Whether governments should be allowed access to citizen’s phone or if this is a violation of privacy is a debatable topic. Those who support access believe that safety is the number one priority, while those opposed believe this is an invasion of our privacy. Although I agree that there could potential be so risks attached, in my opinion the benefits far outweigh the risks.
Those who are against government access without permission are of the opinion that this could potential lead to risks such as invasion of our rights as well as blackmail. The potential to be hacked by outsiders is a major concern, which deters them from supporting government access. A recent study by Harvard found a staggering 85% of those opposed to phones being monitor where scared that their private life could potentially be leaked, with a further 10% concerned about the risk of blackmail if data ended up in the wrong hands.
Whilst those in favour of calls and texts being monitored, argue that safety is our number one priority. The potential for terrorist acts as well as violent crimes, leads them to believe that in order to protect civilians it is imperative that governments have easy access to our mobile history. Those supporting this believe that it is of the highest importance to flag an undesirable event, such as potential bully or kidnappings, accessibility is the number one preventative measure that we can take. Research conducted by the University of Leeds found that one of the biggest stresses communities faced was a terror attack. Further, 63% of those invited to the discussion felt confident that potential threats could be curbed by the monitoring of devices through government facilities.
In conclusion, whilst those opposed to monitoring of devices due to hacking and blackmail make a strong case, in my opinion the opportunity to use our data information to prevent serious offences and protect lives far out-weighs the risks.