In today’s society, the word “privacy” has become ubiquitous. Author Daniel J. Solove, wrote, “The Nothing-to-Hide Argument”, published in 2013 by Yale University Press. He argues that while people are under the delusion of being watched publicly, then they should have nothing to hide. In Britain, for example, surveillance cameras were installed throughout the cities and towns. The government declares, “If you’ve got nothing to hide, you’ve got nothing to fear.” (735) Commentators disagree with this argument by pointing to the things people want to hide, with an underlying assumption that privacy is all about one wanting to hide something.
In this text, Solove builds the underlying ethos, creating an ethical appeal to the audience. He backs up his argument by saying, “I’ve got nothing to hide… only if you’re doing something wrong should you worry, and then you don’t deserve to keep it private.” (734) Everywhere people go, they are being watched. While friends are communicating through social media, or an individual is just searching the web, FBI agents are likely to monitor what is being talked about and/or observed. Solove expresses in his writing that the nothing-to-hide argument does not refer to personal information, only data the government needs to …show more content…
In addition, a problem with the government’s result in personal data, called exclusion, that according to Solove, occurs when people have been prevented from gathering knowledge about how information on themselves can be used. At what point should government officials have power over citizens? The issue may not be about the material people hide, but about the power and system of government. For example, presume that government officials learn a person has bought a certain number of books on how to manufacture methamphetamine. From this information, they may suspect he/she is building
In this text, Solove builds the underlying ethos, creating an ethical appeal to the audience. He backs up his argument by saying, “I’ve got nothing to hide… only if you’re doing something wrong should you worry, and then you don’t deserve to keep it private.” (734) Everywhere people go, they are being watched. While friends are communicating through social media, or an individual is just searching the web, FBI agents are likely to monitor what is being talked about and/or observed. Solove expresses in his writing that the nothing-to-hide argument does not refer to personal information, only data the government needs to …show more content…
In addition, a problem with the government’s result in personal data, called exclusion, that according to Solove, occurs when people have been prevented from gathering knowledge about how information on themselves can be used. At what point should government officials have power over citizens? The issue may not be about the material people hide, but about the power and system of government. For example, presume that government officials learn a person has bought a certain number of books on how to manufacture methamphetamine. From this information, they may suspect he/she is building