There are many different opinions on privacy in social media. Some people believe that everything on social media should be private in the sense that what you put on a site open for posting, you should not be held liable for their actions. And then there are some people that think you should be held liable for what you put on social media sites. A recent case supports both sides of the issue, Apple vs. the FBI. In this case the FBI wanted to investigate an iPhone that was linked to a terrorist attack in San Bernardino this shooting occurred on December 2nd, 2015. The outcome of the attacks were 16 people dead, including the shooters. One of the shooters, Rizwan Farook, had an iPhone 5c and used it to store documents that could have been linked to a terrorist group. When the FBI requested the phone’s data, Apple denied their request because it would infringe on the right of privacy for other iPhones, “Do we compromise security now for the expediency of easy investigation or do we preserve everyone’s security at the possible risk that someone who has been secured is a bad guy?” Even if Apple tried to access your files, they couldn’t. Their security is so advanced, they cannot access the files on any apple device. “Today, even Apple doesn’t have the key to information stored only on your device, and couldn’t look at it even if compelled by law.” Apple’s argument is that if they hand over the evidence, they could compromise every iPhone in use.
Why would a company not comply with the investigation of a terrorist attack? It doesn’t make any sense. Sure Apple has to insure the privacy of every user of their product, but they should have tried to access the files of the shooter and hand it over. I don’t agree with the stance of Apple but I also understand completely. The First amendment of the United States Constitution states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” The shooters actions and words were in clear violation of present danger and imminent lawless actions under the restrictions of the first amendment. The fourth amendment applies to this situation better because the fourth amendment is the assurement of your privacy as a whole, so if we were arguing the rights of others privacy were being infringed upon you could declare the FBI’s actions tyrannical because they were using their powers to access documents that are meant to be private.