Although it may be difficult to notice because it’s happening now, the ubiquity of smartphones and other related technologies are very seriously changing the fabric of social relations; particularly, for better or worse, many intimate parts of our lives have a strong likelihood of becoming akin to public record.

I’m no Nostradamus, but I think it is overwhelmingly apparent that this will have wide-ranging implications for the standards of electability of our public officials. 

There has been a lot of talk in the media about government organizations and corporations flagrantly violating privacy rights under the veil of security or marketing. The realization that the National Security Agency can get access to everything on your smartphone, or that Google probably knows more about you than you would ever admit to your closest friends and utilizes that information for advertisements, is often portrayed as an acutely unnerving truth. 

However, isn’t it fair to be somewhat speculative of these concerns? What is the endgame of these organizations? At the end of the day, the NSA is in the business of combating terrorism and Google is in the business of making money. 

Neither of these organizations have much to gain by exploring confidential information about your everyday person.  

There is, however, a person or group of people that very well may pose a serious risk to your privacy — you and your friends. Our current politicians never had the luxury of Snapchat or Facebook when they were our age, and maybe that was a good thing for them. 

Computer security expert Richard Hickman told The Guardian that Snapchats never really disappear; rather, they are saved on smartphones in the form of metadata. Think about all of the ridiculous faces and captions you have made on Snapchat. 

Everyone is doing it; who’s to say that the future president of our generation isn’t making one right now?

If he or she is, there will be a lot of explaining to do should the recipient of these messages reveal them to the public.

Imagine your most out-of-context funny or crazy Snapchat. How comfortable would you be defending or explaining that picture under the scrutiny of the media and the international community?

We can see the making of these new problems in scandals such as the Anthony Weiner case. How much would you bet that this won’t be the last one?

How do you think today’s public would react to a 12- or 13-year-old Barack Obama making a Facebook status as obscene as half the jokes people our age see on regular television shows such as Family Guy?

Furthermore, what shred of privacy will people have left when technologies such as Google Glass are commonplace? In that world, you had better watch every single word you say, lest someone record you by simply blinking twice.

And it doesn’t stop there; there are numerous examples of ever-encroaching pervasive surveillance in other countries. In Russia, there are millions of dash cameras to prevent insurance fraud. In the United States, the paparazzi have spied on celebrities with drones. And in the United Kingdom, there are an estimated 4.2 million closed-circuit surveillance cameras on city streets, many equipped with facial recognition technology.

Provisions such as these, coupled with the commonality of social media and smartphones, paint a picture of a society, which has an unprecedented and comprehensive profile of your everyday person.

This really can only mean that the standards for our elected officials will be significantly lowered.