Information policy

Information Policy Government’s Surveillance of Websites In the contemporary past, there have been increased Government initiatives aimed at preventing websites from releasing highly controversial and damning information to the public. Despite availing more information on highly important topics to the public, these exposé cannot be justified as significantly contributing to the general well-being of the public and keeping the public informed. Indeed, given the catastrophic impacts that the release of sensitive information by websites can have, it is worth sacrificing ones freedom of expression to prevent the leakage of confidential information, not meant for the public. Additionally, the release of sensitive information by websites has serious harm than good.
Websites such as WikiLeaks expose highly sensitive information that was not availed to the public previously. The release of documents detailing killings of unreported Afghan civilians by WikiLeaks website. Equally, the release of records showing NATO’s concerns that the intelligence agency of Pakistan’s ISI is assisting Taliban in Afghanistan can lead to adverse political effects. It is clear that the majority of civilian do not pay attention to these released information; instead, terrorist groups and other governments use this information to inflict pain on civilians. Further, NSA’s bulk surveillance programs curb terrorism. Despite Section 215 of the U. S. Telephone Record’s program only disrupting one terror plot in the United States, we cannot rule its efforts since this helped prevent loss of life in some part of the world. Finally, the release of controversial documents like NSA documents by Edward Snowden usually end up being reported unresponsively by journalists thus threatening the security of the globe (Mueller, 2010).
Facebook’s Interne. org Project
The benefits of free, limited internet access for people who previously had no internet connection cannot measure the availability of open, unregulated internet access for a limited few in that society. The provision of free, limited internet access to people violates their freedom by restricting the contents that they can view. The fact that the contents that these people view are restricted, overshadows the benefits associated with the free, limited internet access provided to them. Availability of open, unregulated internet access for a limited few is beneficial. These enable the few people to access freely all the information they want that they can pass to the larger society lacking internet access.
Facebook’s Internet. org project may affect people’s freedom of expression on the internet by violating their privacy and security, and principles of net neutrality (Hodson, 2014). Hodson (2014) adds that the projects might restrict the world’s poorest people to access only a narrow set of insecure services and websites. Further, the project compromises the freedom of equality of opportunity and expression by allowing service providers to choose the Internet services that will be privileged over others. The key beneficiaries of Facebook’s decision to limit access to approximately thirty companies are the technology firms that collaborate with Facebook in this course. Lastly, if Facebook chooses the pages to be available on Internet. org, the people whose freedom of expression within the system will be significantly affected in the public sphere are the local mobile providers.
References
Hodson, H. (2014). Facebooks biggest secret. New Scientist, 223(2980), 22. Doi: 10. 1016/s0262-4079(14)61484-6
Mueller, M. (2010). Networks and States. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.