David Yancey 1

David T. Yancey
Mrs. McGuire
American Studies
13 October 2003
The Right to Privacy
E-mail and instant messaging surveillance is a pervasively controversial issue.
Should the Government have the right to read peoples private emails and instant
messages? There are many different opinions on this subject. My opinion is that if a
person is not suspected of criminal or other activity that may endanger the health or
safety of others, the government should not be have access to his electronic
communications.
Once an email leaves ones computer, it travels from the originating host
computer to the destination of the mail. It passes through several other hosts on its way.
Administrators of these other hosts can easily look into the mail. If a piece of mail
bounces because it cant reach its intended computer destination, a copy is made of the
message and the originating host can read the addresses and the contents of the email.
Not only can these hosts read the mail, employers can read the mail sent on company
computers, and it can be seized by law enforcement officials. Employers read
employees emails for two main reasons: to make sure the workers are being productive,
and to ensure the safety of the company. There are many potentially positive uses of
email monitoring, but there is a dark side to email surveillance that could result in
serious erosion or privacy rights.

David Yancey 2
Last year, over 900 million instant messages were sent a day and it has been
projected that by 2004, people will send over seven billion messages a day. Instant
messaging is another method of communication that is easily monitored by parents,
employers, or law enforcement agencies. From the perspective of the employee or user
of the instant message program, it is regarded as a private way to communicate using
online technology. Since you have to type in a password to access to your screen
name, it helps to reassure the user that the messages are not readily accessible by others.
Much like emails, the monitoring of instant messages can be affective in ensuring the
safety of businesses and families, however, the ability of employers or other officials to
read peoples messages can be easily abused.
The U.S.A. Patriot Act was enacted after the attacks on September 11, 2001, and
gives the government more authority to track telephone and email communications and
eavesdrop on them. Views on this topic vary widely due to its sensitive nature. My view
is that the act permits the government investigators too much discretion. It even allows
the federal government to detain non- U.S. citizens suspected of terrorist activity for up to
seven days without specific charges. This act constitutes a form of spying but is
defended as necessary for national security.
I think that it is good for employers and government agencies to monitor email
and text messaging conversations but only when coupled with adequate legal protection.
The U.S.A. Patriot Act can help keep us safe, but we must be ever vigilant to guard
against unacceptable invasion of our privacy.

David Yancey 3