Internet Privacy
Computer privacy has been becoming a major topic in various people’s eyes. The majority of people define privacy as being free from being seen and not disturbed by others and there. There are also people that define privacy as controlling how a person’s personal information is collected, used, and distributed. When Companies and social media are in the picture that is when the gray area really comes into play. Social media is defined as websites and applications that allow users to participate in social networking by creating and sharing content with people they communicate with new people, people they already know, or the user’s family. People argue that social media like Facebook, Google+, or LinkedIn have disclosed the user’s personal information without the user having any knowledge. I believe computer privacy has a gray area on whether what privacy really is anymore. The gray area comes into play when social media takes the user’s information and stores it in their database to use as demographic data. That information, later on, gets distributed to companies and the companies display products or services on the user’s page as advertisements. Social media organizations should not be held accountable for the user not knowing that their personal information is distributed to 3rd party companies because, at the end of the day, it is the user’s decision on whether he/she wants to utilize social media.
Each organization has policies governing the use of social media in the offices. In most organizations, the use of office services such as the internet bandwidth and computers to access the internet is restricted only to the purposes that involve the business of the organization. In this way, the organization in question expects that their resources are put into a responsible use for profit making activities. However, with the new development, where employees cannot stay the whole day without using the internet, according to Lewis (2000), it becomes difficult to manage the use of such services. Employees will spend a lot of their time using the internet instead of concentrating on the matter that centrally concerns the organization. The social media, for instance, is mainly used by most of the employees for personal purposes such as connecting with friends and families, something they can do at the most appropriate moment, which is definitely not when they are at work. I support organizations that use the information of their employees from the services meant for the purpose of work such as computers. Before one disagrees with this point, they should take a minute or two to ask themselves if the employees who use the services of a company for non-justifiable purposes right. It is not in the first place to divert your attention to social media when the company has hired you to assist in a profit making service. I am not aware of how connecting with friends and family through the social media during office hours will help improve the performances of an organization.
When an employee decides to use a company’s service for their personal benefits, they are aware of the repercussions. Every employee always put their identity and personal information at risk when they log in to their blogs and profiles using a company networked system. Blaming an organization for the breach of privacy is being unjust on the side of the employer. When one is aware of the risk and still goes on and face the risk, what should such people expect? What should be understood in this scenario, before any judgment is made, is that an employee uses an organization’s service for social media activities-something outside the job description of their position. According to Weber (2015), internet privacy is not a reality when the user is not responsible with the information they give out. In the event that a third party gets hold of their personal data, an employee should not cry foul because they are the ones who ignorantly gave them out, something they could have avoided through following their job descriptions and avoiding things that are not purposeful to the organization’s activities.
Thirdly, an employee is using the services of the organization and hence the organization has all the authority to use what their services provide. Smartphones have become cheaper, smaller in size and can retain power for a very long time. Some also have internet access, almost all. It cost very little to use personal digital assistance for the purpose of personal communication. This makes personal information more secure. Therefore, I want to refute with the loudest voice possible those against the company’s use of personal data of their employees using the social media on office computer that this is the fault of the employee and not the employer. An employee has a personal choice of not to use the office computer for personal activities. With this, we will have killed two birds with a single stone. The organization’s activities will be done on time as no time will be wasted on social media, and on the other hand, the employee’s personal information will be safe.
Sometimes you can think that you have explained a point and that everyone will agree with you. This is the direct opposite. After such a good explanation, there are those who still hold that organizations must keep off their employee’s personal information even when such information is recklessly given out by their employees. Their main argument is that privacy is a basic right. According to McEvoy (2002), everyone should have their personal space and their personal data shared only with their consent, sometimes not shared at all. Apart from the fact that privacy is a basic right, personal information can be used by the third party in a wrong way such as getting an employee’s credit card number leading to a fraud. Such arguments are well founded, I must admit. There are cases where personal information has been used against the owner leading to a mess they can never want to find themselves again. However, as much as I agree with the fact that it is wrong to share personal data, I also agree, in case someone will propose, that using an office’s services for personal activities is wrong. Those who take this path of the argument must take into account a lot of factors into considerations.
First, the employer only gathers information from the employee using what they have provided while using the services of the organization in accessing the social media. The organization has no business with the employee’s personal information apart from those provided in the social media. An employee, therefore, has a choice where an employer lacks. An employee can decide not to use the internet for personal purposes. The employer, on the other hand, has limited decisions to make. They cannot shut down the internet because there are those who use the resource wisely. Therefore, they must come up with a way that will discourage such behavior. In the contemporary society, a word of caution is never enough. People need actions. It is until they see spam e-mails in the name of adverts popping and occupying most of their memory is when it will dawn on them that they have to stop using a public service for personal activities.
Finally, most of the organizations that share personal information of their employees do so with a positive intent. I do not believe that there is any organization that wants to see their employees in a quagmire situation arising from the leakage of their personal information. The intention is to create a good linkage between the employees and the third party company to which the information is shared. For instance, a company may want its employees to shop in the best store in the town, therefore, through the adverts from the third party company; the employee will come to learn of the existence of such stores.
In conclusion, I am positive that most organizations do share information with another company not to harm their employees, but either to send a warning that it is wrong to use office computers on social media services or to create a good linkage with the third party company. Additionally, this can be a good source of income for the organization as they can earn some money out of sharing the information; in return, the employees will be able to get relevant adverts that can be life-saving in some occasions.
Works cited
Lewis, Bob. "No Privacy: Employers Watch Every Click You Make. And What's Wrong With That?." Infoworld 22.46 (2000): 58. Academic Search Premier. Web. 10 July 2016.
McEvoy, Sharlene A. "E-Mail And Internet Monitoring And The Workplace: Do Employees Have A Right To Privacy?." Communications & The Law 24.2 (2002): 69. Academic Search Premier. Web. 10 July 2016.
Weber, Rolf H. "Internet Of Things: Privacy Issues Revisited." Computer Law & Security Review 31.5 (2015): 618-627. Academic Search Premier. Web. 10 July 2016.
