While the Constitution does not explicitly grant the right of privacy, the fourth amendment comes close enough, defining unreasonable searches and seizures and probable cause. The right of privacy has also been strongly protected in the 1965 case Griswold v. Connecticut. In his essay â€œWhy Privacy Matters,â€ Jeffrey Rosen not only stresses the importance of privacy, but illustrates how society as a whole voluntarily surrenders much of its privacy on a daily basis.
In this essay, Rosen defines privacy as â€œthe ability to control the conditions under which personal information is disclosed to others.â€œ As technology advances, we as a people cannot help but lose a sense of privacy. Rosen points out the use of internet background checks and the widespread performance of them in all sorts of situations, namely when dealing with prospective romantic partners. One of Rosenâ€™s main arguments in his essay is that because so much information about a person is available, that information can be and is often easily misconstrued and misrepresented. I agree with most of the points that Rosen makes, but on the other hand, there isnâ€™t much the government can do about the wealth of information available on the internet. Furthermore, it is common knowledge that internet activity is recorded and easily traced. Society is going to misinterpret whatever it possibly can, regardless of if the information is considered private in nature.
It has been longstanding tradition for the press to emphasize digging up dirt on famous public figures, whether it is finding something unlawful or shameful in a politicianâ€™s past or pointing out which movie star is having an affair with another. The press has and will always try to make every aspect of public figuresâ€™ lives public, much to the delight of society. Society thrives off this, and it should be expected by everyone who makes the choice to become a public figure.