The traditional methods of communication, such as letter writing, personal conversations, and phone calls, seem to have disappeared with the rise of social media. I remember writing love letters and passing notes to classmates during my middle school years. However, technology has made communication less personal and more complicated. Now, love letters are only known to the girls who receive them.
Limiting personal feelings to a small group of people is preferable over allowing millions to access them on a Backbone page, as the intrusion of technology has made communication less personal and disregarded privacy. Web 2.0 platforms like Backbone and Twitter enable communication without direct interaction (Bowels, 2013). While users can create and consume content on web pages, we have no control over how others interpret our comments or ideas shared on these platforms. What close friends may find amusing may not be approved by strangers. The creation of communication through Web 2.0 can have both advantages and disadvantages depending on the viewer’s perspective, raising concerns about privacy and emotional well-being in social media. Despite having privacy settings in place, caution should still be exercised as individuals who are unfamiliar with a website may find ways to bypass these measures.
Engaging in inappropriate behavior on social media platforms, such as Backbone, can have real-world consequences. For example, if I want to view the profile of someone who is not my friend but has a mutual friend with me, I can navigate through that mutual friend’s friend list and check out the profiles of unfriendly people who catch my interest. However, proper privacy settings would prevent this from happening. Unfortunately, those unaware of these settings may not realize that unfriendly members of Backbone might be viewing their page, including their posts, photos, and other content unsuitable for unfriendly individuals.
The extensive use and advancement of technology on social media sites can lead to a decrease in personal privacy. Many consequences arise from invasion of privacy or the user’s failure to take privacy precautions. It is important to note that certain Social Networking Inebriates (SONS), like Backbone and Twitter, sell people’s personal information to marketers for a fee. According to marketer reports in 2010, it was estimated that US marketers would spend over $2 billion on advertising on SONS platforms alone with Backbone projected to receive around $1 billion from advertisers nationwide in 2011.
The SONS sites have the ability to generate income by providing marketers, recruiters, and other interested parties with the personal information of their subscribers. This results in a violation of subscribers’ privacy as their disclosed information is used without their consent (O’Brien, 2010; FTC Bibb). With enough financial incentive, anyone’s privacy can be compromised. I always question why I receive unsolicited spam and junk emails from advertisers I didn’t even know existed. My Backbone account shares my email address with these advertisers in exchange for monetary gain.
After reading this article, I was saddened because Backbone disclosed my personal information without my consent. This made me question the true value that Backbone places on their subscribers when they engage in such a disturbing and illegal action. I had believed that a website that I trusted and considered honorable would not participate in deceitful and undermining behavior like this.
It is important to note that sharing subscribers’ personal information is not the only way to invade privacy. Hacking and becoming a cyber-predator are also methods of obtaining personal information without people’s knowledge. According to two surveys conducted by the Pew Internet Project, there is a significant percentage of online teens and young adults who use social network sites.
While popular media and trade press may express concerns about government actions and privacy advocacy groups, they also perpetuate the misconception that teenagers and young adults do not care about their online privacy. However, another survey by the Pew Internet Project reveals that most social networking users between 18-29 years old have adjusted their privacy settings to limit what they share with others online.
Furthermore, a quantitative study focused on young adults’ attitudes towards online privacy concludes that they desire increased privacy similar to older Americans.Despite the availability of necessary precautions, there are still individuals who leave themselves vulnerable to hackers or cyber-predators. Many SONS implementations make the mistake of allowing users to create an easily guessed password by requiring only a username. This often occurs when users choose personal information such as their date of birth or nickname as their password.
Earlier, it was mentioned that personal information like birthdays can be accessed by marketers, recruiters, or anyone else who is interested. If I were to pretend to be a marketer or recruiter, it would be easy for me to obtain the password of someone subscribed to a specific SONS page, along with their personal information. As members of SONS, we should protect ourselves from having our personal information invaded by hackers or cyber-predators by creating usernames and passwords that are more difficult to obtain.
Gaining personal information is not the sole form of privacy invasion; employers also tend to invade the privacy of their employees. Delaney stated that if a user decides to publicly post on Backbone, it is their choice. However, there have been instances where employers have asked or even demanded applicants or employees to provide their username and password for online social networks they belong to. In certain cases, employers may even request an applicant or employee to log into their Backbone account to permit the employer to browse through the account.
Delaney (87) states that it is concerning how some employers have penalized job applicants or current employees for declining to disclose personal information. The idea of granting an employer complete access to my Facebook account is unimaginable. The prospect of having my employer sift through my private messages, party pictures, and list of friends is intolerable. It’s one thing to be evaluated solely on professional merits, but being judged based on confidential personal matters is a wholly separate issue.
Both organizations and employees face consequences for violating confidentiality agreements, but employers often violate privacy without consent without facing any accountability or repercussions. It is unjust to hold employees to higher standards or expect them to possess more morals than their employers. Both parties should be equally respected in terms of privacy. The absence of personal privacy would raise significant concerns mentioned in an organization’s 360-evaluation report.
The invasion of personal privacy through the use of social media may appear insignificant to some individuals, but those who are impacted by it consider it to be a significant issue. Businesses and employers utilize social media to assess job candidates or terminate employees, which is one group affected by this issue. People who have experienced their Twitter or Facebook accounts being hacked or have become victims of cyber-predators also face the consequences. Furthermore, individuals who have been betrayed by their acquaintances and had their personal information shared with marketers, recruiters, or other interested parties for financial gain are similarly impacted.
