thesis statement internet privacy

Most Popular

10 days ago

English and Social Studies Teachers Pioneer AI Usage in Schools, Study Finds

12 days ago

Best Summarising Strategies for Students

How to cite page numbers in apa, is summarizing books a good way to retain knowledge redditors weigh in.

11 days ago

What is Accidental Plagiarism

Digital privacy & cybersecurity thesis statement examples.

freepik.com

In an age of increasing digital reliance, digital privacy and cybersecurity are paramount topics that require meticulous academic exploration. Thesis statements in this realm should articulate clear and specific research objectives. Below are examples of good and bad thesis statements, alongside analyses delineating their respective merits and flaws.

Good Thesis Statement Examples

Specific and Clear

Good: “This thesis will scrutinize the efficacy of end-to-end encryption in safeguarding users’ privacy on social media platforms.”
Bad: “Encryption is crucial for privacy on social media.”

The good example is specific, pinpointing the type of encryption and the context (social media privacy). In contrast, the bad example is general, lacking clarity on encryption type and application.

Arguable and Debatable

Good: “The adoption of GDPR has significantly enhanced digital privacy protection for EU citizens, albeit at the expense of restricting certain online services.”
Bad: “GDPR has changed digital privacy.”

The good statement provides a debatable argument, acknowledging GDPR’s impact on privacy and online services. The bad example is factual but lacks a defined stance or specific areas of impact.

Researchable and Measurable

Good: “The thesis explores the correlation between the increase in remote work and the rise in phishing attacks during the COVID-19 pandemic.”
Bad: “Cybersecurity threats have increased with remote work.”

The good example is researchable, measurable, and time-bound, providing clear variables and context. The bad statement, while true, lacks specificity and measurable variables.

Bad Thesis Statement Examples

Overly Broad: “Cybersecurity is important for protecting privacy.”

While true, this statement is excessively broad and doesn’t pinpoint specific cybersecurity aspects or privacy areas for exploration.

Lack of Clear Argument: “Digital privacy matters to everyone.”

This statement, though factual, doesn’t present a clear argument or specific area for research, serving poorly as a research guide.

Unmeasurable and Unresearchable: “Without privacy, there’s no freedom on the internet.”

While philosophically valid, this statement isn’t easily measurable or researchable, lacking specificity for empirical investigation.

Developing a strong thesis statement for digital privacy and cybersecurity research is imperative, serving as the foundation for your scholarly endeavor. Effective thesis statements are precise, arguable, and conducive to research, guiding both the researcher and readers through a focused academic inquiry. Conversely, ineffective ones are often vague, lacking clear arguments, and not easily researchable. By considering these examples and analyses, students can craft thesis statements that are not only academically sound but also pivotal for exploring the critical issues of digital privacy and cybersecurity.

Comments (0)

Welcome to A*Help comments!

We’re all about debate and discussion at A*Help.

We value the diverse opinions of users, so you may find points of view that you don’t agree with. And that’s cool. However, there are certain things we’re not OK with: attempts to manipulate our data in any way, for example, or the posting of discriminative, offensive, hateful, or disparaging material.

Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

More from Thesis Statement Examples and Samples

Sep 30 2023

Gender & Sexuality Studies Thesis Statement Examples

Criminal Justice Reform Thesis Statement Examples

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Thesis Statement Examples

Remember Me

What is your profession ? Student Teacher Writer Other

Forgotten Password?

Username or Email

Internet and Data Privacy Guide

Introduction to Internet Privacy
Common Privacy Concerns
Building a Privacy Toolkit
Data Privacy
Privacy at Pratt Institute
Further Reading

Introduction

Our engagement with technology and the internet has increased exponentially in the last decade with internet devices in our pockets, on street corners , and even in our household appliances . Maybe because of all this engagement, we assume that we understand our various internet-connected machines and activities. It's difficult to be fully aware of the data and internet surveillance complex, including the shifting surveillance laws governing digital spaces.

This guide is meant to act as a privacy roadmap and a provocation for further research. It includes information on internet privacy, data privacy, tools for building an internet privacy toolkit, and further readings for learning about surveillance and privacy.

Image Credit: https://www.ubyssey.ca/features/double-edged-sword/

Privacy as Practice

Internet and data privacy is a practice; it cannot be achieved by using a single encryption app or privacy product. Privacy practice is informed by critical technology studies and developed through research and engagement. Developing a critical technology lens involves asking questions about who could benefit from your data, how your data could be monetized, and how would you want your data to be shared. The resources included in this guide are meant to demystify some of these questions and inspire further research.

As technologies change rapidly, any links or applications suggested in this guide may become outdated or compromised after publication. Where appropriate, resources have dates of publication listed to date the materials.

We encourage users to research any application or programs before downloading, using the resources listed as a springboard to developing a critical technology praxis.

Image Credit: https://sites.psu.edu/digitalshred/2019/10/22/virtual-privacy-lab-sjpl/

Next: Common Privacy Concerns >>
Last Updated: Mar 18, 2024 3:57 PM
URL: https://libguides.pratt.edu/internet-data-privacy

Internet Privacy - Essay Examples And Topic Ideas For Free

Internet privacy refers to the right or expectation of privacy in the digital realm, encompassing issues related to the protection of personal data, confidentiality, and anonymity online. Essays on internet privacy could delve into the risks and challenges associated with digital surveillance, data breaches, or online tracking, the impact of laws and regulations on privacy, or the ways in which individuals and organizations can protect privacy online. They might also explore the ethical, social, and political implications of privacy in the digital age, or the tensions between privacy, security, and convenience online. A substantial compilation of free essay instances related to Internet Privacy you can find at PapersOwl Website. You can use our samples for inspiration to write your own essay, research paper, or just to explore a new topic for yourself.

Impact of Technology on Privacy

The 21st Century is characterized by the heavy impact technology has on us as a society while it continues to develop new devices and modernize technology. Millions of individuals around the world are now connected digitally, in other words, people globally rely heavily on smartphones tablets, and/ or computers that store or save a majority of their personal information. Critical and extremely personal data is available and collected in these smart technology such as credit card details, fingerprint layout, and […]

A World Without Internet

On the street is the 21st century. Almost all people on our planet have access to the Internet. And they are actively using it. But they forget that they use it almost around the clock. From watching the weather in the morning to texting on social media in the evening. Instead of writing an essay by hand, a modern student simply downloads it. People on the Internet are already looking for work, pay for housing and communal services, participate in […]

Positive and Negative Effects of Internet

The topic of the pros and cons of the Internet is one of the most controversial topics. People often cannot give a definite answer to it. The topic of the Internet is quite versatile. Let's look at it from the positive side first. The Internet is the greatest invention of mankind, which made life easier and continues to do it for us hundreds of times. Its first plus is, of course, the available information. Now you can find out any […]

We will write an essay sample crafted to your needs.

Security Versus Freedom?

Welcome to the Digital Age. In today’s connected world, we are living much of our live online. As a result, companies everywhere are creating large storehouses of data on all of us. The most obvious information being collected is social media data. Everything we post publicly and some cases privately, is being stored and analysed. But it is not just social media, there is now a digital record of everything we buy, everything we watch, where we go and what […]

Internet Access Restrictions May Vary

Fantastic. In most instances, they are placed on search quarries and are most prominent at education centers. This is simply to keep minds safe from content unsuitable for most ages (Gonchar). Although this is an effective plan with good intentions, it can become more effective by being enforced on younger ages rather than those who have already been exposed to the negative side of the internet. As you enter high school you have nearly done and seen everything there […]

Securing Cyberspace: Crafting Tomorrow’s Internet Privacy Laws

In an era where digital footprints shape our daily lives, the quest to safeguard personal privacy in the vast expanse of the internet has become more critical than ever before. Transitioning from the pixels that construct our online world to the intricate policies governing its boundaries signifies a pivotal juncture in the evolution of digital governance. As we navigate through this landscape of data, the formulation of robust internet privacy legislation emerges as a beacon of protection against the perils […]

Silent Struggle: Assessing Threats to Internet Privacy and Security

In today's digital age, the internet serves as the cornerstone of modern communication, commerce, and entertainment. However, amidst the convenience and connectivity it offers, lurks a pervasive and often invisible battle for privacy and security. From data breaches to surveillance, the threats to our online well-being are manifold and ever-evolving. One of the most concerning threats is the rampant collection and misuse of personal data by corporations and governments alike. Every click, search, and purchase leaves a digital footprint, eagerly […]

Safeguarding Cyberspace: the Vital Role of AI in Preserving Online Privacy

In an era where our digital footprints grow larger with every click, the question of how to protect our online privacy becomes increasingly pertinent. Enter Artificial Intelligence, our modern-day guardians in the complex realm of cyberspace. Far beyond mere machines crunching numbers, AI has evolved into a formidable force in the fight against privacy breaches. The first and foremost duty of AI guardians is to fortify our virtual boundaries. Picture them as vigilant sentinels stationed at the gates of our […]

Preserving Digital Integrity: a Scholarly Evaluation of Internet Privacy

In the contemporary digital epoch, where the internet serves as an omnipotent conduit for global interaction, commerce, and information dissemination, the concept of cyber privacy emerges as a pivotal concern. As an academic critic, entrusted with scrutinizing the intricacies of cyber privacy, it becomes essential to unravel the diverse facets of this intricate matter, ranging from its legal and ethical dimensions to its societal and technological reverberations. Cyber privacy fundamentally entails the right of individuals to govern their personal information […]

Additional Example Essays

Positive Effects of Social Media
Instagram and body dysmorphia
The Negative Effects of Social Media On Mental Health
The Mental Health Stigma
How the Roles of Women and Men Were Portrayed in "A Doll's House"
Psychiatric Nurse Practitioner
Substance Abuse and Mental Illnesses
Importance Of Accountability
Are Electric Cars Better Than Petrol Diesel Cars?
"A Doll's House" as a Modern Tragedy
Poems “The Negro Speaks of Rivers” and “Still I Rise”
The Unique Use of Literary Devices in The Tell-Tale Heart

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

The Internet, children, and privacy: the case against parental monitoring

Original Article
Published: 31 July 2013
Volume 15 , pages 263–274, ( 2013 )

Cite this article

Kay Mathiesen 1

5074 Accesses

19 Citations

3 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Monitoring your children’s Web browsing is important. You may not be able to monitor their surfing in real time. But it’s good to know exactly where they’ve been. So, what’s the easiest way to check what sites they’ve visited? Your Web browsers hold the information you need. Every browser records a surfing history. You can see every page your children have visited. “Computer Guru” Kim Kommando

It has been recommended that parents should monitor their children’s Internet use, including what sites their children visit, what messages they receive, and what they post. In this paper, I claim that parents ought not to follow this advice, because to do so would violate children’s right to privacy over their on-line information exchanges. In defense of this claim, I argue that children have a right to privacy from their parents, because such a right respects their current capacities and fosters their future capacities for autonomy and relationships.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

The Rise of the Algorithmic Child: Protecting Children in Smart Homes

Mental Models of the Internet and Its Online Risks: Children and Their Parent(s)

Internet privacy, technology, and personal information

Quotes are from, in order, Directgov [the UK government's digital service for people in England and Wales], “Keeping Children Safe On-line,” http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/parents/yourchildshealthandsafety/internetsafety/dg_071138 , accessed June 2, 2012; Common Sense Media, “Tech tip: Checking Browser Histories,” http://www.commonsensemedia.org/advice-for-parents/tech-tip-checking-browser-histories , accessed July 23, 2012; Federal Bureau of Investigation, Cyber Division, “A Parent’s Guide to Internet Safety,” http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/parent-guide/ , accessed June 2, 2012; Minor Monitor, http://www.freewaregenius.com/2011/12/11/monitor-your-childs-facebook-activity-with-minor-monitor/ , accessed February 8, 2013. See also, Children’s Rights Council, “Check your Child’s Web History,” http://www.crckids.org/parents/parenting-tools/online-activity/how-to-check-your-childs-internet-history/ , accessed July 10, 2012.

Numerous websites offer advice on how to do this, see e.g., http://www.wikihow.com/Surf-the-Internet-on-a-Macintosh-Without-Your-Parents-Knowing , accessed 8 February 2013.

While early work on children and the Internet indicated that minors do not value privacy on-line, recent studies have shown this to not be true (see e.g., Lenhart et al. 2011 , 7; Davis and James 2013 ).

While I focus on parents, the child’s right to privacy would also obligate others in parental roles (e.g., counselors, teachers) to respect minors’ privacy in their informational exchanges.

Admittedly there is a debate among scholars over whether “rights” is an appropriate concept to use when discussing the basis of moral obligations toward children (see e.g., O'Neill 1988 , Schoeman 1980 , 1983 ; Wolgast 1987 ). It is not necessary to enter into the general debates about children’s rights here. If one objects to the idea of children’s rights, one can take my arguments as intended to establish a parent’s (non-rights based) obligation to respect the privacy of their minor child.

This is not to say that this obligation cannot be outweighed by other more serious obligations. I discuss the concept of such “pro tanto” obligations below.

I am grateful to an anonymous referee for pushing me to clarify my position on this point.

The justification of a paternalistic action is the good of the individual who is being protected. Thus, actions motivated primarily by a concern with the welfare of other people (including oneself) or by a concern with some independent moral requirement are not paternalistic, properly speaking. I will assume that in the case of monitoring parents are motivated by what they believe are the best interests of the child.

Indeed, those who reject paternalistic laws, such as mandatory helmets for motorcyclists, may, at the same time, endorse such laws for minors (Jones and Bayer 2007 ).

There is insufficient room for a full discussion of all these possible threats here; for an in-depth discussion, see Livingstone ( 2009 ).

Some studies have found “strong evidence for exposure to pro-anorexia websites having negative effects on young women” (Bardone-Cone and Cass 2007 , 544). While a number of social media organizations have banned such sites, they persist (Casilli et al. 2012 ). An informal Google search for “pro ana [pro anorexia] tips” yields approximately 516,000 results and “pro mia [pro bulimia] tips” yields approximately 85,600 results. The first 3 pages of these results were all links to sites that advocate bulimia. (This search was conducted by the author on 3 July 2012).

A “technopanic” (coined by Marwick 2008 ) is a form of “media panic” (Drotner 1999 ), which itself is a subclass of “moral panic” (Cohen 1972 ). A moral panic occurs when there is a perceived threat to the present moral order by some group (or, in this case, technology).

Students in my information ethics courses often make this argument.

Further support for this claim may be taken from the fact that large amounts of time and money have been dedicated to collecting, storing, and using data about people’s Internet searches to provide “personalized” service to customers (Mobasher et al. 2000 ). If such data provided no information about a person’s beliefs or intentions, then such data collection would be pointless. I am grateful to Tony Doyle for emphasizing this point.

Students in my information ethics courses also often make this argument.

In the case of citizens and the state, there are laws protecting citizens’ privacy from state intrusions. Given the unique features of the family context, similar laws protecting the child’s privacy from parental intrusion would likely do more harm than good.

I am grateful to an anonymous referee for pushing me to respond more fully to this concern about autonomy.

I am grateful to an anonymous referee for suggesting the importance of trust in this context.

See e.g., Common Sense Media’s “10 simple steps to Internet Safety” http://www.commonsensemedia.org/advice-for-parents/10-simple-steps-internet-safety ; EU Kids Online’s “How can parents support internet safety,” http://www2.lse.ac.uk/media@lse/research/EUKidsOnline/EU%20Kids%20III/Reports/ParentalMediation.pdf .

American Library Association (2007). Privacy tool kit . Chicago, IL: American Library Association. http://www.ala.org/advocacy/privacyconfidentiality/toolkitsprivacy/introduction . Accessed 11 September 2012.

Archard, D. W. (2010). Children’s rights. In E. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford encylopedia of philosophy . http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2011/entries/rights-children/ . Accessed April 9 2012.

Attili, G., Vermigli, P., & Roazzi, A. (2010). Children’s social competence, peer status, and the quality of mother-child and father-child relationships: A multidimensional scaling approach. European Psychologist, 15 (1), 23–33.

Article Google Scholar

Bahrampour, T., & Aratani, L. (2006). Teens’ bold blogs alarm area schools . The Washington Post, 17 January, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/16/AR2006011601489.html . Accessed 15 February 2013.

Bardone‐Cone, A. M., & Cass, K. M. (2007). What does viewing a pro‐anorexia website do? An experimental examination of website exposure and moderating effects. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 40 (6), 537–548.

Google Scholar

Behnke, S., & Warner, E. (2002). Confidentiality in the treatment of adolescents. Monitor on Psychology, 33 (3), 44.

Benn, S. I. (1971). Privacy, freedom, and respect for persons. In J. R. Pennock & J. W. Chapman (Eds.), Nomos XIII: Privacy (pp. 1–26). Atherton Press: New York.

Benn, S. I. (1980). Privacy and respect for persons: A reply. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 58 (1), 54–61.

Article MathSciNet Google Scholar

Benn, S. I. (1984). Privacy, freedom, and respect for persons. In F. D. Schoeman (Ed.), Philosophical dimensions of privacy: An anthology (p. 223). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Chapter Google Scholar

Bidjerano, T., & Newman, J. (2010). Autonomy in after-school activity choice among preadolescents from Taiwan and the United States. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 30 (5), 733–764.

Bloustein, E. J. (1984). Privacy as an aspect of human dignity. In F. D. Schoeman (Ed.), Philosophical dimensions of privacy: An anthology (pp. 156–202). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Bok, S. (1999). Lying: Moral choice in public and private life . New York: Vintage.

boyd, d. (2007). Why youth (heart) social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), Youth, identity, and digital media (pp. 119–142). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Brennan, S., & Noggle, R. (1997). The moral status of children: Children’s rights, parents’ rights, and family justice. Social Theory and Practice, 23 , 1–26.

Buss, E. (2004). The speech-enhancing effect of Internet regulation. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 79 (103), 103.

Cantor, J. (2001). The media and children’s fears, anxieties, and perceptions of danger. In D. G. Singer & J. L. Singer (Eds.), Handbook of children and the media (pp. 207–221). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Casilli, A. A., Tubaro, P., & Araya, P. (2012). Ten years of Ana: Lessons from a transdisciplinary body of literature on online pro-eating disorder websites. Social Science Information, 51 (1), 120–139.

Clarke, S. (2002). A definition of paternalism. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 5 (1), 81–91. doi: 10.1080/13698230212331294554 .

Cohen, S. (1972). Folk devils and moral panics: The creation of the mods and rockers . London: MacGibbon and Kee.

Davis, K., & James, C. (2013). Tweens’ conceptions of privacy online: Implications for educators. Learning, Media and Technology, 38 (1), 4–25.

Dinger, D. R. (2005). Should parents be allowed to record a child’s telephone conversations when they believe the child is in danger? An examination of the federal wiretap statute and the doctrine of vicarious consent in the context of a criminal prosecution. Seattle University Law Review, 28 (4), 955–1028.

Doyle, T. (2009). Privacy and perfect voyeurism. Ethics and Information Technology, 11 (3), 181–189.

Drotner, K. (1999). Dangerous media? Panic discourses and dilemmas of modernity. Paedagogica Historica, 35 (3), 593–619.

Duerager, A., & Livingstone, S. (2012). How can parents support children’s internet safety? EUKids Online . http://www2.lse.ac.uk/media@lse/research/EUKidsOnline/EU%20Kids%20III/Reports/ParentalMediation.pdf . Accessed 5 February 2013.

d’Haenens, L. Vandonink, S., & Donoso, V. (2013). How to cope and build online resilience? http://www2.lse.ac.uk/media@lse/research/EUKidsOnline/EU%20Kids%20III/Reports/Copingonlineresilience.pdf . Accessed 1 February 2013.

Eastin, M. S. (2008). Toward a cognitive development approach to youth perceptions of credibility. In M. J. Metzger & A. J. Flanagin (Eds.), The digital media, youth, and credibility (pp. 29–48). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Federal Communications Commission vs. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726 (1978).

Fried, C. (1984). Privacy (A moral analysis). In F. D. Schoeman (Ed.), Philosophical dimensions of privacy: An anthology (pp. 203–222). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Friedman, M. (2000). Autonomy, social disruption, and women. In C. Mackenzie & N. Stoljar (Eds.), Relational autonomy: Feminist perspectives on automony, agency, and the social self (pp. 35–51). New York: Oxford University Press.

Gerstein, R. S. (1984). Privacy and self-incrimination. In F. D. Schoeman (Ed.), Philosophical dimensions of privacy: An anthology (pp. 245–264). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Griffin, J. (2008). On human rights . Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.

Book Google Scholar

Gutman, A. (1980). Children, paternalism, and education: A liberal argument. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 9 (4), 338–358.

Himma, K. E. (2007). Privacy versus security: Why privacy is not an absolute value or right. San Diego Law Review, 44 , 857.

Hunt, A. (1997). ‘Moral panic’ and moral language in the media. British Journal of Sociology, 48 (6), 629–648.

Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (1999). Rethinking the value of choice: A cultural perspective on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76 , 349–366.

Jones, M. M., & Bayer, R. (2007). Paternalism and its discontents: Motorcycle helmet laws, libertarian values, and public health. American Journal of Public Health, 97 (2), 208.

Kagan, S. (1989). The limits of morality . New York: Oxford University Press.

Kerr, M., & Stattin, H. (2000). What parents know, how they know it, and several forms of adolescent adjustment: Further support for a reinterpretation of monitoring. Developmental Psychology, 36 (3), 366–380.

Kirwil, L. (2009). Parental mediation of children’s internet use in different European countries. Journal of Children and Media, 3 (4), 394–409.

Kramer, R. M. (1999). Trust and distrust in organizations: Emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annual Review of Psychology, 50 (1), 569–598.

Lenhart, A. (2009). Teens and sexting: How and why minor teens are sending sexually suggestive nude or nearly nude via text messaging . Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project. http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/Teens-and-Sexting/Overview.aspx . Accessed 1 December 2012.

Lenhart, A., Madden, M., Smith, A., Purcell, K., Zickuhr, K., & Rainie, L. (2011). Teens, kindness and cruelty on social network sites . Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/Teens-and-social-media.aspx . Accessed 13 January 2013.

Liau, A. K., Khoo, A., & Hwaang, P. (2005). Factors influencing adolescents’ engagement in risky Internet behavior. Cyber Psychology and Behavior Cyber Psychology and Behavior, 8 (6), 513–520.

Littman, S. D. (2011). Point/counterpoint: proactive parenting privacy and youth . American Library Association. http://youthprivacy.ala.org/2011/05/05/pointcounterpoint-sarah-darer-littman-on-proactive-parenting . Accessed 5 June 2012.

Livingstone, S. (2009). Children and the Internet: Great expectations, challenging realities . Cambridge, Malden, MA: Polity.

Livingstone, S., & Bober, M. (2005). UK children go online: Final report of key project findings . London School of Economics and Political Science. http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/children-go-online/ . Accessed 15 February 2013.

Livingstone, S., & Bober, M. (2006). Regulating the Internet at home: Contrasting the perspectives of children and parents. In D. Buckingham & R. Willett (Eds.), Digital generations: Children, young people, and new media (pp. 93–113). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Livingstone, S., Haddon, L., Görzig, A., & Ólafsson, K. (2011). Risks and safety on the Internet: The perspective of European children: Full findings . London School of Economics and Political Science. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/33731 . Accessed 20 November 2012.

Livingstone, S., & Helsper, E. J. (2008). Parental mediation of children’s Internet use. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 52 (4), 581–599.

Locke, J. (1996 [1690]) Two treatises of government . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Marwick A. E. (2008). To catch a predator? The Myspace moral panic. First Monday, 13 (6). http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2152/1966 . Accessed 22 July 2013.

Marwick, A. E., Diaz, M. D., & Palfrey, J. (2010). Youth, privacy and reputation. Berkman Center for Internet and Society. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1588163 . Accessed 5 November 2012.

Mill, J. S. (1956 [1895]). On liberty . Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.

Mobasher, B., Cooley, R., & Srivastava, J. (2000). Automatic personalization based on web usage mining. Communications of the ACM, 43 (8), 142–151.

Montgomery, K. (2007). Generation digital: Politics, commerce, and childhood, in the age of the Internet . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Moore, A. D. (2003). Privacy: Its meaning and value. American Philosophical Quarterly, 40 (3), 215–227.

Moore, A. D. (2007). Toward informational privacy rights. San Diego Law Review, 44 (4), 809–845.

O’Neill, O. (1988). Children’s rights and children’s lives. Ethics, 98 (3), 445–463.

Palfrey, J., Boyd, D., & Sacco, D. (2010). Enhancing child safety and online technologies: Final report of the Internet Safety Technical Task Force. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.

Patchin, J., & Hinduja, S. (2006). Bullies move beyond the schoolyard. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 4 (2), 148–169.

Pettit, P. (1995). The cunning of trust. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 24 (3), 202–225.

Rachels, J. (1984). Why privacy is important. In F. D. Schoeman (Ed.), Philosophical dimensions of privacy: An anthology (pp. 290–299). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Reiman, J. H. (1976). Privacy, intimacy, and personhood. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 6 (1), 26–44.

Rotenberg, K. J. (2010a). Introduction. In K. J. Rotenberg (Ed.), Interpersonal trust during childhood and adolescence (pp. 3–7). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Rotenberg, K. J. (2010b). The conceptualization of interpersonal trust: A basis, domain, and target framework. In K. J. Rotenberg (Ed.), Interpersonal trust during childhood and adolescence (pp. 8–27). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Russell, A., Pettit, G. S., & Mize, J. (1998). Horizontal qualities in parent-child relationships: Parallels with and possible consequences for children’s peer relationships. Developmental Review, 18 (3), 313–352.

Scarre, G. (1980). Children and paternalism. Philosophy, 55 (211), 117–124.

Schapiro, T. (2003). Childhood and personhood. Arizona Law Review, 45 (3), 575–594.

Schoeman, F. (1980). Rights of children, rights of parents, and the moral basis of the family. Ethics, 91 (1), 6–19.

Schoeman, F. (1983). Childhood competence and autonomy. The Journal of Legal Studies, 12 (2), 267–287.

Schrag, F. (1977). The child in the moral order. Philosophy, 52 (200), 167–177.

Shmueli, B., & Blecher-Prigat, A. (2011). Privacy for children. Columbia Human Rights Law Review, 42 (3), 759–795.

Smetna, J. G. (2010). The role of trust in adolescent–parent relationships: To trust is to tell you. In K. J. Rotenberg (Ed.), Interpersonal trust during childhood and adolescence (pp. 223–246). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Solove, D. J. (2007). The future of reputation: Gossip, rumor, and privacy on the Internet . New Haven: Yale University Press.

Steyer, J. C. (2012). Talking back to facebook: A common sense guide to raising kids in the digital age . New York: Scribner.

Taylor, J. S. (2002). Privacy and autonomy: A reappraisal. The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 40 (4), 587–604.

Welsh, M. C., Pennington, B. F., & Groisser, D. B. (1991). A normative-developmental study of executive function: A window on prefrontal function in children. Developmental Neuropsychology Developmental Neuropsychology, 7 (2), 131–149.

Westin, A. (1967). Privacy and freedom . New York: Atheneum.

Wolgast, E. (1987). Wrong rights. Hypatia, 2 (1), 25–44.

Download references

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank the participants at the 2012 Information Ethics Roundtable for helpful comments on an early version of the argument in this paper and Samantha Brennan, Tony Doyle, Don Fallis, Laura Lenhart, and Daniel Zelinski for written comments on various drafts. I would also like to thank two anonymous referees for extensive and very insightful comments, which helped me to improve the paper greatly.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Information Resources and Library Science, University of Arizona, 1515 East First Street, Tucson, AZ, 85719, USA

Kay Mathiesen

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kay Mathiesen .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Mathiesen, K. The Internet, children, and privacy: the case against parental monitoring. Ethics Inf Technol 15 , 263–274 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-013-9323-4

Download citation

Published : 31 July 2013

Issue Date : December 2013

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-013-9323-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Parental monitoring
Children’s rights
Risks on-line
The Internet and children
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

Online Privacy and Security Strategies

The advent of the Internet era has brought about a variety of useful options for people all over the world. However, along with numerous advantages, searching and sharing data online also has some negative features. The greatest problem that may be encountered by almost any user is the violation of privacy. People allow many facts from their biography and everyday life to be known to their friends, as well as total strangers. The present paper aims at discussing online privacy issues. The thesis statement of the paper is that while internet users complain about personal information collection and use, they do not take sufficient measures to prevent their data from being disclosed. The analysis of the problem will be performed on the basis of the strategies discussed in class and two articles focused on online privacy.

Articles Dedicated to the Issue and Their Contribution to the Question

The article by John (2015) supports the argument made in the thesis statement. The author remarks that while people say they want privacy online, their actions indicate the opposite. John (2015) mentions that there is such a notion as “privacy paradox” (para. 1). This paradox presupposes that users do not tend to conceal their personal information to the extent necessary for providing sufficient privacy. One of the reasons why John (2015) thinks that people do not care enough about privacy is that it is “a faceless issue” (para. 3). While behaviors are influenced by specific issues, privacy is an “intangible” and “hard-to-quality” concept (John, 2015, para. 3). Thus, individuals frequently neglect this issue.

Rainie (2016) mentions that the problem of privacy is associated not only with users’ disregard of protecting their data but also with their inability to do so. The researcher notes that many people admit being unaware of the tools they could employ to secure their private information. Among the actions taken by users in this respect are avoiding using one’s name, employing virtual networks concealing their IP (internet protocol), clearing cookies, and encrypting one’s mail (Rainie, 2016). Moreover, statistics indicate that 55% of internet users have tried avoiding the surveillance by certain companies, individuals, or the government (Rainie, 2016). However, the majority of respondents admit that they attempt to evade “social surveillance” by friends and co-workers more frequently than by the law enforcement or government (Rainie, 2016, para. 7). Many users consider their efforts insufficient and report that they would like to take more security efforts. Only 37% say they think that they are doing enough to protect their information (Rainie, 2016).

An important aspect discussed in both readings is privacy policy concerns. According to Rainie (2016), many of the US citizens cannot say for sure what data about them is collected and how it is exploited further. Nearly a half of respondents participating in Pew Research Center’s survey admit that they do not understand the ways their data is used. Moreover, the majority of these respondents report feeling discouraged and impatient when attempting to decide whether they should share their information with organizations (Rainie, 2016). In this respect, John (2015) notes that websites use default options. In most cases, users to dot read privacy policy settings, and the author remarks that they do so “for good reason” (John, 2015, para. 5). According to research, it would take the US citizens as many as 54 billion hours every year to get acquainted with the privacy policy of all new websites they use (John, 2015).

The Connection Between Articles and Strategies Discussed in Class

Some of the most crucial strategies concerned with the topic of the present argument are web-based tools, critical software applications, information policy and plagiarism, and using the Internet for research. Probably the most widely discussed of these issues is the latter. Internet research is often the subject of discussion when privacy issues are involved. A relatively term “Internet of Things” is employed by researchers to indicate a set of capabilities “to identify and connect worldwide physical objects into a unified system” (Kumar & Patel, 2014, p. 20). In this respect, there are serious concerns over personal data and the possibility of it being accessed by unfriendly users or organizations (Sicari, Rizzardi, Grieco, & Coen-Porisini, 2015). Sicari et al. (2015) note that satisfying users’ privacy and security is the most crucial problem of Internet research platforms. Among the core privacy requirements, Sicari et al. (2015) delineate the authentication, trust among users, confidentiality of information, and access control.

Plagiarism is another serious problem that may be caused by wrong data sharing patterns. The users who do not know how to protect their data may fall victims of somebody stealing their ideas (Rainie, 2016). In fact, plagiarism is spreading very fast over the internet due to the possibility of sharing pieces of information very fast and to a large number of people. Therefore, it is highly important to educate individuals on the correct use of their privacy rights and the protection of their unique opinions and creations. As John (2015) emphasizes, people do not realize the possible future effects of what they are disclosing.

Critical software applications also play an important role in arranging Internet privacy. According to Rudkin (2018), safety-critical software engineering is both highly important and challenging. The significance of such applications is in their possibility to promote the safety of software systems. The complications that may be encountered while working with critical software are concerned with the variety of standards and guidelines that regulate the applications (Rudkin, 2018). Although quality and attention to detail are crucial in all kinds of engineering, software specialists are affected by them more than other engineers (Rudkin, 2018). For instance, critical software applications need to pass several regulatory audits prior to being allowed to enter the market. Still, benefits presented by these systems are rather valuable, and all efforts made by their creators are justified.

Online privacy is probably the greatest challenge of the Internet. Users enjoy quick access to the information, but frequently, they can only obtain in exchange for some personal details that they would not like to reveal. Not all individuals are aware of the ways to eliminate strangers’ use of their data. Not everyone knows what details of their profiles are in easy access. Online privacy is probably the greatest challenge of the Internet. Users enjoy quick access to the information, but frequently, they can only obtain in exchange for some personal details that they would not like to reveal. Not all individuals are aware of the ways to eliminate strangers’ use of their data. Not everyone knows what details of their profiles are in easy access. Articles by John (2015) and Rainie (2016) support the argument expressed in the thesis statement concerning that while people want more privacy, they do too little to protect their security. In order to minimize the detrimental outcomes of data sharing, it is necessary to inform Internet users about the danger of sharing their private information and teach the public how to avoid becoming victims of hackers.

o little to protect their security. In order to minimize the detrimental outcomes of data sharing, it is necessary to inform Internet users about the danger of sharing their private information and teach the public how to avoid becoming victims of hackers.

John, L. K. (2015). We say we want privacy online, but our actions say otherwise. Harvard Business Review . Web.

Kumar, J. S., & Patel, D. R. (2014). A survey on Internet of Things: Security and privacy issues. International Journal of Computer Applications, 90 (11), 20-26.

Rainie, L. (2016). The state of privacy in post-Snowden America. Pew Research Center. Web.

Rudkin, I. (2018). Safety-critical software engineering: Understanding and overcoming the challenges. Novel Engineering . Web.

Sicari, S., Rizzardi, A., Grieco, L. A., & Coen-Porisini, A. (2015). Security, privacy and trust in Internet of Things: The road ahead. Computer Networks, 76 , 146-164.

Cite this paper

Chicago (N-B)
Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2021, June 25). Online Privacy and Security Strategies. https://studycorgi.com/online-privacy-and-security-strategies/

"Online Privacy and Security Strategies." StudyCorgi , 25 June 2021, studycorgi.com/online-privacy-and-security-strategies/.

StudyCorgi . (2021) 'Online Privacy and Security Strategies'. 25 June.

1. StudyCorgi . "Online Privacy and Security Strategies." June 25, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/online-privacy-and-security-strategies/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "Online Privacy and Security Strategies." June 25, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/online-privacy-and-security-strategies/.

StudyCorgi . 2021. "Online Privacy and Security Strategies." June 25, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/online-privacy-and-security-strategies/.

This paper, “Online Privacy and Security Strategies”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: June 25, 2021 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

Government Internet Surveillance: Privacy Threat Essay

Introduction, the internet and surveillance, us government surveillance, surveillance efforts a threat to privacy and civil rights, justification for surveillance, discussion and conclusion.

The internet is the most important invention of the twentieth century and it has dramatically transformed human life. This invention has greatly increased the speed and efficiency with which communication occurs. Its unrivalled benefits in information processing have made this technology a part of most aspects of modern-daily activities.

Boghosian (2013) notes that while the internet plays a major role in improving life in our society, some sinister applications of this invention undermine privacy and civil rights. Perhaps the most troubling applications of the internet in current times are the mass surveillance efforts by the US government. This paper will argue that government internet surveillance is a threat to the privacy and civil rights of US citizens and it must therefore be mitigated.

Government surveillance has existed in various forms for centuries. Through this activity, the government has been able to obtain valuable public and secret information and act on it to aid governance. The internet age has dramatically increased the ability of government to engage in surveillance.

To begin with, the internet has become the most common medium of communication for many people. By monitoring this single communication network, the government has access to virtually all information that is communicated electronically including email habits, credit card, bank records, and phone records (Regan, 2014). The advancement in storage technology has contributed to the pervasive surveillance carried out by the US.

Today, the data that can be stored is nearly infinite due to the tremendous growth in storage capacity and the decline in storage prices. Intelligence agencies are therefore able to collect all available data since it is cheaper and easier than trying to determine what data should be stored and what should be ignored. At the same time, sophisticated computer algorithms make it possible for government agencies to analyze large amounts of data and derive meaning from it.

Scherer (2013) states that while electronic intelligence in the US historically focused on foreign governments, the events of 9/11 led to an increased focus on American citizens. Starting from that year, the NSA turned inward and shifted its focus to include private individuals. This shift was prompted by the understanding that the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks had resided in the US and made their plans while living in the country. Since then, the government has engaged in widespread surveillance of its citizens in an attempt to prevent crime.

The internet has made it possible for the government to engage in mass surveillance. Through security apparatus such as the NSA, the American government can collect and analyze vast quantities of data about its citizens. These activities often take place without the consent or knowledge of the individual.

Revelations by Snowden showed that the government engaging in surveillance at a scale that a majority of society did not even think was possible (Scherer, 2013). Through US dedicates more than $52.6 billion each year to run a massive secret national security apparatus. This apparatus includes the NSA, which has over 30,000 employees and gathers and stores not only phone records in the US but also metadata on internet traffic.

To increase its surveillance abilities, the US government has engaged in programs aimed at influencing IT companies to provide the NSA with a back door to encrypted communications. Scherer (2013) documents that through such a program, the government denies private citizens of their right to create unbreakable encryption software.

Wide scale surveillance by the government has harmed the privacy rights of US citizens. Government internet surveillance efforts result in a violation of individual privacy as the government intercepts the personal information and communication from US citizens. For privacy to exist, an individual has to have control over himself and the information he shares with others.

Boghosian (2013) notes that attempts to safeguard the privacy of American have been compromised by the government’s demand for unrestricted access to information. Under the Patriot Act, the government has access to a wide array of personal information. Through the National Security Administration (NSA), the government has engaged in large-scale data collection on US citizens.

This data is then analyzed in an effort to identify suspects. However, this data can be used to obtain more information about the private lives of Americans thus violating individual privacy.

The right to free speech and association are affected by the existence of extensive internet surveillance programs. According to the freedom of speech right, an individual is entitled to communicate his personal opinion or ideas with others without the fear of repercussions. The freedom of association guarantees an individual the right to relate with persons or groups of his choosing without any external inhibitions.

Purkayastha and Bailey (2014) observe that mass surveillance undermines free speech as individuals may face retaliation action if they are critical of the government. The government may engage in steps to silence critics who are identified through the surveillance efforts. Private Citizens concerned that their communications may be under surveillance are likely to avoid making their opinions public out of fear of government reprisal. Internet surveillance will therefore have led to the violation of the civil rights of these US citizens.

Government surveillance violates the location privacy of an individual. Boghosian (2013) defines location privacy as the right of an American to move in public without being tracked on monitored. This right is violated by unrestricted surveillance by the government. By monitoring Global Positioning System (GPS) devices, the government can record the precise movement of an individual. His/her exact location at any time can be record and stored helping to create an elaborate profile on the individual’s movement patterns.

The Fourth Amendment, which guarantees Americans protection against unreasonable searchers and seizures is violated by the undiscriminating internet surveillance. Through this mass collection and scrutinizing of personal information, the government violates the requirements of the Fourth Amendment. Scherer (2013) confirms that unreasonable searches that take place with no justification characterize the internet surveillance carried out by the government. The government collects data from all citizens and then analyzes this information in the hope of finding patterns that will help identify criminals.

The US government has justified its aggressive surveillance activities as necessary efforts for the enhancement of national security. In a speech on the importance of surveillance, the US President Barack Obama asserts that these activities enable law enforcement officers to detect terrorists and prevent them from carrying out attacks against the US (Obama, 2014). Even ordinary US citizens recognize this positive role of internet monitoring.

While most Americans are opposed to government surveillance, there is a recognition that the government might need to engage in monitoring efforts in order to safeguard the homeland. Scherer (2013) notes that according to polls, a majority of Americans show continued willingness to give up some of their rights to privacy as part of efforts to combat terrorism.

Government surveillance of the internet helps to protect citizens from the dangers that an abuse of the internet can cause. The internet provides individual users with significant power due to the wide range of information contained on the network and the communication efficiency.

These attributes can be exploited for wrong purposes if the government does not police the network. Seidler (2013) confirms that the government might be forced to carry out secret activities for the benefit of its citizens. Through surveillance, the government can identify questionable activities by citizens and engage in further investigation. Such efforts might lead to the discovery and stopping of criminal elements before they carry out crime.

Under the Obama Administration, the US has continued and even expanded the electronic surveillance implemented by the Bush administration. The justification for this is that the surveillance regime is integral to protecting the US against Foreign and Homegrown terrorists. Even so, Obama (2014) admits that the prevalent internet monitoring creates a potential for abuse. Action therefore needs to be taken against government surveillance on its citizens.

According to the renowned American whistleblower, Edward Snowden, the important players in this issue include “the public, the technologist community, the U.S. courts, Congress and the Executive Branch” (Scherer, 2013, p.81). These bodies need to deliberate on the future of the country if government surveillance is allowed to go on uninhibited.

As it currently stands, Internet surveillance has given the government intrusive police power that can be used against innocent civilians. The liberties of Americans have been constricted by the deployment of the surveillance infrastructure. Action needs to be taken to address these issues and restore the privacy and civil liberties guaranteed to American citizens by the US Constitution.

Boghosian, H. (2013). The Business of Surveillance. Human Rights, 39 (3), 2-23.

Obama, B. (2014). Remarks by the President on Review of Signals Intelligence . Web.

Purkayastha, P., & Bailey, R. (2014). U.S. Control of the Internet Problems Facing the Movement to International Governance. Independent Socialist Magazine, 66 (3), 103-127.

Regan, L. (2014). Electronic Communications Surveillance. Independent Socialist Magazine, 66 (3), 32-42.

Scherer, M. (2013). Number Two Edward Snowden The Dark Prophet. Time, 182 (26), 78-89.

Seidler, N. (2013). A perspective on principles for Internet surveillance .

Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, February 19). Government Internet Surveillance: Privacy Threat. https://ivypanda.com/essays/government-internet-surveillance-privacy-threat/

"Government Internet Surveillance: Privacy Threat." IvyPanda , 19 Feb. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/government-internet-surveillance-privacy-threat/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'Government Internet Surveillance: Privacy Threat'. 19 February.

IvyPanda . 2024. "Government Internet Surveillance: Privacy Threat." February 19, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/government-internet-surveillance-privacy-threat/.

1. IvyPanda . "Government Internet Surveillance: Privacy Threat." February 19, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/government-internet-surveillance-privacy-threat/.