If the government were to monitor someoneâ€™s internet, it is argued that their freedoms could be imposed on. People that oppose government monitoring say that it would be unconstitutional because of the violation. The ninth amendment can be violated depending on a personâ€™s interpretation of the constitution. A strict interpretation would believe that it is a violation but a loose interpretation would claim it is not a violation because the internet was not available as the constitution was written, so the government could claim the right to monitoring the
The living constitution approach implies that consequences do guide decisions because rules are bent and the original meaning of the documents are reinterpreted and applied to modern situations. Originalists argue that one cannot look to judges to come up with different answers because one does not like what happens when you apply the original view. However, as strong as this argument against the living constitution approach is, they still uphold timeless principles through these actions but just not as strictly as the Originalists do. An example of this is the confrontation clause debate about whether an accused molester should or should not be required to confront the child accuser in court. The Originalist approach says that the molester should be required to confront the child accuser because consequences cannot be considered and we must stick to the original view of the documents.
The government should be able to pinpoint a law they find has been broken and then have the case brought to a different party. When it comes to censoring they should be able to censor sites that have childpornography. Sites that kids should not be on should then include a fee to be on them. This would make it harder for kids to be on the site, and deter them away. Other topics of censorship the government should not have control over, but rather the platform have government approved regulations, that are constitutional and legal.
Chris Reed said that regulating the internet should start with the approach that all laws applied should be equivalent both in online activities as well as offline activities. In both cases, people should have the basic rights of privacy as well as freedom of choice. Also, the cross-border information inflow and outflow causes problems when creating regulations as there are different standards of ethics across borders. In other words, cyberspace may as well be considered as a single intangible entity, therefore general rules set on cyberspace would be applied to all internet users not taking into account the place of residence. However, the fact that internet has no owner or so called controlling body which can apply rules which would be accepted by all means that regulations must be imposed by various specific parties.
Many consider these failings to be at the hand of CEO John Roth. Roth did not seem to use successful business tools to make decisions. One tool he could have utilized is rational ethical decision making which describes an employee’s concept of what is considered ethical. (Collins, 2012) Upon taking over the organization, Roth’s first tasking was to grow the business by expanding into the internet business. Roth used propaganda to present an altered idea to the public of the organization.
For instance, Rapleaf used Facebook data to sell profiles of ignorant users. A survey conducted in 2009, by the University of Cambridge, shows that it difficult to understand privacy policies by social mediums, since there were no standards existing for the said privacy policies. However, Facebook has since addressed the concern by the public pertaining privacy of its users. Therefore, it is evident enough that social media needs regulation to avoid case that follow after the privacy of a user has been tampered with. The visual images have the ability to speak louder than words.
“The devices we use change the way we live much faster than any contest among genes” (Wu, 2014). Increasingly our society is evolving into a snapchatting, instagramming, selfie-taking, facebook using, tweeting crowd of technology addicts. The thought of someone not using the internet or a mobile phone in their daily life is laughable to most young people. However, this is a relatively new phenomenon. Fifty years ago people were capable of going to lunch without snapchatting their friends and uploading a photo of their meal to Instagram (granted the technology did not exist, but they did not attempt to communicate in a similar way).
However, the first step is always to describe the behavior in some specific terms. For instance, it is quite unclear if we call someone obtuse. But if we say that the person provides irrelevant comments during meetings, then it gives certain behavioral context. If you want to create the complete picture, you should observe your employees’ behaviors in different settings as well as at the time of various work processes. Furthermore, observations should not be made by a single person.
All, to feel loved -- to be accepted. We have found validation in the unlikeliest of places, yet we are unable to find some in ourselves. When social media platforms first surfaced, nobody anticipated that it would turn into the global phenomenon it is today but it has and with it has come a seemingly unquenchable need for validation. In 2004, Mark Zuckerberg introduced Facebook with the intention of creating a platform to socially interact and communicate. As of 2017, there are 1.86 billion active users on Facebook and 2/3 of people online, have social media accounts.
I do not think that a company has the right to monitor emails or phone calls of an employee, no matter their reasoning behind it. That is extremely unethical and wrong in my opinion. The company should at most be able to monitor the websites that are visited at work or obtain a background check. Overall the top level manager will decide what is acceptable and what is not, but the employees should always speak up if they feel their privacy or rights are being violated. The employees should always be aware what parts of their life are being
According to James Madison, “Congress shall make no law…. abridging the freedom of speech….” The First Amendment was written in 1789 and it has worked for decades. However, after the introduction of internet in human’s daily life, the society is now challenged with the idea of government’s role in monitoring the internet content. With situations that include threats, substance unsuitable for children, and online malicious behavior, there is a need for government’s regulation on people’s speech. Government is called to dictate internet content when one incites people to violence with his speech, however, it needs to be a true threat which includes immediacy and an actual intent.
iCrossing does not disclose their rate structure on their website, nor do they confirm any terms of their contract, if they have one. However, this is common in the SEO industry because there are so many different factors that play into what you will be charged based on your individual needs and the size of your business. Other than a few negative comments by former employees of iCrossing, which were a few years old, we couldn 't find any negative trends being voiced by their customers in any way shape or form. It seems everyone is happy with the service they receive from iCrossing, which is very encouraging. [/the-bad] [the-bottom-line] We feel confident in recommending iCrossing as a top-notch digital media marketing company.
One hundred years ago nobody heard about the news or current events from Facebook or the newest tweet. Until fairly recently the most up to date news had to be heard through the grapevine or read in a newspaper. Since the creation of the internet and the mass media that comes with it, information can now be spread all the way across the world in the time it takes to hit the enter button on a computer or phone and upload it to the internet. Some people think that this is a bad thing because so many things that are uploaded can be either false information or simply information that is misleading and could teach individuals the wrong thing. However, if mass media is used in the right way it can be beneficial to the accessibility of valuable information,
Are We Living In Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451? After reading the article Are We Living In Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 I have come to the conclusion that I do agree we are living in Fahrenheit 451 for many reasons. Over the past couple of years many people have forgotten what real communication is all about, it is not about tweeting and texting to each other it is all about real face to face interaction. According to the article it states that “similar kinds of arguments about the dangers of the web and social media” (Ingram 2) have also been made. Due to the advances in social media it seems to me that the world is only getting stupider and stupider especially.
The social media fast we just completed in LA was a very interesting experience for me. As someone who doesn’t have a Twitter account, or spend hours a day on Instagram, I didn’t think that it would have a huge effect on me. When we started the social media fast, I knew that it would be easy for me because I don’t regularly spend time on Instagram or Twitter, so I decided to limit myself even more so I could see a bigger difference. I decided that I wouldn’t use Instagram, GroupMe, or Pinterest, and I also decided to turn off notifications for Snapchat, so I wouldn’t spend all day checking and responding to snapchats. I was surprised at how much it affected me, especially because I was able to get through all 4 days.