The Web Means the End of Forgetting
By Jeffrey Rosen
New York Times Magazine
21 July 2010
Four years ago, Stacy Snyder, then a 25-year-old teacher in training at Conestoga Valley High School in Lancaster, Pa., posted a photo on her MySpace page that showed her at a party wearing a pirate hat and drinking from a plastic cup, with the caption â€œDrunken Pirate.â€ After discovering the page, her supervisor at the high school told her the photo was â€œunprofessional,â€ and the dean of Millersville University School of Education, where Snyder was enrolled, said she was promoting drinking in virtual view of her under-age students. As a result, days before Snyderâ€™s scheduled graduation, the university denied her a teaching degree. Snyder sued, arguing that the university had violated her First Amendment rights by penalizing her for her (perfectly legal) after-hours behavior. But in 2008, a federal district judge rejected the claim, saying that because Snyder was a public employee whose photo didnâ€™t relate to matters of public concern, her â€œDrunken Pirateâ€ post was not protected speech.
When historians of the future look back on the perils of the early digital age, Stacy Snyder may well be an icon. The problem she faced is only one example of a challenge that, in big and small ways, is confronting millions of people around the globe: how best to live our lives in a world where the Internet records everything and forgets nothing â€” where every online photo, status update, Twitter post and blog entry by and about us can be stored forever. With Web sites like LOL Facebook Moments, which collects and shares embarrassing personal revelations from Facebook users, ill-advised photos and online chatter are coming back to haunt people months or years after the fact. Examples are proliferating daily: there was the 16-year-old British girl who was fired from her office job for complaining on Facebook, â€œIâ€™m so totally bored!!â€; there was the 66-year-old Canadian psychotherapist who tried to enter the United States but was turned away at the border â€” and barred permanently from visiting the country â€” after a border guardâ€™s Internet search found that the therapist had written an article in a philosophy journal describing his experiments 30 years ago with L.S.D.
According to a recent survey by Microsoft, 75 percent of U.S. recruiters and human-resource professionals report that their companies require them to do online research about candidates, and many use a range of sites when scrutinizing applicants â€” including search engines, social-networking sites, photo- and video-sharing sites, personal Web sites and blogs, Twitter and online-gaming sites. Seventy percent of U.S. recruiters report that they have rejected candidates because of information found online, like photos and discussion-board conversations and membership in controversial groups.
Technological advances, of course, have often presented new threats to privacy. In 1890, in perhaps the most famous article on privacy ever written, Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis complained that because of new technology â€” like the Kodakcamera and the tabloid press â€” â€œgossip is no longer the resource of the idle and of the vicious but has become a trade.â€ But the mild society gossip of the Gilded Age pales before the volume of revelations contained in the photos, video and chatter on social-media sites and elsewhere across the Internet. Facebook, which surpassed MySpace in 2008 as the largest social-networking site, now has nearly 500 million members, or 22 percent of all Internet users, who spend more than 500 billion minutes a month on the site. Facebook users share more than 25 billion pieces of content each month (including news stories, blog posts and photos), and the average user creates 70 pieces of content a month. There are more than 100 million registered Twitter users, and the Library of Congressrecently announced that it will be acquiring â€” and permanently storing â€” the entire archive of public Twitter posts since 2006.
In Brandeisâ€™s day â€” and until recently, in ours â€” you had to be a celebrity to be gossiped about in public: today all of us are learning to expect the scrutiny that used to be reserved for the famous and the infamous. A 26-year-old Manhattan woman told The New York Times that she was afraid of being tagged in online photos because it might reveal that she wears only two outfits when out on the town â€” a Lynyrd Skynyrd T-shirt or a basic black dress. â€œYou have movie-star issues,â€ she said, â€œand youâ€™re just a person.â€
Weâ€™ve known for years that the Web allows for unprecedented voyeurism, exhibitionism and inadvertent indiscretion, but we are only beginning to understand the costs of an age in which so much of what we say, and of what others say about us, goes into our permanent â€” and public â€” digital files. The fact that the Internet never seems to forget is threatening, at an almost existential level, our ability to control our identities; to preserve the option of reinventing ourselves and starting anew; to overcome our checkered pasts.
In a recent book, â€œDelete: The Virtue of Forgetting in the Digital Age,â€ the cyberscholar Viktor Mayer-SchÃ¶nberger cites Stacy Snyderâ€™s case as a reminder of the importance of â€œsocietal forgetting.â€ By â€œerasing external memories,â€ he says in the book, â€œour society accepts that human beings evolve over time, that we have the capacity to learn from past experiences and adjust our behavior.â€ In traditional societies, where missteps are observed but not necessarily recorded, the limits of human memory ensure that peopleâ€™s sins are eventually forgotten. By contrast, Mayer-SchÃ¶nberger notes, a society in which everything is recorded â€œwill forever tether us to all our past actions, making it impossible, in practice, to escape them.â€ He concludes that â€œwithout some form of forgetting, forgiving becomes a difficult undertaking.â€
Itâ€™s often said that we live in a permissive era, one with infinite second chances. But the truth is that for a great many people, the permanent memory bank of the Web increasingly means there are no second chances â€” no opportunities to escape a scarlet letter in your digital past. Now the worst thing youâ€™ve done is often the first thing everyone knows about you.
Answer the following using the three types of evidence: anecdote regarding example, statistics and appeal to authority.
Using Jeffrey Rosenâ€™s article: â€œThe Web Means the End of Forgettingâ€,
-Outline the evidence that Rosen uses to support each claim.
-For each piece of evidence, you should (a) identify the type of evidence, (b) briefly describe it, and (c) evaluate it (how well does it support the claim?).
-Include 2 main pieces of evidence for each claim. That means you will have a total of 4 pieces of evidence. Include one of each type of evidence. Some evidence may be applicable for both claimsâ€”but you should use each piece only once.
[Approximate number of words for this assignment: 350 â€“ 700]
1.The existence of the Internet makes it nearly impossible for people to escape their past.
2.The inability to escape the past should be characterized as a societal problem.