Writing Process Reflection Memo

Do we have a Right to Anonymity?

Name

Institution

Do we have a Right to Anonymity?

Introduction

As long as people are not violating the law or are under any form of suspicion for any good cause, there are no reasons for law enforcers or the government to track them. Despite the fact that individuals are in the public, they should not be entirely vulnerable to others including the government. When an individual is in a public place, nobody is allowed to accost them; hence, he or she should have the free will to speak to anyone he or she wants and divulge identity as much as possible to become publicly invisible (Peng, 2014). As such, what it means to be in a public place is limited and restricted, and an individual's reasonable expectations are violated through tracking. As such, since people's rights to privacy allow them to set limits on access, and the tracking should only be permitted if they understandbenefits an individual may obtain and believe that they could outweigh the benefits of privacy. The most intriguing questions is; "is anonymity threatened by surveillance?” or “do people have a right to anonymity?” (Peng, 2014). The premise is that such anonymity is not available to individuals who are living in small towns and whose very actions are considered to be public. This is in a way that they are not permitted to perform them in public places where they are not known, and no one pays close attention to the activities they do and those which they do not do. At least, this should occur to an extent that they remain within certain bounds of acceptable behavior. Although anonymous, people remain accountable for any activity they do and can be witnessed, identified, should they behave unlawfully.

Right to be Anonymous

Whether anonymous or not, individuals may rightfully be feared considering how the agglomerated information that contains their identity may be used. According to Dershowitz, to ensure that people remain anonymous, optional ID cards should be implemented because they may present little anonymity and offer more security (Dershowitz, 2001). However, privacy and anonymity are vital aspects of today's society. In some settings, such as medical treatment and banking, the privacy and anonymity of individuals are protected by the law. Apparently, it is clear that certain aspects of modern life may not have such clear protections. In the contemporary world, people are increasingly using technology networks to accomplish various activities, which initially were always assumed to be anonymous or private in the non-virtual world. However, today's protectionists, provided by law and police are slowly being driven to adapt to this new life in the virtual world.

Technological advancements have generated concerns regarding the protection of privacy and anonymity on the networks. Many scholars and decision makers have discussed appropriate methods to offer protection to privacy, especially in electronic transactions and to ensure the protection of individual identity. Furthermore, international organizations have also been active in developing principles to govern anonymity and privacy issues. As a result, various government policies and laws, industry self-regulation, and private contract-based approaches have been suggested as appropriate ways to ensure the protection of Internet users.

Anonymity

Anonymity as a mechanism, is used to negotiate relationships, especially between people and independent institutions, has been defined in different ways. For instance, the traditional concept of anonymity was often against public and private institutions with the ability and power. Hence, the primary focus was linked restrictions of access to an individual that was expected to ameliorate the power balance between foreign institutions and individuals. Apparently, with the development of new technologies, which broadened the diversity with which the collectors and users of personal information, there have been efforts set to negotiate the individual’s ties with the external environment through offering the person with control over information concerning him or her. In the interactive network, the anonymity of users cannot be efficiently dealt with by using current legal and technological measures. Under such circumstances, what factors could ensure a person’s autonomy and governance in a relationship with such external forces?

The Challenge to the Right to be Autonomous

The greatest difficulty for individuals who becomes primary objects of tracking or surveillance in today’s technological environment is that users’ identities have become increased exposed to other people and systems, while the subjects or racking and their activities have become less identifiable. The primary impetus for the power balance between the issues of surveillance and the objects used in tracking in the network is the difference in the level of identifiability. With this in mind, the right not to be identified seems to reflect the notion of the users within the networked environment accurately. On the same note, the idea appears more complicated as the issue is the restrictions caused by some unknown and unidentifiable future use of the personal data and identity.

Conclusion

The right to anonymity has been critical in maintaining people’s autonomy, dignity, and self-governance concerning the presence of powerful government agencies and subsequent sociocultural changes. These factors have greatly influenced the relative importance of being anonymous and actively seeking control.

References

Dershowitz, A., M. (2001). Why Fear National ID Cards.The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/13/opinion/why-fear-national-id-cards.html

Peng, Kun. (2014) Anonymous Communication Networks: Protecting Privacy on the Web. CRC Press.