The issue regarding privacy is broad and complex. Certain liberties can render a society divided upon either side of any privacy argument. However, when it comes to children's privacy, the general populace tends to differ drastically and complicate matters. In Harlan Coben’s essay called “The Undercover Parent”, issues regarding the modern medium of communications and its influence in children are discussed. Issues regarding children’s safety in the internet are conveyed as currently being flawed and in need of a particular enforcement. Coben’s stance is that the use of a greater intrusion of privacy via parental spyware is needed for protection of children in the online medium. Unfortunately, this stance seems to only mitigate issues initially
…show more content…
Coben’s reasoning is that children aren’t to be trusted when it comes to their absolute safety. The author warns that the internet is savage-like and a danger due to the possible negligence of a child. However, this excuse is fallacious and the manner of conveying that message is dubious. Coben states, “trust is one thing, but surrendering your parental responsibilities to a machine that allows the entire world access to your home borders on negligence”(Coben pg 66), assuming children negligence is an absolute, not preventable and or mitigated. Yet, Coben makes valid points about the internet having a potential of malicious access to personal information. Coben, however, doesn’t offer an alternative that doesn’t rely on the extreme approach of privacy intrusion. A viable option is to educate and warn one’s child about the proper and safe method of internet usage. Such early education can be very helpful to a child in a manner that doesn’t intrude upon a child’s privacy. This method is deemed more effective in the long term as it does not rely on potentially losing a child’s trust, and in return raising a child that relies on hiding rather than trust. Further disqualifying his statement; Coben’s method of emphasising his argument is via a black and white fallacy. In doing so, he creates fear that the extremity of negative internet exposure for children is going …show more content…
Although rendered irrelevant today due to the implementation of conventional desktop like environment on phones; Coben’s intention was to dismiss the probability of the same type of danger applying to cell phone devices’ traditional text and calling environments. Coben believes in his misconceived perception that cellphone communication is personal and by default safer than internet mediums. Coben then uses negative anecdotal evidence to further the false perception on the severity of internet danger, “one friend of mine, using spyware...found out that not only was she using drugs but she was sleeping with her dealer”(pg 67). Thus, Coben creates an argument via fear mongering rather than evaluating the scenario
Coben’s reasoning is that children aren’t to be trusted when it comes to their absolute safety. The author warns that the internet is savage-like and a danger due to the possible negligence of a child. However, this excuse is fallacious and the manner of conveying that message is dubious. Coben states, “trust is one thing, but surrendering your parental responsibilities to a machine that allows the entire world access to your home borders on negligence”(Coben pg 66), assuming children negligence is an absolute, not preventable and or mitigated. Yet, Coben makes valid points about the internet having a potential of malicious access to personal information. Coben, however, doesn’t offer an alternative that doesn’t rely on the extreme approach of privacy intrusion. A viable option is to educate and warn one’s child about the proper and safe method of internet usage. Such early education can be very helpful to a child in a manner that doesn’t intrude upon a child’s privacy. This method is deemed more effective in the long term as it does not rely on potentially losing a child’s trust, and in return raising a child that relies on hiding rather than trust. Further disqualifying his statement; Coben’s method of emphasising his argument is via a black and white fallacy. In doing so, he creates fear that the extremity of negative internet exposure for children is going …show more content…
Although rendered irrelevant today due to the implementation of conventional desktop like environment on phones; Coben’s intention was to dismiss the probability of the same type of danger applying to cell phone devices’ traditional text and calling environments. Coben believes in his misconceived perception that cellphone communication is personal and by default safer than internet mediums. Coben then uses negative anecdotal evidence to further the false perception on the severity of internet danger, “one friend of mine, using spyware...found out that not only was she using drugs but she was sleeping with her dealer”(pg 67). Thus, Coben creates an argument via fear mongering rather than evaluating the scenario