Privacy?

What is privacy? What are our individual rights to privacy? Is eavesdropping on a conversation in the mall a violation of privacy? Or is watching someone on the bus? In a broad view of privacy, anytime someone looks at or listens to someone else, that person's privacy is being violated. But, as Judith Thomson discusses the rights to privacy in her article, she mentions that "There are many, many things we ought not to do to people, things such that if we do them to a person, we act badly, but which are not such that to do them is to violate a right of his" (297). Therefore, even though we shouldn't eavesdrop and stare at people, it is not a violation of their privacy. The line between what is a violation and what is not is very cloudy. Thomson presents an idea of privacy; that we do not use any extra technology to enhance our own abilities or to gain access to a something that we otherwise wouldn't have access too. An example Thomson discusses is that if you are walking by a house and here someone talking through their window, you are not violating their privacy, but if the windows are closed and you use a sound amplifier to hear what the person is saying, you are violating their right to privacy. Placing a camera in your window and pointing it into your neighbour's window is creepy and morally wrong, but it is not a violation of privacy because we have the right to look out our window and into another persons window. But, if we place a camera in our neighbour's home, two inches to the right of the window, we are violating their privacy.

What about pictures in public? There are several internet sites devoted to shots from under a girl's skirt, so is this a violation of privacy? Thomson goes on to state that anyone who appears in public waives their right to not be photographed, but at the same time, you have the right not to be bothered in public. So, again, the line is blurred. If you are walking up a flight of stairs and someone sees your underwear, is that a violation of privacy? What if that person takes a picture of it, is that a violation? Although it is very perverted and morally wrong, it is not a violation of privacy, because the person is appearing in public and they have no right to tell someone where to look and where not to look. They chose to wear a skirt, knowing that at some angles, people can see their underwear. Celebrities have it the worst when it comes to privacy. They always have to make sure they are wearing clothes that are not too revealing and in some cases, make sure they are wearing underwear. Britney Spears' every move out in public is captured by paparazzi. So, when she steps out of a vehicle and the underneath of her skirt is exposed, only to yield that she is not wearing any underwear, is that a violation of privacy? Again, although it is morally wrong and perverted, it is not a violation of privacy. Britney Spears herself even apologized for the photo, saying she should have been wearing underwear. Therefore, I think people, especially celebrities, are getting used to always being watched or heard, so they just have to be careful what they do. It has come to the point where, if someone takes a naked picture of us while we are swimming in the lake at our secluded cottage and plasters it all over the tabloids, it is our fault for not wearing any clothes. But what is more morally wrong, our decision to swim naked in a secluded area, where no one but our friends and family are around, or a photographers decision to take a picture of us naked? We are living in a modern day panopticon and we never know when someone is listening to or watching us.