

concept is called the sandwich generation (Daez). Grandparents enjoy living their grandchildren

and looking after them. Even after the child finishes college, the parents are still not opposed for

them to live with them until they are willing to leave themselves. This can be connected to

financial reasons as well as the previous fact of parents not letting go of their children. On the

childs side, they feel to support their parents and look after them as they age, therefore the

sandwich generation blossoms.

Although the island mentality of the Filipino culture does not emphasize privacy on a

daily basis, the Filipino government has a strong law to focus attention on privacy. According to

Digital Filipino, Data Privacy Act of 2012 states:

 Bryant, Connolly, Pestelos 8

It is the policy of the State to protect the fundamental human right of privacy, of

communication while ensuring free flow of information to promote innovation

and growth. The State recognizes the vital role of information and

communications technology in nation-building and its inherent obligation to

ensure that personal information in information and communications systems in

the government and in the private sector are secured and protected.

Any person who violates this law can be penalized by imprisonment for up to six years and a fine

of up to four million pesos, which is equivalent to one hundred thousand US dollars (Toral). The

emerging economy of the Philippines realizes the strength and significance in technology, and

understands that they will need to take further precautions to protect their people and their

personal data as they economy grows.

Another act similar to the Data Privacy Act of 2012 is the Republic Act No. 8792 of

E-Commerce Act includes provisions on privacy security and provides for penalties on computer

hacking, introduction of viruses and piracy of copyright works (Varilla). The E-Commerce Act

states any person who obtained access to any electronic data message, or electronic document,..

information, or other material pursuant to any powers conferred under this Act, shall not convey

to or share the same with any other person. Like this Act, the Philippines have implemented

many other laws to secure online data not just for citizens, but also for business and government

organizations.

In the Arabian culture, privacy is one of the most important values in their society as a

whole. To further support this statement, the online article Respected values in Arab culture
 Bryant, Connolly, Pestelos 9

makes a statement that, "most Arabs consider privacy to be an important value and they rarely

talk about anything that is personal. Family issues are expected to remain in the family and are

not discussed with outsiders. It is considered to be rude to ask too many personal questions...

...most Arabs will not share very much personal information with you and for the most part they

will not ask you to share anything that is personal about yourself" (Arab Business Etiquette).

This statement shows that the Arabian culture is more conservative than the United States, but

also shares the similarity that personal information involving family and friend should be up to

the individuals involved.

Additionally, unlike the United States, the Arabian culture does not take advantage of

what technology has to offer due to concerns of privacy. For example, the article Lessons to Be

Learnt: Cultural Means Impeding e-Commerce Adoption in a Saudi Industry explains that the

Arabian country Saudi Arabia, chooses not to take advantage of e-commerce, despite the

availability of technological know how and the proven advantage of online marketing for the

tourism industry, e-commerce has not been to its full capacity (Brdesee, Corbitt,

Pittayachawan). The article goes further to explain the reasons behind not using this technology

and it all comes down to privacy concerns. There is a statement made that says, trust seems to

be the most significant issue hampering e-commerce adoption as this is not only a relatively new

form of trading but also has a lot of security and privacy concerns unlike traditional forms of

business. Security issues, issues with prototypes on e-shopping, and payment logistics were some

reasons cited by participants (Brdesee, Corbitt, Pittayachawan). Privacy and technology is a

concern in the United States, but the U.S. utilizes e-commerce and everything technology has to
 Bryant, Connolly, Pestelos 10

offer. Therefore, this example shows the restrictions that the Arabian culture uses to prevent

personal privacy from being invaded and that privacy is one of the top concerns for their culture.

Throughout the world, different cultures are seen by some citizens of the United States as

indifferent and the wrong way to live. In the years of history with the United States of America,

we tried to change and adapted different cultures to western ideology. Current countries with

their cultures being tested, as in Afghanistan and Iraq. With our deployment of troops to occupy

these countries and reduce the national threat of terrorism towards the United States. But the

question remains how different are we from other countries and our freedom and privacy. A

article The Washington Post titled 10 reasons the U.S. is no longer the land of the free states:

Even as we pass judgement on countries we consider unfree, Americans remain

confident that any definition of a free nation must include their own the land of

free. Yet, the laws and practices of the land should shake that confidence. In the

decade since Sept. 11, 2001, this country has comprehensively reduced civil

liberties in the name of an expanded security state. (Turley)

Since 9/11 the United States has adopted new policies for national security and all of the policies

created are to help reduce the threat of terrorism against the United States. The article from the

Washington Post describes these policy changes as followed:

Assassination of U.S. citizens, the right to order the killing of any citizen

considered a terrorist or an abettor of terrorism. Indefinite detention, terrorism

suspects are to be held by the military the president also has the authority to

indefinitely detain citizens accused of terrorism. Warrantless searches, the

 Bryant, Connolly, Pestelos 11

president may now order warrantless surveillance, including a new capability to

force companies and organizations to turn over information on citizens finances,

communications and associations. Continual monitoring of citizens, to use GPS

devices to monitor every move of targeted citizens without court order.

Considering the policies that have been put into action to protect our nations freedoms, we often

overlook cultures that have a different perspective. It would seem our freedoms compared to

other cultures, are not much different after all. When dealing with liberties that can be

threatening towards society, we as a nation, see different.

The intention of these cultures and governments have positive ideas to help protect the

homeland. Protecting both from domestic and foreign attacks. The methods that have been in use

since post 9/11 have been brought on to prevent terrorism thriving in our nation. Either from

China restricting its citizens to register real names to prevent deemed unwanted material by the

government published online, to protect its citizens. The difference between the Chinese and

Arabian nations about public privacy. The Chinese have a culture open to the public way with

physical and social activities. How the Arabian nations keep privacy to a high standard in their

culture and do not pry into ones privacy to find secrets. Today for us Americans, it is how much

is too much? How often do you turn on the television news channel or browse headlines online

and see an issue with the United States spying on its citizens. Will our nation ever satisfy the

hunger of big brother?

 Bryant, Connolly, Pestelos 12

Works Cited

Borowski, Julie. (2013). The USA Freedom Act Limits NSAs Surveillance Powers. Web. 5
March, 2015.
http://townhall.com/columnists/julieborowski/2013/11/11/the-usa-freedom-act-limits-nsas-surve
illance-powers-n1743509/page/full

Brdesee, Hani, Corbitt, Brian, Pittayachawan, Siddhi. (2012). Lessons to Be Learnt: Cultural
Means Impeding e-Commerce Adoption in a Saudi Industry. Web. 5 March, 2015.
http://www.academia.edu/2484072/Lessons_to_be_learnt_Cultural_means_impeding_e-commer
ce_adoption_in_a_Saudi_industry

BusinessDictionary.com. http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/privacy.html

Chin, Josh. China Is Requiring People to Register Real Names for Some Internet Services. The
Wall Street Journal. Web. 4 February, 2015.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/china-to-enforce-real-name-registration-for-internet-users-1423033
973

Daez, Mylene. The Sandwich Generation. Brighter Life. Web. 30 July 2013.
http://brighterlife.com.ph/2013/07/30/the-sandwich-generation/.

Etzioni, Amitai. (1999). The Limits of Privacy. Basic Books

Internet Privacy. American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Web. 5 March, 2015.
https://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/internet-privacy

Johnson, Carrie. (2011). As It Turns 10, Patriot Act Remains Controversial.

http://www.npr.org/2011/10/26/141699537/as-it-turns-10-patriot-act-remains-controversial

Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment

The Long March to Privacy. The Economist. Print edition. Web. 14 January, 2006.
http://www.economist.com/node/5389362

Respected values in Arab culture. (2015). Arab Business Etiquette. Web. 5 March, 2015.
http://www.arab-business-etiquette.com/respected-values-in-arab-culture.php

Toral, Janette. Republic Act No. 10173 - Data Privacy Act of 2012. Digital Filipino. Web. 24
August 2012. http://digitalfilipino.com/republic-act-no-10173-data-privacy-act-of-2012/.

The Gorgon. On Filipino Close Family Ties. Anti-Pinoy. Web. 20 June 2011.
http://antipinoy.com/on-filipino-close-family-ties/
 Bryant, Connolly, Pestelos 13

Turley, Jonathan. 10 reasons the U.S. is no longer the land of the free. The Washington Post.
Web. 13 January, 2012.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/is-the-united-states-still-the-land-of-the-free/2012/01/
04/gIQAvcD1wP_story.html

Varilla, Phillip A. Privacy Framework In The Philippines. Communications on Information

and Communications Technology. Web. 2 January 2004.