Government control over privacy of internet content

 

Order Number			45471455714
Type of Paper			Essay
Writer Classification Level			Undergraduate
Style of Writing			MLA/APA/CHICAGO/
Sources and References			5
Number of Pages			4
Paper Instructions Description To write a Rogarian method of argument essay. To use MLA format To access the the issue of internet privacy and determine a reasonable conclusion based on readings, research from the library data base, and personal analysis. To write a cogent essay. To practice using the library website. Assignment: You are going to write an argument essay and answer the following question: Is the government responsible for the activities on the internet and should there be government control over the privacy of content of the internet? Requirements: Your paper must be written 5-6 pages, double spaced using a #12 font. You must use at least two of the articles from the unit on Internet and Privacy module. You must use at least two articles from the library database. One of the articles must be from Ebscohost. Your paper must be turned in MLA format CHAPTER 26 Has the Internet Destroyed Privacy? Over the past three decades, the Internet has changed many aspects of daily life in the United States and around the world. If you don’t access it from your cell phone, there’s always a laptop, tablet, or campus computer. Who can get access to your accounts? How easily? For what purposes? Every Web page you visit potentially leaves a trace of where you’ve been and the device you used to get there. Who has or should have access to this information? What might they be doing with it? Are individuals, companies, or governments profiting from that information? The selections in this chapter encourage you to consider these issues and perhaps to reflect on your own online behavior. In a blog post, Lindsay McKenzie reports on the ways that UMass Amherst developed a campaign to remind students about the need to avoid weak passwords. Weak passwords are, of course, a threat to an individual’s account—and hence their private information—and to the school’s entire computer system. Although such a fact is obvious, McKenzie observes that students at UMass (and perhaps your campus, too) still often choose weak passwords like the name of their pet. The second selection, visual arguments, presents a series of cartoons, all of which focus on aspects of privacy online. The third selection is composed of two short blog postings by Lauren Salm and by Deanna Hartley from Careerbuilder.com. Both focus on how employers use information about individuals available online to screen applicants, whether screening them out because of information on social media or screening them in because of how they’ve presented their online selves to relevant employers. The privacy issues here relate ultimately to questions of ethos—the self-image you create for yourself (and that others create of you) on social media and online more broadly: based on what employers can find online, what sort of potential employee do you appear to be? The fourth selection, by Lauren Carroll of PolitiFact, evaluates a claim from the nonprofit Fight for the Future (FFTF) when it tweeted, “215 members of Congress just voted to let your ISP spy on what type of underwear you buy and sell that data to advertisers.” As you’ll see, Politi-Fact concludes that advertisers can now find out private information about you that you might never have expected, and they can use that information to their benefit. The stark example Carroll uses—what kind of underwear you buy or even look at—makes clear the sorts of things that are at stake when we debate issues of privacy on the Internet. In an excerpt from his 2017 book, World without Mind: The Existential Threat of Big Tech, Franklin Foer explains why he thinks the Internet—and Big Tech, in particular—are well on their way to killing our privacy. He, however, has a proposal for what Americans can do based on a precedent, an action we’ve taken in a similar situation in the past. Amanda Hess, who writes for the New York Times, contends that privacy is now a commodity—and luxury—that only the rich and powerful can manage to afford. She supports her claims with an interesting discussion of the changing nature of privacy—the word and the concept—from Ancient Greece to the present. As we write these words, the latest online privacy scandal involves Cambridge Analytica, which has been accused of scraping Facebook users’ data without permission in an effort to sway U.S. elections, creating “Facebook’s worst crisis” and causing many users to try to delete their accounts. Of this situation, Mark Zuckerberg commented that when he started Facebook in his dorm room in 2004, he would never have imagined that fourteen years later, his biggest worry would be stopping governments from seeking to influence one another’s elections. This scandal will likely be history by the time you read these selections, but challenges raised by privacy online will no doubt continue to emerge. This November 2017 selection was written by Lindsey McKenzie, a technology writer for InsideHigherEd.com, an online publication devoted to issues in higher education in the United States and worldwide. It reports on one university’s efforts to get its students to be vigilant about a persistent problem: the use of weak passwords that compromise their own personal accounts and the security of the campus network as a whole. McKenzie highlights the challenge to campus technology professionals: figuring out a creative way to make a compelling argument to a well-defined audience. As you read, take note of not only the aims of argument at play but also the additional benefits that the campaign described here reaped. Consider as well why we chose to begin this chapter on privacy with a discussion of passwords on campus. Getting Personal about Cybersecurity LINDSAY McKENZIE Today’s students may be digital natives, but that doesn’t mean institutions can count on them to protect themselves from cyberattacks. A recent survey by the technology firm CDW-G found that the No. 1 cybersecurity challenge facing IT professionals on campus is educating users about security policies and practices. Among students surveyed, just 25 percent dubbed the cybersecurity training or education efforts on their campus as very effective. IT information technology. One institution, however, may have found a way to reach students—by making them, and their pets, the stars of a cybersecurity-awareness campaign. Speaking at the annual meeting of Educause in Philadelphia this month, representatives from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst shared how they leveraged students’ love of social media and personalized content to encourage them to up their cybersecurity game. Educause a U.S. nonprofit organization seeking “to advance higher education through the use of information technology.” “There was a recognition that we needed to do something different, something fun,” said Iris Chelaru, web communications manager at UMass. While previous awareness campaigns had been informative, they failed to connect with students on a personal level, said Chelaru. Cybersecurity awareness is a bit like public health awareness, she said—“things that we have to do but that we don’t want to.” As students are both creators and curators of content online, who better than them to advise and help design an awareness campaign, Chelaru said. She and her team worked with the student government and other campus organizations to design an approach that was both informative and “warm and fuzzy,” said Chelaru. Rather than presenting information on multiple security risks, as the university had previously, UMass officials decided to pick just one issue—weak passwords—as the center of their campaign. Pet names emerged as something that students regularly use as passwords, but that can be easily guessed, said Chelaru. With this in mind, the team created a website where students can create posters with pictures of their pets, underneath the tagline “My name is not a good password.” Posters from the Getting Personal About Cyberspace campaign at UMass Amherst The campus Internet security professionals found that their campaigns were more effective when they connected to their audience—students—on a personal level. LINK TO Chapter 1, Appealing to Audiences. “We were thinking about things that are familiar to students and that they know, maybe something from home that they miss,” said Chelaru. The posters, which could be easily shared on social media, saw much more engagement from students than previous campaigns did, said Matthew Dalton, chief information security officer at UMass Amherst. Though the campaign started with posters of student pets, it quickly broadened, said Dalton. To make the campaign even more interactive, the team created giant photo frames that students could pose with in real life, under the same “My name is not a good password” banner. The team set up tables in areas with high student traffic at lunchtimes in October as part of National Cyber Security Awareness Month and offered prizes to encourage engagement. Soon the football team’s mascot, Sam the Minuteman, and the university administration were in on the campaign. While Dalton and colleagues hailed the campaign as a success, evaluating its impact has been tricky, he acknowledged. They have seen a decrease in student account breaches, but Dalton said he can’t be sure this campaign is responsible, as opposed to other security work the team has done. It would be difficult to Although you’ve likely never considered it, producing an effective cartoon requires an interesting and complex set of rhetorical skills. Cartoonists have a limited amount of space to convey their messages. The five cartoons included here range from a single panel to four panels, the latter representing a widely syndicated cartoon strip. A cartoon’s message has to be pithy—much like a tweet—and it has to combine one or more images with words. The words, of course, may take the form of a caption, or they may be part of the image. The images have multiple functions: they have to capture the reader’s attention, but they must also thrust the reader into a narrative, a story, one that unfolds almost instantaneously. Cartoons likewise have to rely on the two-edged sword of humor—always risky—to make their point. In this regard, even simple cartoons represent sophisticated visual rhetoric—multimodal arguments—that merit careful attention. Furthermore, cartoons must be timely, speaking to a current topic of interest or debate; in short, they must seize the kairotic moment, as discussed in Chapter 1. As you consider the five cartoons in this selection, all of which consider aspects of privacy, use your rhetorical skills to analyze how each of the cartoonists manages to pack what is often an implied but powerful argument into such a small package. Making a Visual Argument: The Issue of Privacy Pickles is an award-winning Sunday comic by Brian Crane that has been syndicated since 1990. The main characters, Opal and Earl Pickles, shown in this strip, are in their seventies and were originally based loosely on Crane’s retired in-laws. In this cartoon strip from September 2016, Opal notices that Facebook is capable of what she terms “mind infiltration”—a noteworthy word choice! And yet very quickly Opal goes from being offended by the alleged privacy violation to being susceptible to the targeted advertising. . . . As you read, consider your own responses to the way social media feeds on and reinforces our interests, our values, our desires, and our fears. Chris Slane is an award-winning New Zealand cartoonist, illustrator, puppeteer, and author who has been publishing cartoons since 1991. He specializes in the topics of privacy, security, and freedom of information, and he claims that his database on these subjects is likely the largest in the world. His cartoons on these topics have appears in at least nine countries and been translated into four languages, reminding us that these subjects present challenges worldwide. As you study this cartoon, consider how it complements and contrasts with the message of the previous one by Brian Crane. Chris Wildt’s cartoons appear in the Cape Gazette (Delaware). As you study this cartoon, consider how it builds on and expands the arguments made by Lauren Salm’s and Deanna Hartley’s blog postings, in the third selection in the chapter, about the growing role that social media play in the hiring process. Mike Smith’s syndicated cartoon, “Smith’s World,” appears daily on the editorial page of the Las Vegas Sun. In his work as a “geeky artist,” he seeks to be “an equal opportunity offender,” poking fun across the political spectrum. He reports that he is grateful for his liberal arts degree from a Jesuit school because it taught him to “question authority and be a person who practices critical thinking.” He has likewise stated that “editorial cartooning is really about reading. It’s about absorbing as much information as you can, because the spark to the creative process is information.” This cartoon, from 2016, comments on a specific legal question—whether a cellular phone manufacturer should be able to hack the phones they sell in order to provide information to a government. Since Smith’s original cartoon, the questions have become broader—stretching to all social media—and more urgent. Notice how deftly Smith is able to pack all that controversy into a single cartoon. J. D. Crowe is statewide cartoonist for the Alabama Media Group, which includes several newspapers, magazines, and Web sites, all related to Alabama life. He has stated that he believes it is “[his] duty to weed out numbskull politicians on the homefront before they can grow in the national spotlight.” He likewise “generously spreads his tough love to international and national issues based on the news of the day.” This 2017 cartoon comments on the same Congressional decision that is discussed in a later selection, Lauren Carroll’s “Congress Let Internet Providers ‘Spy’ on Your Underwear Purchases, Advocacy Group Says.” As you study this cartoon, consider how its effectiveness compares with the tweet Carroll’s group evaluates. This selection includes two short 2017 blog postings from Careerbuilder.com, an employment Web site providing not only job listings from around the world but also practical advice to help those seeking jobs. These articles fall into the latter category. Lauren Salm explains how employers scrutinize job candidates’ social media profiles, while Deanna Hartley offers ways to maximize the potential of social media when preparing for the job market. Their advice certainly relates to Aristotle’s claim that rhetoric is “finding the available means of persuasion.” For job seekers, that means carefully doing certain things online while studiously avoiding others. As you read, consider how the advice both women offer relates to the rhetorical notion of kairos, as discussed in the opening chapter of this book. 70 Percent of Employers Are Snooping Candidates’ Social Media Profiles LAUREN SALM Scrolling through your photos from this past weekend and laughing at the debauchery of your Hangover-esque charades? Ranting about your current job or co-workers because you think you’re just among “friends?” Think again. According to a new CareerBuilder survey, 70 percent of employers use social media to screen candidates before hiring, which is up significantly from 60 percent in 2016. So pause before you post—if you think it could be questionable or inappropriate, you should go with your gut. SO, WHAT TO FLAUNT VS. FLOP? Social recruiting is now a “thing” when it comes to hiring candidates—3 in 10 employers have someone dedicated to solely getting the scoop on your online persona. Employers are searching for a few key items when researching candidates via social networking sites as good signs to hire: Information that supports their qualifications for the job (61 percent) If the candidate has a professional online persona at all (50 percent) What other people are posting about the candidates (37 percent) For any reason at all not to hire a candidate (24 percent) And they aren’t stopping there either—69 percent are using online search engines such as Google, Yahoo and Bing to research candidates as well, compared to 59 percent last year. THE NO-NOS WHEN USING SOCIAL NETWORKS With more than half of employers (54 percent) finding content on social media that caused them not to hire a candidate, why take your chances? Pause before you post and remember these key reasons that employers were turned off by a candidate’s online presence: Candidate posted provocative or inappropriate photographs, videos or information: 39 percent Candidate posted information about them drinking or using drugs: 38 percent Candidate had discriminatory comments related to race, gender or religion: 32 percent Candidate bad-mouthed their previous company or fellow employee: 30 percent Candidate lied about qualifications: 27 percent Candidate had poor communication skills: 27 percent Candidate was linked to criminal behavior: 26 percent Candidate shared confidential information from previous employers: 23 percent Candidate’s screen name was unprofessional: 22 percent Candidate lied about an absence: 17 percent Candidate posted too frequently: 17 percent USING SOCIAL MEDIA TO YOUR ADVANTAGE You don’t have to look at your online persona as problem. There are things you can do on Twitter or Facebook that can actually up your chances of employment. Use it as an opportunity to stand out in a positive way and showcase your personality. In fact, more than 44 percent of employers have found content on a social networking site that caused them to hire the candidate. Among the primary reasons employers hired a candidate based on their social networking site were: candidate’s background information supported their professional qualifications (38 percent), great communication skills (37 percent), a professional image (36 percent), and creativity (35 percent). But don’t avoid the stress all together by deleting or hiding your profiles. Believe it or not, this can be even more detrimental to your brand. Fifty-seven percent of employers are less likely to call someone in if the candidate is a ghost online. The bottom line? Think before you post, because there’s always someone watching. Don’t put anything online that you wouldn’t want your mom, grandma, dad, uncle, best friend’s mom or cat to see or read. Creative Ways to Get Noticed by Employers on Social Media DEANNA HARTLEY From making flippant racial remarks to posting unhygienic pictures on the job at a fast food restaurant, there are larger-than-life instances of what NOT to do on social media. On the flip side, social media could work in your favor if you’re looking for a job—if you do it right. Some savvy job seekers are leveraging it to their benefit to catch the attention of potential employers, and you can follow suit with these tips. Update your social media profile. Whether you like it or not, social media is an extension of your personal brand. Did you know that 70 percent of employers are peeking into candidates’ social media profiles? So clean up your Facebook profile or make it private. Add skills and/or recommendations to your professional social media profiles, and make sure to use keywords wherever you can so your profile is easily searchable. Your Facebook profile is fair game to potential employers Use multimedia to supplement your resume. While some job seekers have actually gone to extremes by advertising themselves using social ads on Facebook or Google AdWords, being over-the-top dramatic is not always necessary to catch an employer’s attention. Consider creating an online portfolio of your work, creating videos that show off your skills, producing a Snapchat channel that highlights your creativity or using other non-traditional avenues that would give employers a sense of your professional prowess. Make strategic connections. While it’s great to connect with Ron from the last networking event you went to, be proactive and seek out professionals in your field. Don’t be afraid to ask for advice—many professionals, as busy as they are, will be happy to help. Establish connections with individuals who work at the company you’re applying to and reach out to them for tips on how to get your foot in the door. Follow your dream employer’s social media accounts. Not only will it help you connect with the company, but you can also follow the social media feeds to do some more research about the company and determine if it’s a good cultural fit. Oftentimes, brands tend to be more authentic and engaging on social media than other corporate channels, so look for personality and fit. Start interacting with corporate social accounts. The recruiter or hiring manager at your dream company may not return your calls or queries in a timely fashion, but chances are you’ll have a better shot at a two-way communication using social media. Retweet and share relevant posts. You don’t need to be a subject-matter expert or thought leader to reply to their tweets or comment on LinkedIn posts or Facebook posts—but do so only if you have legitimate feedback/opinions or something constructive to add to the conversation. LinkedIn offers a way for job-seekers to interact with hiring companies Personalize conversations. What you find out about a company or hiring manager online can help you find topics that sit well with the hiring manager so you can personalize conversations or even thank-you notes. Keep in mind there’s a line between being diligent (scouring for professional insights) and creepy (looking to see how many children they have), so don’t cross it. This selection, from PolitiFact, presents an argument within an argument from March 2017. First, we have a tweet posted by Fight for the Future (FFTF), another nonprofit organization, which advocates on issues related to digital rights, including online privacy. The tweet presents itself as an argument of fact. Then, we have what is obviously an evaluative argument by PolitiFact, a Pulitzer-Prize winning Web site operated by the Tampa Bay Times and the Poyner Institute that investigates and evaluates claims made by politicians, lobbyists, and interest groups. As you can see, PolitiFact ultimately rates the FFTF’s tweet as “mostly true” on its truth-o-meter. The author of this evaluative argument was Lauren Carroll, who was a staff writer at PolitiFact; the author of the FFTF tweet was not identified. As you read, pay attention to the research process that Carroll used as well as to PolitiFact’s process for documenting the research it conducts and the criteria it uses in arriving at its evaluative ranking. Congress Let Internet Providers “Spy On” Your Underwear Purchases, Advocacy Group Says LAUREN CARROLL Your Internet service provider has intimate knowledge about your intimates, and a bill headed to President Donald Trump’s desk allows them to sell that information, says Internet privacy advocacy group Fight for the Future. Voting along party lines, Republicans in Congress recently passed a joint resolution that reverses a landmark Federal Communications Commission rule requiring Internet service providers (ISPs), like Comcast or Verizon, to ask customers for their explicit permission before handing user data over to advertisers and other third parties. President Donald Trump is expected to sign it into law. “215 members of Congress just voted to let your ISP spy on what type of underwear you buy and sell that data to advertisers,” Fight for the Future tweeted March 28, after the bill passed the House. A Fight for the Future tweet Fight for the Future has the vote count right; 215 members of the House of Representatives voted for the measure. We decided to dig into whether the group is right about what the bill means for online shopping. ISPs AND THE BILL Fight for the Future’s tweet might give the misleading impression that ISPs can’t already see their customers’ online purchases and sell that information. They can. Congress’s action just makes this explicitly legal. An ISP’s function is to connect its users to websites or online apps, and so it can see nearly everything its users do on the Internet, including what kind of underwear they buy. An advertiser might be interested in purchasing that information from an ISP because then it can predict whether a given user is more likely to respond to an ad for boxers, briefs or tighty-whities. Beyond shopping habits, ISPs and advertisers can glean more significant personal information about their customers from Internet browsing patterns—like that a spouse is contemplating divorce because he looked up “best divorce lawyers in my area,” or that a person has a chronic medical condition because she spent a long time reading certain pages on WebMD. In October 2016, the FCC established rules intended to give consumers more control over how ISPs used their data. The rules required ISPs to obtain explicit information from their customers before using and sharing their web browsing history, which would include underwear purchases. The rule also required the ISPs to get consent before sharing other “sensitive information,” like Social Security numbers, precise geolocation data and financial or health information. Many Internet companies and trade associations had already committed to requiring consumers to opt-in before they can share that sort of information, per guidance from the Federal Trade Commission. But these opt-in rules never went into effect; Congress killed them in March 2017, months before the December 2017 start date. So ISPs can see and use customers’ web browsing data as they always have. “Practically speaking, I expect consumers will see no change in how their data is collected and marketed,” said Brent Skorup, a technology policy research fellow at George Mason University’s Mercatus Center. Fight for the Future Campaign Director Evan Greer said Congress’s vote was significant because it gives ISP companies explicit permission to engage in practices that some privacy advocates consider “abusive,” and it gives ISPs an incentive to invest in systems to further these practices.
	Distinguished (100%)	Proficient (85%)		Basic (70%)	Below Expectations (50%)	Non-Performance (0%)
Thesis Statement	Raises the strongest   objection to the thesis presented in the assignment. The objection is strongly grounded in research and logical reasoning.	Raises a plausible objection to the thesis presented in the assignment. The objection is mostly grounded in research and logical reasoning.		Raises an objection to the thesis presented in the assignment. The objection is somewhat grounded in research and logical reasoning.	Attempts to raise an objection to the thesis presented in the assignment. The objection is minimally grounded in research and logical reasoning.	The objection to the thesis is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Counter Argument	Provides a strong, thorough rebuttal to the objection. The rebuttal effectively demonstrates that the thesis can withstand the objection and applies the principles of charity and accuracy.	Provides a rebuttal to the objection. The rebuttal mostly demonstrates that the thesis can withstand the objection and mostly applies the principles of charity and accuracy.		Provides a limited rebuttal to the objection. The rebuttal somewhat demonstrates that the thesis can withstand the objection and somewhat applies the principles of charity and accuracy.	Attempts to provide a rebuttal to the objection; however, the rebuttal minimally demonstrates that the thesis can withstand the objection and does not apply the principles of charity and accuracy.	The rebuttal is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Conclusion	Provides clear and concise closing remarks that comprehensively summarize the essay. The remarks consider the broader controversy and/or further research that could offer additional insight into the moral solution of the business problem.	Provides closing remarks that summarize the essay. The remarks mostly consider the broader controversy and/or further research that could offer additional insight into the moral solution of the business problem. The closing remarks are somewhat unclear.		Provides closing remarks that minimally summarizes the essay. The remarks minimally consider the broader controversy and/or further research that could offer additional insight into the moral solution of the business problems. The closing remarks are unclear and/or vague.	Attempts to provide closing remarks that summarize the essay; however, the remarks do not consider the broader controversy and/or further research that could offer additional insight into the moral solution of the business problem. The closing remarks are unclear and vague.	The closing remarks are either nonexistent or lack the components described in the assignment instructions.
Written Communication: Context of and Purpose for Writing	Demonstrates methodical application of organization and presentation of content. The purpose of the writing is evident and easy to understand. Summaries, quotes, and/or paraphrases fit naturally into the sentences and paragraphs. Paper flows smoothly.	Demonstrates sufficient application of organization and presentation of content. The purpose of the writing is, for the most part, clear and easy to understand. There are some problems with the blending of summaries, paraphrases, and quotes. Paper flows somewhat smoothly.		Demonstrates a limited understanding of organization and presentation of content in written work. The purpose of the writing is somewhat evident but may not be integrated throughout the assignment. There are many problems with the blending of summaries, paraphrases, and quotes. Paper does not flow smoothly in all sections.	Organization and presentation of content are extremely limited. The purpose of the writing is unclear. There is little or no blending of summaries, paraphrases, and quotes. Paper does not flow smoothly when read.	The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Written Communication: Control of Syntax and Mechanics	– Displays meticulous comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains no errors and is very easy to understand.	Displays comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains only a few minor errors and is mostly easy to understand		Displays basic comprehension of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains a few errors which may slightly distract the reader.	Fails to display basic comprehension of syntax or mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains major errors which distract the reader.	The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Written Communication: Required Formatting	Accurately uses required formatting consistently throughout the paper, title page, and reference page.	Exhibits required formatting throughout the paper. However, layout contains a few minor errors.		Exhibits limited knowledge of required formatting throughout the paper. However, layout does not meet all requirements.	Fails to exhibit basic knowledge of required formatting. There are frequent errors, making the layout difficult to distinguish as required style.	The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Written Communication: Word Requirement	The length of the paper is equivalent to the required number of words.	The length of the paper is nearly equivalent to the required number of words.		The length of the paper is equivalent to at least three quarters of the required number of words.	The length of the paper is equivalent to at least one half of the required number of words.	The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Written Communication: Resource Requirement	Uses more than the required number of scholarly sources, providing compelling evidence to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.	Uses the required number of scholarly sources to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.		Uses less than the required number of sources to support ideas. Some sources may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are used within the body of the assignment. Citations may not be formatted correctly.	Uses an inadequate number of sources that provide little or no support for ideas. Sources used may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are not used within the body of the assignment. Citations are not formatted correctly.	The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.