The idea that all humans are entitled to privacy (defined in a variety of ways) seems to be an axiomatic truth accepted by nearly all institutions and societies. The definition, seemingly simple, is actually quite complex. Each person seems to have his or her own definition as to what constitutes privacy. We have seen the definition itself evolve over the years. In the United States, privacy was first pithily defined as “the right to be left alone” by Supreme Court justice Louis Brandeis in 1890. Most nations around the world now recognize privacy as a human right, which is apparent in article 12 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
(Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 12)
Given the history and complexity of privacy, I think it would be very interesting to see a scholarly analysis tracing the various generational movements in privacy. It seems fair to say that that over the years—since the wide-spread use of digital information systems—privacy has become less and less of a reality. During the early 20th century, as well as earlier points in history, privacy was something with substance. People would have physical documents, letters, or some sort of hard copy of data that could be literally protected. The same went for their personal privacy—their right to solitude. These were all things that were much harder to intrude upon chiefly because they would require some sort of physical exertion. If the government wanted to read through your mail they would need to either intercept it through the postal system, or literally come to your mailbox and steal it. And if they wanted to spy on you, they would need an FBI agent. Modern times have made the violation of privacy a trivial act. The U.S. Government does not need to spy on you by following you around as you get your coffee at the local Starbucks; they simply snoop on your internet activity, phone activity, or any other sort of digital communication. It is a much more subtle and affective way of violating a basic human right. The U.S. PATRIOT Act is the clearest example of this new way of undermining the right to privacy. We must live in an awfully perverse world when the violation of a basic human right is considered an act of patriotism.
All of this leads to the main point I wanted to make; that is, the children of this generation (myself included), do not value privacy on the same level as previous generations. Let me simplify: Privacy is dead. Modern technology ultimately led to this destruction of privacy. Facebook would be the finest example of people simply giving up privacy for instant social stimulation. Indeed, this may prove to be a wonderful thing for the next 5 years, but privacy will eventually be missed. I can present innumerable examples of how Facebook could potentially be used against people of the United States, or any country for that matter, but I think I will save that for a future essay. What’s even more frightening is the increasing trend towards the complete documentation of one’s life. Social services such as Foursquare and Facebook make the violation of a person’s right to privacy an absolute breeze for the United States Government. Instead of having to spend months researching and tracking a person, agents can simply track a given person’s activity on Foursquare, and study their communication on Facebook. That being said, I do not want to come off as a hater of social networking. In fact, I maintain a presence on both Facebook and Twitter, but I do often wish that I were not on these two sites. It all boils down to the notion that we must be aware. Simply be aware that privacy is delicate and can be taken away rather quickly in this age. I am partly afraid that my generation will not ever truly understand what privacy is, and how valuable a right it is. That is why I urge all people to guard their privacy as best they can.
