Singer gives us so much food for thought. I want to jump in with something unexpected. I'd like to chat about his title: Visible Man. This is of course a reversal of the so often used title and concept of invisibility (Invisible Man). Still, I wonder if this generic phrase, generic in the sense that it's supposed to represent men's and women's visbility, can actually cover (pun intended I guess) both. Are the lives of men and women, now and in the past, equally visible? Is privacy enjoyed equally, or are the lives of one group more open?
Also, we might ask a similar question about adults vs. children. The use of photography in the article is interesting, the blurring of the faces. Was this done to suggest privacy even while the piece is about loss of privacy? I'd like to give a great deal of thought to just how unprivate the lives of youth have become in the age of Facebook. What do youth gain from disclosing so much, especially images of themselves, and what do they lose?
Doesn't Facebook, in its very conception and in its naming, encourage an explosion of shared visual images? I wonder if the plastering of celebrities across our computer screens and even the near nudity of pregnant women (I think Demi Moore was the first) on magazine covers make it seem, as Singer said, that the more people give up privacy the less risky it will become. Are we fools to believe this?
In this essay we look at the real aspect of the word privacy. In this concept we examine what is privacy and how we can posibly practice it. In today's society privacy is often invaded by social networks, the government and sometimes through our own personal circle. In the government, like the essay shows the government uses the two way glass to spy or to get certain information out of a certain individual. Simply privacy is no longer the base problem but the people who may allow their privacy to be in the open.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this essay my eyes are opening a lot more clearly about this word known to man kind as "privacy"...I agree with Singer's and this article because it does seem as if the loss of privacy is becoming acceptable by social networks & social media..Now a day many of the human race don't look at social networking sites for what they really are (controlled watch sites). A picture on Facebook or tweet on Twitter about my every move is simply the norm (everybody's doing it) so we internalize giving up our privacy as the method of being accepted by society...So I don't think its more so on those who are the watchers (government officials,parents, stalkers etc.) who make the loss of privacy deviant but more so those of us who simply sit back and give up our privacy rather willingly or not that has caused this issue.
ReplyDeleteWith just the touch of a button I was able to have the entire world at my fingertips. I didn’t have to go through as much a little red tape to find people that I’d never seen before or maybe to coincidently browse through my neighbor’s likes or dislikes, even a few intimate thoughts on their favorite networking site. With the internet I was able to find a personal visual of my own back yard and if my inquiring mind wanted to know a little more about coworkers and friends, I could simply type in a first and last name, possibly location to find out the most private information, yet it be bank statements, social life, stocks, criminal background, or even worse, social security information.
ReplyDeleteIn the article Visible Man, author Peter Singer evaluates the acceptable public invasion of privacy by (camera surveillance, internet “social networking sites,” as well as any other form of digital monitoring. Singer makes several observations based upon his theory “perfection of power” and his perception of modern surveillance culture; controlling behavior and stifling descent. Singer did not attack society’s acceptance of a surveillance life but the power of privacy invasion; including the idea that we can monitor the authority in which is lurking us limitlessly.
Networking sites have a privacy agreement required to register as well as other popular social sites. All function daily off of the invasion of other people’s thoughts and personal images. Facebook, Twitter and etc can be used for networking, retail, the finds of loved ones and even marketing and jobs. If you find yourself following social fads (sleeping with your phone, updating your personal status every opportunity granted), then you just might be a victim of modern/surveillance culture. Is this for over enjoyment or benefit maybe regular monitoring and surveillance? You be the judge, what is the actual benefactor?
Visible man made everything clear to me. It is hard to argue with the truth we are actually living in a time were we accept everything the good and the bad. I belive that the people that do not know what is happening around us is blinded by the fact that it is real. I did not believe that it was real until hearing it in class. Privacy in this essay caught my attention. We voluteer our privacy, and when it become a rumor it becomes a problem. Most of the time it is not the government that hurt us most of the time we are hurting ourselves. Privacy to me is important but now it has me thinking "is privacy really privacy?"
ReplyDelete