Summary
According to a report, https://transparency.twitter.com/overview twitter acclaims that the United States law-enforcement does not obtain a search warrant or establish probable cause from a judge before they seek information about a Twitter user. Most of the requests for information from Twitter come from the United States and the company accepts their requests for information more than half the time. Japan, Brazil, Britain and France have the most data requests from outside the United States. Earlier in February, “a French court ordered the company to disclose the identity of the authors of Twitter posts that were racist and anti-Semitic – and in violation of French law”. Twitter is still considering options towards the French case. Twitter is more likely to disclose information to foreign governments if they request the information through a United States court. These requests for information reflect how popular Twitter data can be for law-enforcement agencies all over the world. Millions of people use Twitter to express their feelings against political issues, announce protest events and share short videos.
The same report shows that most requests from United States government agencies included no more than a subpoena, which takes little effort to show proof. “The company said that under federal law, the government can request basic information using a subpoena, including the e-mail address associated with an account and an Internet Protocol address.” Only 19 percent of the information requests from this report came with a search warrant.
Reason for choosing this article
This article seemed interesting because it has law and ethics in it. Everyone is supposed to follow the law, especially law-enforcement agencies. However, this article explains how they are finding a way to get their information without legal documentation. It seems almost hypocritical that a LAW agency isn’t completely following the law. The agencies are capable of finding a way around the law to obtain the information needed in a case.
Personal and Social Values at stake and ethical implications
United States law-enforcement agencies are causing their work ethic to be at stake when they don’t follow legal guidelines in requesting information from Twitter. Other countries attempt the same thing and don’t succeed as often. The government might eventually see this distinction, possibly during a case in court. If the opposing side in court requests they display their search warrant for their request in seeking information from Twitter, and they can’t supply this, then they could get in trouble.
Users’ freedom of speech is at stake when they decide to post something controversial on Twitter. When users post things on Twitter, they should be safe in writing whatever they want without fear of consequences. However, the United States is using this information against them in court. It may not be ethical for them to use this information against them because Twitter allows people to post pretty much whatever they would like, since there is freedom of speech.
It is unfortunate that Twitter users need to be careful what they write about online because it could be used against them, even if it is not legally obtained. Hopefully Twitter users realize that “the numbers are a signal of how attractive Twitter data can be for law-enforcement agencies worldwide.” This changes Twitter users’ responsibility when micro blogging online. They should realize now that they are responsible for whatever they post online and could be used against them.
Credibility of its sources
Somini Sengupta wrote this article for the Bits blog section of the New York Times. The New York Times is a credible source. It is a daily newspaper and online international news site. The newspaper was established in 1851, has won 108 Pulitzer prizes and is the largest newspaper company in the United States.
According to a report, https://transparency.twitter.com/overview twitter acclaims that the United States law-enforcement does not obtain a search warrant or establish probable cause from a judge before they seek information about a Twitter user. Most of the requests for information from Twitter come from the United States and the company accepts their requests for information more than half the time. Japan, Brazil, Britain and France have the most data requests from outside the United States. Earlier in February, “a French court ordered the company to disclose the identity of the authors of Twitter posts that were racist and anti-Semitic – and in violation of French law”. Twitter is still considering options towards the French case. Twitter is more likely to disclose information to foreign governments if they request the information through a United States court. These requests for information reflect how popular Twitter data can be for law-enforcement agencies all over the world. Millions of people use Twitter to express their feelings against political issues, announce protest events and share short videos.
The same report shows that most requests from United States government agencies included no more than a subpoena, which takes little effort to show proof. “The company said that under federal law, the government can request basic information using a subpoena, including the e-mail address associated with an account and an Internet Protocol address.” Only 19 percent of the information requests from this report came with a search warrant.
Reason for choosing this article
This article seemed interesting because it has law and ethics in it. Everyone is supposed to follow the law, especially law-enforcement agencies. However, this article explains how they are finding a way to get their information without legal documentation. It seems almost hypocritical that a LAW agency isn’t completely following the law. The agencies are capable of finding a way around the law to obtain the information needed in a case.
Personal and Social Values at stake and ethical implications
United States law-enforcement agencies are causing their work ethic to be at stake when they don’t follow legal guidelines in requesting information from Twitter. Other countries attempt the same thing and don’t succeed as often. The government might eventually see this distinction, possibly during a case in court. If the opposing side in court requests they display their search warrant for their request in seeking information from Twitter, and they can’t supply this, then they could get in trouble.
Users’ freedom of speech is at stake when they decide to post something controversial on Twitter. When users post things on Twitter, they should be safe in writing whatever they want without fear of consequences. However, the United States is using this information against them in court. It may not be ethical for them to use this information against them because Twitter allows people to post pretty much whatever they would like, since there is freedom of speech.
It is unfortunate that Twitter users need to be careful what they write about online because it could be used against them, even if it is not legally obtained. Hopefully Twitter users realize that “the numbers are a signal of how attractive Twitter data can be for law-enforcement agencies worldwide.” This changes Twitter users’ responsibility when micro blogging online. They should realize now that they are responsible for whatever they post online and could be used against them.
Credibility of its sources
Somini Sengupta wrote this article for the Bits blog section of the New York Times. The New York Times is a credible source. It is a daily newspaper and online international news site. The newspaper was established in 1851, has won 108 Pulitzer prizes and is the largest newspaper company in the United States.