Abstract:Data mining and collecting is increasingly becoming a common practice, in the name of monetization of personal data, progression of national security measures, and politically fueled democratic interferences. Millions of users’ data is constantly being sorted, manipulated, and sold, often without conscientious consent of the consumer. While this practice can result in greater convenience from an innocent consumer level, the vulnerabilities to national privacy and the cyberspace create dangerous territory. The article entitled describes the triangulation of security, monetization, and politicizing in terms of data collection through three primary case studies: Cambridge Analytica and the Facebook scandal during the 2016 United States presidential election, Apple v. FBI, and Edward Snowden and the NSA surveillance activities. It explores how data harvesting and subsequent monetization is embedded in virtually every aspect of our culture and develops understanding of how corporate social responsibility calls for companies to respect and maintain transparency with consumer interests. Current technology policies leaves open spaces for violation both internally and internationally, and why this constitutes certain offensive measures. Future data and privacy legislation, with strong consideration to the varying social contexts, resources, and current international relations. This is done under the underlying assumption that data is an irreplaceable factor in our global progression and is irrevocably embedded into our society. Over-regulation or under-regulation of big tech may lead to negative repercussions to our security or individual privacy rights. These ideas are becoming increasingly understood by the general public and are considered worthy of concern after seeing glimpses of the depth of surveillance and information held by either the government or corporations. While there are intense emotions and opinions on the matter, my article takes an objective and well-rounded perspective to address the interlocking complexities of individual freedoms, need for international cyberspace protection, and continued profitability of data. The idea of personal data and information being manipulated and used against citizens for financial or political agendas is rightfully horrifying the public; my article therefore takes into account these concerns while suggesting further navigating the political, legal, and social process in alignment with the ever-growing power of big data.

Private interests count too: commentary on "Science, democracy, and the right to research"

Who Should Be Driving US Science Policy?

Basic science is not just a foundation

Rebalancing commercial and public interests in prioritizing biomedical, social and environmental aspects of health through defining and managing conflicts of interest

Confidentiality, public interest, and the human right to science: when can confidential information be used for the benefit of the wider community?

Assessing the reliability and credibility of industry science and scientists

Prosocial motives underlie scientific censorship by scientists: A perspective and research agenda

Scientists’ Political Behaviors Are Not Driven by Individual-Level Government Benefits

The public-private research ecosystem in the genome editing era

An Overview of Science,Democracy and Freedom

Citizen science or scientific citizenship? Disentangling the uses of public engagement rhetoric in national research initiatives

Fragile science

Protect the safety of researchers

Data Profiteering: Corporate Social Responsibility and Privacy Law Lost in Data Monetization and National Security

The Question of the Origins of COVID-19 and the Ends of Science

Democratising Food Safety: Why We Need to Look Beyond Government Regulation and Provide a Citizen Right of Action

Pushing partnerships: corporate influence on research and policy via the International Life Sciences Institute

When does science persuade (or not persuade) in high‐conflict policy contexts?

Ethics and the Responsible Conduct of Research in the Chemical Community: The Unique Role and Challenges of the News Media

Science is neither red nor blue

How scientists should disagree