The EU introduced the Data Retention Directive in 2006; the main reason for the introduction was that it could be used as a tool in the fight against terrorism. On the 4th of April this year the Norwegian parliament came to an agreement on including the controversial EU Data Retention Directive in Norwegian law. All telecommunication and internet traffic, extensive numbers of traffic and location data, will be stored for six months. Despite this introduction it will, according to various experts,still be easy for criminals to avoid detection through fairly simple means. It leaves us with the simple, but fundamental question; where do we draw the line for state control of law-abiding citizens?
The lists of both pros and cons are endless and have been discussed in newspapers, on the internet and in schools and at workplaces for some time. It is not that I do not believe in fighting serious crime. But I do believe that we all should be able to keep our autonomy. Introducing the Data Retention Directive to Norwegian law interferes with the democratic legal principle that says everyone is innocent until proven guilty. I am afraid it has now, somehow, turned the other way around.
Considering the time and age we live in, the digital social media is inextricably linked to children and young people's everyday life. They handle various channels and media with a limitless ability and spend most of their days in traceable digital environments. Sir Tim Berners-Lee, who has been credited with creating the World Wide Web, compared access to the Internet with access to water. Berners-Lee admitted that access to water is obviously a more fundamental right because humans cannot survive without it. But today, anyone who lacks Internet access will fall behind their more connected peers, losing in the process.
Digital natives frequently change their profiles, express or self-promote on a number of sites, create groups for different interests, they build networks and relationships the same way, post, tag, and participate in the different groups. To miss or not be present in these networks is like missing out on life itself. Norwegian children are major consumers of the internet and nearly all children aged13 and over are surfing the internet several times a day. I believe we are in for a great change in the way we communicate. I believe we are about to change our society, from being one based on trust, to one being based on control. Will this not change the way we communicate and act? Will this not change the way we trust each other, even people we hardly know, in the sense that we will not feel free to express ourselves and want to share and collaborate?
Being a digital immigrant I can step back in time and compare the computer with the much forgotten letterbox. Would I appreciate someone controlling all the post that went in to my letterbox? Who sent it, from where and when it was sent, when it arrived and when I picked it up, when I opened it or if I just threw it away immediately`? Couldn’t someone on the grounds of that information, make up a story about me and pass on information about me believing it to be true, only based on their own conviction? We are all human beings and stereotyping is a way of relating to world around us. This will be true for the persons given the power to decide who and what crime that goes on the “suspect list” or not. It is reprehensible that there has not been given proper answers to the risk of misuse; what happens when data gets in to the wrong hands.
It is a fact that the internet allows digital natives and digital immigrants to easily and quickly access and exchange information on a worldwide basis. We have the whole world at our feet. This gives digital natives of today the opportunity to get to know people from all over the world. And whether we like it or not, even people from countries and places that have a bad international reputation. We as law-abiding citizens should be able to communicate in private contexts with people from such countries, or that background, without worrying about; that these conversations may be used against us in future. It reminds me; sadly enough, of George Orwell’s book 1984. There are many Big brothers watching all of us.
Hello. I think this was a well written blog post. I don`t agree with you though. Or, in a way I do. We all are innocent until the contrary is proved. But I don`t have anything to hide. And Ok, they can find out who I called 4 month ago, but they don`t know what we were talking about. And if this directive can help against terror and crime, I think that is a good thing. I hope it is Ok that I link your page to mine:-)
SvarSlett@Inger but if you allow them to keep track of who you call and when you do it what will the next step be? Will you allow them to put videocameras in your house so they can look at what you are doing ? Biggest problem with the DLD is that it's invicible, you dont look, or feel anything when they store all that data about you. But if they put videocameras in your house then you woul feel like someone is spying on you. And that doesnt feel right. But, it's still just gathering information about you.
SvarSlettThen the next step will be to install GPS in your car so the government knows where you are 24 hours a day. Are you still ok with that? After all you are doing nothing wrong and they are just gathering information about you.
But in the end, you will have no privacy, cause someone knows where you have been, what you did, who you talked to, when you did it.
This destroys our rights and posibilties to be free human beings.
And a quick search on the net shows you really how easy it is to avoid many ways of being controlled. Let's not assume that criminals and terrorists won't try to hide. so, in the end, all they will to is gather alot of privat information about you and me. Because, as you put it. we are doing nothing wrong so we don't have to hide. But doing nothing wrong isn't the same as saying it's ok for the whole world to know everything about me.
@ Inger Tora, Thank you for commenting on my post. Sorry that it took so long for me to answer you. Been too busy.... I think we just have to agree on disagreeing :-)But I do not think disagreeing always is a bad thing. We share our opinions, which enlightens us, and makes us consider someone else's thoughts and opinions. Even if we disagree; we stop and think and we learn something new.Thank you for linking my blog to yours,I hope you do not mind me linking yours to mine ?
SvarSlett@ lars,I could not agree more with you on the thought that even if I do nothing "wrong", just communicating will allow someone to follow my every step.I think you make a good and truthful, but at the same time, quite scary picture of the possible consequences.