Argument #1: People
have a right to their own privacy, even from the creators of the
media.
"Some courts have concluded that individuals have ‘‘a
reasonable expectation of privacy to [their] private Facebook
information and messages.’’"(Murphy and Fontecilla 4).
" We all have a constitutional right to privacy. For example,
the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects
" [t] he right of the people to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and
seizures....""(Goodfellow 1).
Argument #2: Online evidence can be easily lost
While Facebook allows one to download all of a users data,
Twitter does not and requires a third party to assist, creating
an entirely extra step.(DiBianca 1).
It is possible for a user to delete any evidence they have on
social media at any time if they access to their account,
happening in two separate court cases(DiBianca 1-2).
Sources:
DiBianca,
Margaret (Molly).
“Discovery and Preservation of Social Media Evidence.” Business Law Today, 2014, pp. 1–4., Type:
Scholarly,Database: JSTOR
Goodfellow,
Simon R. “Social
Media as Evidence: Navigating the Limits of Privacy.” Family Advocate, vol. 37, no. 4, 2015, pp. 32–34., Type:
Scholarly,Database: JSTOR
Murphy,
Justin P, and Adrian Fontecilla. “Social Media Evidence in
Criminal
Proceedings: An Uncertain Frontier.” Bloomberg
BNA, Digital Discovery & e-Evidence, 17 Jan. 2013,
Republished on https://www.crowell.com/
Type: Trade, Bias: Owned by a Presidential Candidate