Privacy and Surveillance
Do employers have the right to know what their employees do when they are not working? Why or why not?
Employers do not have the right to know what their employees do when they are not working. I knew I agreed to this but I did not want to come up with reasons based on things like how much an employee drinks or goes to nightclubs. The first thing I came up with is if you are searching for another job. Nobody would argue that searching for a different position in your own time was unethical. But your boss might not take it very well if he finds out you are meeting with a potential new employer on a social networking site. Another issue I thought about a lot is sexuality and gender identity. A workplace does not have a right to what happens in someone’s bedroom or to know that someone has had a sex change if they do not what to disclose it.
Can these cases with professional athletes (Sanderson, 2009) can be applied to (or compared with) other types of employees — such as lawyers, teachers, advertising sales reps, etc. Why or why not?
At first I thought that this case with the professional athletes was very different from any other types of employees. Athletes are constantly being interviewed, recorded, or photographed. Their actions are more closely looked at and seen as a part of the public domain. But now we have facebook. Much of our life, no matter how insignificant, is being recorded. An interesting article about this subject is “Israel Uses Facebook to Catch Female Draft Dodgers”. The only difference is that most of the potentially embarassing or even illegal things we post on facebook are not profitable for others.
Should people be concerned about the location tracking capabilities discussed by Abe (2009)? Do these technologies have negative aspects?
The location tracking capabiltiies are a serious concern for me. When FourSquare was first introduced I was really disturbed. A lot of friends were announcing their whereabouts using FourSquare posted to Twitter and it seemed like a perfect opportunity for a stalker. This guide tells you to avoid “checking in” at places where you are particularly at risk – home, your bank, work, your child’s school, and the doctor’s office are all mentioned. It also mentions that location tracking could be the perfect guide for burglars to come in and rob you without interruption.
Does Abe’s argument about hospitality make sense to you in the context of online surveillance? Why or why not?
I was a bit confused about the concept of hospitality that Abe used. The connection is tenuous at best. I do not know if you can strengthen your argument by applying a scenario in which even Derrida admits is pretty much impossible. This just might be me but it always raises a red flag in my mind when someone tries to connect an aporia of Derrida to a real life situation. I know Derrida is a very hot subject to talk about and I wonder if making the connection is more of a chance to show off some knowledge of philosophy rather than a thoughtful nuanced reading of Derrida connected to the concept of online surveillance.
I also found this story about a banker getting fired for boasting about her severance package.