In an era where everything is constantly becoming more intertwined with technology, the rituals of our daily lives follow this very trend. Whether it is something as simple as online banking or as complex as using technology as a mechanism to resist and express one's beliefs, the modern era of technology is continuing to expand society's possibilities. One expanded possibility has become the application of Hacktivism, the use of computer hacking as a means of protest to promote political ends. Opposite to historical agitational movements mediums of communication, but similar in their overarching goal to produce change, Hacktivism seeks to inform the public by disseminating secrets from governmental, corporate, and other private sources. One such hypothetical Hacktivist group, "Total News Today," consisting of highly trained, dedicated computer hackers have demonstrated their controversial tactics in a multitude of electronic publishing, from CIA waterboarding evidence to corporate layoff plans and everything in between. The questions that arise from this new modern age of political protests are endless, but there are several that should be considered. Are these political strategies a positive or negative way to provide valuable information to the public? Are they good for a democratic society, or harmful to one? Does this advanced use of technological capabilities surpass the threshold of acceptable expression? Although it is quite obvious that some may view Hacktivism as a form of social disobedience and surpassing the limits of freedom of speech, especially governmental and corporate sources, I believe that Hacktivism provides a safe, non-violent, and effective manner for individuals to express their beliefs, reach political goals, and inform the public when the cause is just.
The first and most salient aspect of Hacktivism is to examine whether it provides a positive or negative way of delivering valuable information to the public.
