Indeed, the Digital age has been considered as one of the greatest development of the world today. It has brought different benefits to the lives of people and catered all their needs and wants. As the world gets into crave for things that are “quick and easy”, the Digital Age had posed threat to people’s privacy and security (Meeks, 2000). The advancement in new technologies and gadgets should not only be considered as something good that came into people’s lives but also danger in the privacy of their personal information.
Loss of privacy is the most inevitable risk that these technologies have brought to mankind. Every now and then, as people post in their status in Facebook, twit things on Twitter, sends emails to friends and blog facts on their pages, the risk of the digital world is in front of their houses, waiting for their doors to open and hacks into their personal lives and property. This thing can likely to be compared to a professional thief, who had planned long for its victims.
Every bits of information given away to the web has been automatically rendered as property of the Digital world. Whatever is in there can never be taken back; it stays there, often forever (Kalbach & Leous, 2012).
The Digital Age had used the advanced technologies to lure people to its hidden traps. According to Brock Meeks (2000), technologies had fed the people with “fast food” mentality and turned them into speed freaks. It has lured and seduced the people with discounts (Meeks, 2000). With little bits of personal information, an instant discount will be given to anyone. This has been Meeks’ argument over the strategy that the Digital world had done to intrude people’s lives. Discounts were just simple examples of how Digital Age has posed threat to the world (Meeks, 2000). What about the more extensive ways it does just to veer towards personal lives of people? Definitely, there would be more complicated actions it can do. There would really be a problem in privacy of information in the Digital Age. As people enter the digital world, they are widely exposed out from privacy and to the entire world itself.
Risks of Digital Age don’t just only lie on its own ways, but also on the outside factors that trigger to people’s detriment. There have been rich people and government officials who are willing to use the advancement of technologies to devour other people (Meeks, 2000). Indeed, the people have little control over the information they want to be private in Internet (JWT, 2008). The fact that through the internet it is easy to embarrass, hurt, and shame people makes the existence of technologies more risky to people’s privacy and personal security (JWT, 2008). At some point, privacy can survive in the Digital Age with the help of technologies itself. But there are only few people who can actually afford to protect themselves from the risk of the loss of privacy. Much of these people are the rich ones and people in authorities (Meeks, 2000).
As one releases information to the Digital Age, the information cannot be pulled back or removed before it can cause damage and consequences (Kalbach & Leous, 2012). It will never be easy to ask an Internet company to remove private information it knows from you (Kalbach & Leous, 2012). As what Sun Microsystems CEO Scoot McNealy said, Privacy is really dead and people should deal with it (Meeks, 2000). With the coming of the Digital Age, privacy has been put to the verge of its death. Indeed, the Digital Age has made changes to the lives of people from buying food, travelling, treating diseases up to socializing with friends and family (NAAG, 2012). But it became the most challenging phenomenon in the ability of people to control how and whom their personal information is shared (NAAG, 2012). The advancement of technology had really created risks for the whole world.
How to protect Information Privacy?
One of the arguments that had been given about the issue of protecting information privacy is equality and transparency (Meeks, 2000). People should all give up their privacy equally (Meeks, 2000). Even those who are in high authorities should be transparent about this. If the Police have the right to put surveillance to the public, then the public should also have the same right over these authorities (Meeks, 2000). In that case, government officials and high authorities would be obliged to respect such right for everybody. Privacy then would gain its ultimate protection. How? A very simple question would probably answer it.
Whose government official, high authorities or rich people would agree on putting their lives in the eyes of the public? None. It would actually trigger not to enact such surveillance to everybody resulting to protection of information privacy of all. Equality and transparency will address the problem of loss of privacy. If somebody wants you to share your information or get your personal data, a fair condition is a good idea to make (Meeks, 2000). He/she should do the same thing which he wanted you to do. In such way, it would be fair that both parties have agreed to share information intentionally. The deal would just be a “give and take” relationship. One should give, to gain something. The main purpose of the idea would be to avoid anyone to get private information from you as they would not agree to share theirs with you.
Is it possible to redefine Privacy?
It would actually be impossible to redefine privacy today. Privacy is simple as “it’s PRIVATE”. How would it be redefine? Once a right to privacy is removed, the mere meaning will be of no sense. Some says it would be better to get legislation to protect privacy, but what would the legislation do if there is no certain person who runs the world of Digital Age (Kalbach & Leous, 2012)? It is designed to “route around.” (Kalbach & Leous, 2012) Who would be the people accountable for its flaws? Answer: the people itself. The idea now goes, people made legislation to protect their privacy from their selves. It would actually turn out to be an unreasonable thought.
People know that their privacy is under attack, but they never knew that it was all their actions that devour them. The people would never know how to fight back against the threat of the Digital Age as soon as they realize how to manage their actions over technology. Privacy need not to be redefined. People just need to know the discipline on how to properly use technology and manage their information at hand. Their personal information should be kept to their selves. It would just be a matter of choice how and whom they would like to share them.
Meeks, B., (2000). “Is Privacy possible in Digital Age: if isn’t dead, then it’s hanging on by a thread.” NBC News. Retrieved from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3078854/t/privacy-possible-digital-age/#.UMQAweTCntB JWT, (2008). “ Privacy in Digital Age.” WPP.com. Retrieved from http://www.wpp.com/wpp/marketing/digital/privacy-in-the-digital-age.htm Kalbach, J., & Leous, J., (2012). “Be Proactive in protecting your