According would build a society which remains in

According to the The Journal (Duffy, n. d.), the origin ofthe phrase is unclear but it is most famously associated with Nazi Minister ofPropaganda Joseph Goebbels, who supposedly used it in 1933. Solove (2011), claims that privacy is too complex a conceptthat it is impossible to reduce it to one simple idea. Therefore “ The nothingto hide” argument hailed by the government and the cooperate advocates, for me, is a naive attempt to appease people and turn down voices that have raisedconcerns about individual and mass privacy right issues. It violates the basicsocial right to choose what and with whom you want to share yourself and yourlife with.  In doing so, both thegovernment and cooperate sector has made people more paranoid about society. The question also arises whether “ The nothing to hide” argument assumes that everyone is looked upon as a prospectus criminal orwrongdoer? If so, then it would build a society which remains in constantanxiety of being watched, assessed and analyzed.

We are already living in asociety rich with conspiracy theories, this will further shape unhealthy relationshipsand associations which would presume an individual, a group or a cooperate ofwrong doing and look upon it with distrust at the slightest hint of keepingsomething from the other.  In other wordsthe “ nothing to hide” argument opposes itself, by making surveillance, whethergovernment or cooperate, an indiscriminate tool to gather information andmonitor without any reasonable suspicion. Thus agreeing with Emilio Mordini’sview that the “ nothing to hide” argument “ is inherently paradoxical.” Another important issue to ponder upon of such an argumentis of the interpretation and analysis of the information, it processing andstorage and the use. It doesn’t matter how harmless or innocuous, the datacollected is, what matters is how it is used and who has access to it.

As towant  privacy, doesn’t not necessarilymean you want to hide something. It only asserts the notion of free will andfreedom of speech. With ” Nothing to hide” we will start to “ hide” our true selves, opinions and would avoid saying or doing anything debatable, in fear it mightget misconstrued. If the issues is of protection and security then shouldn’t,” Nothing to hide” argument work both ways? Shouldn’t there be transparency at both sides?  The governments, the cooperates and the commonpublic all have the right to enjoy this privilege.