AOW#3:Prism
First Response Post (Due Tuesday, midnight)
A solid blog response includes a well-formed opinion that references the text and your own experiences. It shouldn’t repeat a previous comment BUT extend the thinking beyond what’s already posted.
· Grammar, spelling, and mechanics count
· Self-check your post for clarity of thought
· Keep in 3rd person
· Avoid repeating the same information
Select two student’s post and begin with whether or not you agree or disagree with their side. Extend the discussion with a new idea; don’t just repeat or summarize what the other person already posted.
Question -Do you think that PRISM is necessary for the U.S. government, or was Snowden right to expose the truth? How does this relate to 1984, do you see the U.S. moving in this direction?
I think this relates to 1984 because like Snowden, if someone reveals any information about what the government is doing or just makes an attempt to rebel against them, they will be vanished. In the article they say that Snowden has been looking for asylum, he is no longer safe in the U.S. Just like a person in 1984 will be if they try to rebel against the Party. PRISM isn't necessary for the U.S because they are not checking on the people who are committing crimes, they are looking at everyone's information. Phone companies like Verizon are giving the information we provide them to these secret programs. Snowden's reason to leak the information was "I don't want to live in a society that does these sort of things." which I personally agree with because I don't want to live in this kind of world either, however he should've think about the consequences that it could bring him after the leak of information. He can no longer live in his own country because he knows that nothing positive will happen. Well the government is already looking what we are doing in the web, they get information from where we think its safe, i absolutely think that we are moving that direction.
ReplyDeleteIt is very scary to think that if you know even a small little thing that the government doesn't want you to know, they could kill you it put you in jail. In winstons case he is publicly hung in front of everyone and that is very embarrassing. Although I do think that PRISM does have some good to it I also think that it can get way out of hand and it has. The idea behind PRISM is good but the way it is used is not. I hope one day they will fix this issue but I do not think they will.
DeleteIt's amazing how in some ways our government is like the Party. When the government secrets are revealed those who leak the information would be hunted down and potentially thrown in jail or in 1984’s case, vaporized. This hints that the U.S. government is doing much more in order to keep their wrong doings a secret from the public for the purpose of preventing a possibility of a rebellion of some sort. Much like how the Party in 1984 vaporizes those who they believe to be against their policies for the sake of preventing a rebellion. I agree that PRISM is not necessary because for the most part the NSA is looking through many people’s private affairs without consent and occasionally has an added benefit of finding a terrorist.
DeleteI don't agree with the fact that we are moving in the same direction. With the world we live in today, I believe the it is very capable to act in the same way. However, given that this is a country of freedom and rights, a country that people want to come to; I just don't see us in heading down that same path.
DeleteBut Snowden did not vanish at all, he moved to another country because he did something illegal. If he would have gone about releasing the information the right way he wouldnt be under investigation.
DeleteI agree with the fact that we are moving in the same direction. The world we live in today with such advanced technology is slowly taking away our freedom of privacy.
DeleteWe are not given our full rights we as people are limited to what we can do. Thai also goes yo that our governments laws are always changing but I can not see this happening anytime soon. Something is always bound to happen so that this can be avoided.
DeleteI agree with Ryan when he said the idea behind PRISM is good, but how they are using it is not. It is understandable why the government would want to make PRISM a real thing after September 11, 2001, but it needs to be thought out a little more and taken a step back. An idea to make PRISM work could be to start slow and work their way up, so it is not this dramatic change no one is used to.
DeleteI totally agree that people deserve to know, but I still believe there needs to be some programs like this in place. The programs should look for key words and not save every bit of personal information they may have collected and instead save things that may be incriminating against a person until not needed.
DeleteSnowden was right to expose the truth because people have a right to know the government is looking through their lives. PRISM is not necessary for the U.S. government, even though it can be beneficial at times when serious criminals are involved. For example the article states “the basic idea is that it allows the NSA to request data on specific people from major technology companies” (Kopstein par.5), this lets people believe that those who are being exposed, are people of interest which makes society safer. However, it gives the government too much and power in controlling people’s lives, because they could look deeply into anyone at any time. The government can use other means of getting information for criminal cases without exposing the lives of the innocent. This relates to the idea in 1984 because when someone such as Snowden stands up to the wrongdoings of the government, they basically get banished, or could even get killed. In 1984 it is the word “vaporized” which keeps people from uprising. With the increase in technology, the government will become more and more powerful and we will let them out of fear, just as what happened in 1984. The United states will not become the same society as the one in 1984, although the government has the potential to be just as powerful.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you are saying because even though PRISM does make society "safer" it is a huge invasion of our privacy. The people do have the right to know and it is very scary to think that they have so many secrets. I really hope Winston rebels and somehow gets his message out to the public even if it does mean being killed or "vaporized". The government shouldn't lie to their citizens!
DeleteI agree with the fact that the U.S. government has potential to become just as strong. And Expanding on that, the government today is corrupt. The government withholds information from the public to protect themselves from backlash, if they were responsible for any wrongdoing. A prime example of this would be the JFK assassination. But the public deserves the truth.
DeleteI agree, I think that the government can work to stop terrorists without gaining so much personal information on the lives of innocent people. The government always says that what they do is for the greater good, but it seems that most of what they do does more harm than good.
DeleteBut on page 48 it states that for PRISM to be used they have to gain permission form the court. With this and maybe more regulations involved isnt it a good thing we have software like this looking out for the next possible terrorist attack?
DeleteI agree the government can help stop terrorism without invading the privacy of innocents citizens completely. It seems completely unfair to inavde the privacy of innocent people like they are criminals.
DeleteJacob, I saw that too on page 48. Though I don't believe they will wait to ask permission for everything. There are people who can hack through the most secure firewalls so what makes you think these people can't? I see what you're though when you mentioned more regulation. If they had more regulations and such, it could be beneficial but there is no garentee they will follow guidelines.
DeletePrism is not necessary for the U.S. government. Snowden did the right thing by exposing the truth because NSA does not just target and look through terrorists private affairs but rather looks through the whole public's personal affairs leaving behind little to no shred of privacy for anyone. For example as stated in Joshua Kopstein’s article “Everything you need to know about PRISM” Kopstein states, “The Protect America Act allows the attorney general and the director of national intelligence to explain in a classified document how the US will collect intelligence on foreigners overseas each year, but does not require targets or places to be named. As the Post reports, once the plan is approved by a federal judge in a secret order, the NSA can require companies like Google and Facebook to send data to the government, as long as the requests meet the classified plan’s criteria,” (Kopstein para 8). This is significant because it shows how at random the government can pull information on people who are not being specifically targeted and peek into their personal affairs for no reasonable cause. Sure, the NSA may be able to find some terrorists hidden in the populous however, the people who are innocent are at risk of having their personal lives exposed. This relates to 1984 because people in the novel constantly are being watched by the Party and have no privacy anywhere they go for the most part. Just like in today's society where the NSA spies on the general public for the sake of protecting the country but in reality just invades people’s personal privacy with the added bonus of catching terrorists here and there. Despite all the spying coming from the NSA, the U.S. will not share the exact intentions of that of the Party in the novel 1984, but is slowly moving in the same direction.
ReplyDeleteI agree, I do not think that PRISM is necessary. I think that when it was originally thought of, the government fully intended on using it to catch terrorists, but as time went on, I think that they realized how much information they could really access and started to use PRISM to get personal information on innocent people. I'm all for catching terrorists, but the government does not need so much of our personal information to do so.
DeleteI totally agree that we are slowly moving towards the same directions as 1984, and also that NSA is looking through innocent people's information. I think no one, not even the government should be allowed to look through what we do in our personal lives. If anything needs to be investigated it should be with the person consent.
DeleteWhile there can be some benefits to PRISM, I don’t agree with the fact that it should be necessary. According to the U.S. government, they insist that, “it is only allowed to collect data when given permission by the Secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court” (Sottek, Kopstein par 4). While this may be true, it is not possible to tell if this is really the case since they do everything secretively with no limitations. PRISM also allows the NSA to invade the privacy of others and collect personal info. In this situation, Snowden was right to expose the truth, which always come out one way or another. If he felt the need to even try to expose the truth, which he did, then something was definitely wrong with what they were doing. In correlation to 1984, punishments are made to those who rebel. And just as Winston is doing, Snowden rebelled and fled. He took a risk to expose PRISM for the better of society. Winston is doing the same thing for the future generations to come. In a way the U.S. has taken similar steps pertaining to privacy, but I don’t see it turning down that path. This is a country of freedom and rights, which are bound by documents, such as the Constitution.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your response especially when you say that PRISM would definitely have an impact on today's society. But the majority of the United States should not be watched on a monitor all day. It would definitely help the crime rate go down but it would be horrible to know that we are just watch all day and everything that we send that want to private won’t be. This trade off does not seem fair to me.
DeleteI agree with you when you said it would not be possible to know if the U.S. government would actually get permission to collect data or if they would keep doing it secretly, which they most likely would. The government probably does enough things secretly as it is already; can not imagine if this factor was added into it. Not knowing when someone is watching you because they are doing it secretly is really disturbing.
DeleteI don’t agree with the fact that PRISM is a secretive surveillance system, but I believe that it was meant to have a good intention. There were probably people that they suspected more than others when they incorporated this system, which would make the NSA only monitor certain people rather than everyone. The government was sacrificing its citizen’s privacy to make the nation better.
DeleteI do not think that PRISM is necessary for the United States. There is no reason why millions of innocent people should be spied on. It would be different if PRISM was only to be used to gain information on suspected criminals, but the government is not using it for this. They are using it to access needless private information from individuals who have no reason to be thought of as criminals or suspected criminals. I think that Snowden was right to expose the truth. Americans know that the government, in some way shape or form, is tracking them, but I do not think that we realize the extent of the tracking. By leaking this information, Snowden has helped to shed some much needed light on the governments actions. I think that this relates to the telescreens in 1984. Citizens in 1984 are constantly under surveillance. They watch basically everything you do and say, for the purpose of catching "thoughtcriminals." The only difference between us and 1984, is that we have more of a choice, in the sense that we have control over what we buy. We can choose to not purchase and use electronics that would make it easier for the government to track us, the people of 1984 do not have that choice. They do not have a choice, they will be watched whether they like it or not. Though, I do not completely think that the intentions of the United States and the intentions of 1984 are the same.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree that PRISM it is not necessary. Though they do need court approval to collect data on suspected terrorists the majority of the people being researched by the NSA are innocent people. Snowden was right to expose the truth to the public because though many people are aware of the government’s surveillance,they do not know to what extent the surveillance is. Therefore the public has the right to know of the government's actions and Snowden should not have to seek asylum to prevent from being hunted down by the government due to the fact that he exposed additional information on the topic known to the public. I agree that the intentions of the U.S. and the Party are not the same however their actions in regards to spying on the public show some similar qualities.
DeleteI agree that we don't know to which extent the government is tracking us and also that the PRISM is not necessary. Thanks to what Snowden revealed we now know about the different programs the government runs to go into our information, where we think its secure.
DeleteI also agree with you, but I think the government wants to take precautions even if innocent people who have never done harm to be searched. Even if they are going a little extreme over the search, they are trying not to repeat what has happened in the past. I agree that it is a little unnecessary to obtain so much information that is not really needed, but again, I can see that the government are a little precautions. I do believe they should find another method instead of looking through everyone's private information.
DeleteI agree with you that innocent people should not be spied on. I believe if the government HAS to watch us in order to keep our country safe, that the best thing would be just to watch people who are suspected criminals.
DeleteI totally agree with you that PRISM should not be necessary if it is not just for criminals but also for the rest of society even if the people are innocent. They need to just have surveillance on those who look suspicious. PRISM should not invade every person's privacy because that is completely wrong.
DeleteThe US does need a system like PRISM, although many people dont need to fear it. Snowden was right to show the people that technology does exist. The people do have the right to know that such surveillance equipment is being used. This connects to 1984 by showing that we have the same technology but it is not being used 24/7, it is only authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court as said in the article. America is not heading towards a state of 1984 at all.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that a system like this would be okay in the United States. I just think that it should focus more on suspected criminals and not innocent citizens. I also agree that the people should have an idea that the government is watching because then they know that if they break the law they will most likely get caught.
DeleteI see what both of you are saying. I understand that it could be beneficial, and maybe not such a bad thing for the US like you guys were saying. Although people must be aware of what the government is doing to prepare for any consequences. If they were to use it, they should focus on criminals as you said Maddy.
DeleteI do not necessarily agree with the idea that most people do not need to fear PRISM. It is unnecessary for the government to have the amount of information they do about each citizen's personal life. They should stay very surface in their findings on this idea, not know what Becky had for lunch 7 years ago at 5:38 PM.
DeleteI can see why the US would need a system like PRISM to keep certain people in check, but i disagree with the fact that we don't need to fear it. I feel that our nation is under constant surveillance and it is not true that we are only being watched when told.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSnowden was right to expose PRISM. Snowden was just trying to show the truth on what the government was going to do with random innocent citizens. This article relates to 1984 because the government in 1984 (Big Brother) listens to what everyone has to say no matter if someone supports Big Brother or not. The saying if you have nothing to hide you had nothing to fear gets thrown around a lot during these types of questions, but if the government had nothing to hide then should not not fear it getting out. And Snowden most likely felt the same and came to the conclusion that the files had to be released no matter the cost. If nothing is changed soon the United States will soon be heading down the path of 1984.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Snowden was right to expose the government, but the actions taken by the government was because of fear. In my opinion, both actions were completely justified because the government wanted to try to protect the nation and Snowden wanted to protect the rights of the people. The government only started to monitor people because they were searching for people who meant to harm the nation.
DeleteI agree that Snowden was right to expose PRISM, probably not the best timing but it is over now. The exposure got people start thinking about how actively the government is involved in their lives. They claim to do it in searches on criminals but generally they are looking at every one.
DeleteI agree that Snowden made the right choice in exposing PRISM. It was necessary so that people would be aware of how prevalent the government is in monitoring their lives. It is a way for people to see how they do not have true privacy which should be known to the public and not kept as a secret.
DeletePRISM would be completely unnecessary for the US. Innocent citizens should not have to feel consistently spied on by random strangers. If PRISM was used in better ways, like to spy on suspected criminals or terrorists, then it would be completely necessary, but they are not using it for these reasons. Snowden was completely in the right telling the truth. We all know we are being tracked but we all probably don’t know to what extent we are being tracked for no reason. Americans had the right to know this and Snowden did the right thing in exposing the truth about the violating acts of the government. This relates to the telescreens in 1984 because those have eyes on the citizens at all times, and if the government keeps it up this is the direction we will be going in.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you we as people should have the right to choose if we want yo be spied on. I also feel that Snowden did what was ethically correct and that our rights were being violated so in letting us know he did the right thing by doing so. In the end he had made the decision in order to secure our freedom and make us aware of what is going on.
DeleteIt is necessary to supervise criminals that the government officials deem dangerous to the citizens' safety. The people of the U.S. do not give permission to the PRISM program to spy on social media, emails, and other accounts on the internet. As Greenwald stares in his speech called "Why Privacy Matters" he states that not everybody that conceals their privacy are criminals, they just see the social media and other electronic ways of communication as a private sanctuary, leisurely way to relax, and for private work conversations. One should not feel threatened or uncomfortable while using these outlets. Snowden made the correct decision of leaking this information out to the media the information must've threatened the people's security because he went on to say that, he didn't "want to live in a society that does these sort of things". Connecting this back to the novel 1984 this situation ties in with the telescreens, the children, and Thought Police because they are the ones that are spying on the people who live there, as George Orwell wrote that by being spyed on they were persuaded "that mere impulse, mere feelings, were of no account, [and] at the same time robbing you of all power over the material world". No one should ever feel like that if this unwanted spying goes any farther then society runs the risk of this becoming reality.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with the fact that people only use social media for good, and doing normal things like you said, socializing with others and for private conversations and etc. But I think since 9/11 occurred, the government has been so wrapped up over the fact that a terrorist attack like that can happen again any second feared them to start looking through private information. Any normal person can randomly shoot a school up, or worse, I think the government want to take precautions, but I do agree that no one really wants their privacy to be breached, especially when they aren’t doing anything wrong.
DeleteI see your point about how nobody wants to feel invaded of their privacy on social media, especially when they are innocent. But I disagree when you said that people use social media mainly as an outlet for leisurely conversations, because things like Twitter are constantly used in negative ways as well such as cyberbullying, racism, sexism, etc. I think it would be okay for PRISM to lurk into social media only for suspects of crime as it could help their case.
DeleteSnowden had the right to expose the truth for the people to know that their information they have and what they are searching online will not technically be private. And although people do not want their privacy shared, it is necessary for the government to have PRISM, despite the people now knowing. PRISM was created to find terrorists and criminals plotting their plans online, and to stop it beforehand. Even when the people know they are being watched, some do not believe it, and post what terrible acts they are planning to do. When PRISM came out a lot of planned attacks has been stopped and saved many people before disaster can occur: “ Since September 11th, 2001, the United States government dramatically increased the ability of its intelligence agencies to collect and investigate information…” (Sottek & Kopstein 1). The U.S. government has only started to do this after what tragically happened in 9/11 and do not want a repeat of it. There is no implication of the U.S. government moving their direction towards what is going on in 1984. Because, unlike 1984, the government is trying to stop crime and to save people’s lives, even if they have to search through their private information. In 1984, Big Brother watches to make sure their people do not rebel against their system, or say anything that can offend the party. It does not help the people from stopping crime, but instead takes away their freedom from saying and doing what they want, even if it’s not causing harm to others.
ReplyDeletei agree with you, snowden had every right to expose the PRISM stuff. it helps keep our country safer from threats. PRISM has stopped many repeats of 9/11 because of PRISM.
DeleteI understand that our country was scared after an incident like 9/11 so I can see why they created a program like PRISM. A program like this is needed in the United States, but maybe at a lower level. At a lower level the government would just be able to listen in and search the devices of suspected criminals, not innocent people. Although I agree that a program like this is okay, I also believe Snowden was right to expose the truth. The truth needed t get out. Innocent citizens cannot go day by day without knowing that their privacy is being violated. This relates to 1984 because in the book the Party watches its citizens 24/7, the people don’t even know if they are or if they aren’t being watched so they just behave. In the article the government wire taps our devices and listens to its citizens without them knowing, just like the Party in 1984. I do not see the U.S moving in this direction because in the past year people have been becoming more aware that the government is always watching us.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that Snowden had the right to expose the truth. People feel like their actions are limited and have to watch out for whatever actions they make if they are being spied on. No innocent person should have to live a life in paranoia of every action they make.
DeleteSnowden was right to expose the truth to society because everybody deserves to know they are being watched by the government. No innocent person should have to worry about their private lives being violated by the government and not feeling comfortable wherever they are. This article relates to 1984 because like PRISM, Big Brother is always watching citizens through telescreens so no one is able to really have a private life without it being invaded by the government. Today the government is both slowly moving towards the same road as 1984, but it also is not because there are many people who are more aware of the government watching whatever we do on our electronics by tapping into our cameras or datas of our devices. So to prevent the government from spying on ourselves, people sometimes take duct tape and put it over their cameras.
ReplyDeleteI agree that people should be aware at all times that they are being watched so if something like 1984 were ever to occur people would be more conscious that it is going on and maybe have an idea on how to stop it.
DeleteThe use of PRISM during a time when many individuals were living in fear of terrorism was needed to collect information about any possible terrorists in the United States. Snowden was also right to expose the truth about the government secretly obtaining information about its citizens because all of the citizens should have at least been notified that the government is keeping an eye out of any suspicious people. This event is similar to 1984 because the government secretly spies on its people throughout their daily lives just to prevent anything that the government does not want to happen. The government will more than likely not do something like this again because people already expose a lot about what is going on about their private lives through social media. If the government secretly took information about its citizens in today’s society and people found out, then there would be a large backlash against the government.
ReplyDeleteI agree completely with what you said, in this day and age we need to find the bad and console the good. A program of this level should only be used when there is shady or suspicious activity on a consistent basis
DeletePRISM is not necessary for the U.S. government because like Sottek and Kopstein said, it could “violate the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens.” Making PRISM a real thing in the U.S. will cause more problems in our society than what it is worth in the long run if they would ever catch someone doing something illegal or wrong. Snowden was definitely right to expose what had been going on. He made a good point when he said, “‘ I don’t want to live in a society that does these sorts of things,’” because it definitely goes against “the American way.” People come to the United States to be free and get away from problems in other countries. No one wants to come to America thinking they are going to have freedom when secretly, they will not. This relates to 1984 because the government in the book uses telescreens to watch over their people, while the U.S. government would be using PRISM to watch over theirs. Hopefully the U.S. never moves in this direction, but never say never.
ReplyDeletei disagree with you because the program PRISM has helped stopped many attacks from happening because people care to post about them and PRISM has filtered through and stopped them. if people claim if goes against their constitiutional right or their freedom, then welcome to america where you dont have 100% freedom unless you live off grid. if someone owns a phone or tv they are giving up their constitutional right of privacy and freedom.
DeleteI agree with you in the sense of PRISM violating the peoples' rights, but I disagree with you in regards to the freedom aspect of your argument. The US isn't the only country that is necessarily considered "free" and we as a people, except a certain amount of surveillance. A large amount of the population owns an Apple device, and just those devices alone survey one's location, search history etc. To a certain extent the people know what they sign up for
DeletePRISM is necessary for the US government, it helps the government narrow down whos a threat and whos not and it keeps our country safer. PRISM helps the government filter who they should keep an eye out for. Snowden had every right to expose the truth, but the US still should have PRISM. Snowden just helped keept the US people in line with knowing what our government is doing. The US will never be as severe as 1984, the american people wont let it ever get that far if we are already talking about how america is in 1984 yet we are no where close to it and people are already freaking out and trying to stop it when we are know where close to the real 1984, so no the US will never move in that direction.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you when you said Snowden has the right to expose the truth, but I just don’t think that he went about it in the right way. Some details might have been left out that were probably important in helping people fully understand its intentions.
DeleteThe PRISM system is something that is needed, but there needs to be a firm line of what personal information they collect and keep. It should be scanning for keywords and eliminating off of that where to dig further and what to leave alone. Snowden was in the right to leak that we are under constant surveillance because it is something the public should know, if a person knows they are being monitored at all times they may be more frightened to keep doing those things even if it is not something illegal, it may be something embarrassing and as humans we avoid being embarrassed or feeling shame, it is a feeling we dread so people may want to know that they are being watched very closely so they can just be more aware. I could see the U.S. becoming something like Oceania in 1984, it is already on that track. We are under constant supervision, just like in 1984 but in our society people are only arrested for commiting crimes that usually put others at harm not things like thinking bad about the government.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with you because there should be a line on how much we should be watched. It should be used for safety issues which you pointed out. I also agree with you about how the book relates to us right now.
DeleteI do not think that PRISM is necessary for the U.S. government in the manners that it is using it. They were abusing the freedom of the people, Patriot Act this and Protect America Act that, they only produced what the government wanted and allowed for you to know. The way in which PRISM is used relates to 1984 because the people, literally and from the novel, understand that they are being watched by the government and are completely okay with that. People claim that they appreciate their privacy and that they would do anything to protect it but they continue to use their electronics. Along with that theory of how the U.S. is invading privacy, there is an ever-growing decrease of people with to initiative to make any changes.
ReplyDeleteThe people that lack initiative to make changes are the reason why scenarios like 1984 could happen in real life. The citizens that lack the motivation to defend their basic rights, now have none because they didn't stand up to the government or power in place.
DeleteThe surveillance program, PRISM, is definitely not necessary for the US, reason being that the citizens have a right to privacy. Snowden is very agreeable when he said "[he doesn't] want to live in a society that does these sort of things." No one wants to be under surveillance, especially by the government who may or may not interpret things differently that we do.He was very right to expose what the society is going through. It definitely relates to the novel, 1984 because of how they are being surveillance and even though we are not to that extent the US is slowly heading to that direction. This is because of safety precautions, in the book they are doing it just to make the people paranoid.
ReplyDeletePRISM can be necessary to the United States to a certain extent, but Snowden was still in the right to expose the truth. PRISM should only be used on a consistent basis to make sure that the people are safe, not to watch people's personal life. There is a fine line between doing your job and doing too much and in that case Snowden was correct. This is where the concept of 1984 begins in my opinion, it can manipulate some to live their lives the way the government wants them to live. The United States can definitely be moving in that direction because the more control the government has over things like the media, the more exposed we are for celebrities and other influential people to put thoughts into our head. If we have enough of the population that are educated of their rights and the constitution, the conformists will also start to follow what they are saying so it is also a great possibility that this will not happen.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you with your statement on how the US Government is using the media to control us through celebrities and other big name people. The popularity that the people have make it really easy for them to have a lot of influence over weak minded people.
DeletePRISM is not necessary for the U.S. Government. Edward was right to expose and leak the truth of what was really going on. It relates to 1984 due to both powers (U.S and the Party) both monitor and survey their citizens. In the novel, the openly spy on you whether you like it or not. The U.S was secretly collecting citizens information. They openly violated your your rights as a citizen. The U.S may have plans on adopting some new methods of controlling its citizens through secrecy or fear.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the use of PRISM is a violation of privacy. The government should not be worrying about monitoring everyone at all times. By doing so it acts as a gateway to controlling the lives of the citizens and leading to a corrupt society like in 1984.
DeleteIt is understandable how people panicked when PRISM was leaked, but ultimately I believe that the sole reason PRISM was created was to protect America from terrorists and make sure a tragedy such as 9/11 never happens again. For those who feel the government is taking advantage of their power and using PRISM to spy on innocent people, I have a hard time believing government officials would ever have enough time in their day to do so. Crime occurs constantly every day, so they are always busy with this or have other more important things to keep track of than random innocent citizens’ business. Also, the government already hides the majority of their business from the public because otherwise society would turn to chaos because we can’t handle to know about most of the things going on in the world. Just like how a parent hides certain things from their children to protect them, the government hides information to protect the US and has the right to do so because they are trained to understand how to handle complex situations. I don’t think Snowden made the right decision when leaking PRISM because once information is put in the hands of the public, it is always misinterpreted as society attempts to put together a whole puzzle with just a few pieces. As to how this relates to 1984, people fear what they don’t know or understand. People don’t like secrets unless they’re in on it, and both Big Brother and the US government have secrets of their own, only with completely different intentions. The article states that once PRISM’s plan is approved by a federal judge the NSA can require data from medias to be sent to the government, “as long as the requests meet the classified plan’s criteria.” This proves that PRISM is a program with good intentions, always waiting for a federal judge’s approval before taking action and following criteria. The US is not on the path to becoming similar to 1984 because we are given too much freedom to even come close to becoming such a dystopian society.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSnowden's decision to expose PRISM was the right action to take. He wanted to show people the truth behind government actions against it's citizens. Although the intent may be to watch for any potential threats, it should not be monitoring people's personal lives at any given time. In relation to 1984, Big Brother monitors every citizen under any circumstances. PRISM is similar as it is meant capture private data of citizens, even if they are not suspected of being a threat. The current U.S. society could be moving in the direction of 1984, however government processes placed on society are not nearly as drastic as Big Brother. Yet if systems continue to be placed in order to monitor citizens, the U.S. could very well become like the world of 1984.
ReplyDeleteI think having the courage to come forward like Showden did, despite knowing how much it would affect his life, should be seen as brave and admirable. PRISM was/is violating peoples' privacy, and even though they said they were doing it to protect the people, they took advantage of a community's need for safety after a horrific event, to obtain information. I understand why they created the program in the first place, but because of how it has changed, as well in 1984. The society is controlled in a way that does not help the people what so ever. If anything, it hurts them because not only is the Party taking away their memories, but they are taking away valuable information that the people should know. I don't necessarily think this is becoming apparent as it told in the article at this moment, but I do think we are letting technology control our live so much, that we will overlook something like someone using our information against us, which really does need to be more important.
ReplyDeleteI disagree that it is necessary to have a program like PRISM. The feeling that you are being watched and knowing you are being watched is an uneasy one. Knowing that the government can search through your private information is not something that I am personally comfortable with. When it gets to that point, it seems like if someone can search through my personal life they can understand my tendencies and I may become vulnerable. If someone knows everything about you, but you know nothing about them, they automatically have an advantage over you in terms of your decision making. They understand that you may become susceptible to certain notions and they may throw messages your way that gets you to think the way that they want you to. I would like to be able to have my privacy and be able to have a personal conversation over the phone without the feeling that someone is watching me. I shouldn’t feel like I am being constantly tracked, and that information is always available to use against me.
ReplyDelete