The issue of American citizens choosing protection or privacy in the cyber world is a major and controversial topic involving our rights as human beings, but also our government wanting to provide the protection that we have asked it to provide. It is safe to say that everyone that uses computers and the internet in particular would like to feel safe from online threats. However, there is a bit of confusion when it comes to deciding what threats are real and dangerous. For example, China has had the capability in the past to intercept American Naval commands based on movements. Some may consider this as the beginning steps of cyber war, but in all actuality it is just cyber espionage. Yes, China accessed top secret information, but how can our government decide what China’s purpose with that information is? Cyber War is certainly a looming threat in the back of military official’s minds and particularly the minds of people in agencies such as the National Security Agency, but it isn’t the only threat. Just by purely intercepting data China hasn’t engaged in any form of cyber war, but they have provided a threat in the form of cyber espionage. In order to prevent such situations, as critical as this example or just merely an identity fraud case, our American government has suggested a few plans to better protect us as citizens from online threats. During the Clinton Administration the government tried to pass legislation that would have required all computers to contain the "clipper chip" which would have allowed government officials to have access to all data within the computers. The Obama administration is currently seeking similar legislation which allows law-enforcement officials to police online communications. Another suggested plan of action would be to require all Internet Service Providers to require verifiable registration information. However, the down side to all these proposals for our protection is just as threatening as the threats we are protecting against; we would lose our privacy.
The cultural significance behind this issue is clear in its existence; do we as common American citizen’s care more about our rights and our privacy online, or would we rather be safe from hackers participating in cyber espionage and possibly even cyber warfare? Our country was founded on the basic beliefs that all human beings deserve certain unalienable rights that were given to us by our creator. One of these rights as citizens of the United States of America is privacy. Although the government established must give citizens their freedoms, the government is also in place in order to protect its citizens. The threats of cyber war and espionage have complicated this matter because, while trying to protect against these things, the government must police communications and data online which is consequently invading privacy. Another reason why this issue is so significant is because we have the power as citizens to essentially make these decisions. The legislation that is trying to be passed has to receive approval. The decision is a tough one and very controversial because either way we are winning and losing at the same time. We will wither be safe and neglected our rights, or we will continue to be vulnerable to online threats but still have the privilege of privacy.
The topic at hand brings one question to mind: Should American citizens choose to be more adequately protected from cyber threats by our government, thus resulting in the sacrifice of much privacy online? This question is one that has a very narrow-minded topic to it. There seems to be no solution, only a controversial decision to be made. However, in the research of it I found different points of view from various sources that overall can help answer this question. The different points of view, included strongly against government control, calls for more protection, strategies of how to protect yourself, and an explanation of what American’s rights actually cover. Examples from each point of view help to extend that point of view even further, and ultimately equip the audience to have a better understanding of the issue and what side to choose. After reading all the articles one would probably feel that protection is necessary even if it comes at the cost of a little bit of our “privacy”, which we don’t really have anyways, from the government.
