Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
electronic surveillance and privacy
essays on the concept of surveillance
Disadvantages of crime Prevention through Environmental Design
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: electronic surveillance and privacy
When one walks out the front door into the world, how aware and conscious are they of how often they are watched, tracked, and monitored? Through surveillance, everywhere one goes they are having their lives watched and invaded by prying eyes. Most people believe society needs electronic surveillance and that it is there to protect them. Others believe society does not need surveillance and worry about their privacy being invaded. Many argue about different issues relating to the costly use of surveillance. Electronic surveillance has a broad range of purposes dealing with past, present, and future events. There needs to be a balance between the benefits that surveillance employs in society and the misuse of surveillance that encroaches on the privacy of all.
Although some are good and some are not, there are several purposes and reasons why society uses electronic surveillance. One main purpose of surveillance, and one of the most common, is for the utilization of promoting safety. People in our society want to feel safe from crime and danger in the world around them. Authorities and law officials use the common means of video surveillance to capture those involved with illegal activity. For example, in the article "Protecting Public Anonymity," the authors state how law officials use video surveillance from a mall to monitor shoppers and to discover if there are any "wanted persons." They also screen malls, or highly populated areas, to "track all persons with previous police records or all persons who have specific genetic, behavioral, religious, or cultural profiles that suggest they are more likely to engage in unlawful activities" (Granger, Morgan and Elaine Newton). This creates problems because it is likely that everyon...
... middle of paper ...
...hipps, Jennie L. and Leslie Ryan. "Traffic Cameras Bringing Eyeballs to Station Sites." Electronic Media. 19 (2000): 16. Academic Search Premier. EBSCOhost. Community College Library Media Center. 4 Mar. 2008.
Smithsimon, Molly. "Private lives, public spaces: the surveillance state." Dissent 50.1 (Wntr 2003): 43(49). General OneFile. Gale. Community College. 15 Feb. 2008 .
Someone's Watching [videorecording]. NY Times/Discovery Times Channel Production. Discovery, [2005].
Surveillance Tech. [video recording]. [United States]: A&E Home Video, 2004
"Watching as you shop." Economist 385.8558(Dec 2007): 28-29. Academic Search Premier. EBSCOhost. Community College Library Media Center. 15 Mar. 2008.
"Wireless Eyes Watch for Crime." Communications News 44.9(2007):22-24. Academic Search Premier. EBSCOhost. Community College Library Media Center. 4 Mar. 2008.
The feeling that someone is always watching, develops the inevitable, uncomfortable feeling that is displeasing to the mind. For years, the National Security Agency (NSA) has been monitoring people for what they call, “the greater good of the people” (Cole, February 2014). A program designed to protect the nation while it protects the walls within as it singles people out, sometimes by accident. Whether you are a normal citizen or a possible terrorist, the NSA can monitor you in a variation of ways. The privacy of technology has sparked debates across the world as to if the NSA is violating personal rights to privacy by collecting personal data such as, phone calls and text messages without reason or authorization (Wicker, 2011). Technology plays a key role in society’s day to day life. In life, humans expect privacy, even with their technology. In recent news, Edward Snowden leaked huge pieces from the NSA to the public, igniting these new controversies. Now, reforms are being pressed against the government’s throat as citizens fight for their rights. However, American citizens are slammed with the counterargument of the innocent forte the NSA tries to pass off in claims of good doing, such as how the NSA prevents terrorism. In fear of privacy violations, limitations should be put on the NSA to better protect the privacy of our honest citizens.
The government is always watching to ensure safety of their country, including everything and everyone in it. Camera surveillance has become an accepted and almost expected addition to modern safety and crime prevention (“Where” para 1). Many people willingly give authorization to companies like Google and Facebook to make billions selling their personal preferences, interests, and data. Canada participates with the United States and other countries in monitoring national and even global communications (“Where” para 2). Many question the usefulness of this kind of surveillance (Hier, Let, and Walby 1).However, surveillance, used non-discriminatorily, is, arguably, the key technology to preventing terrorist plots (Eijkman 1). Government surveillance is a rising global controversy; and, although minimal coverage could possibly result in safer communities, too much surveillance will result in the violation of citizen’s privacy.
Whether the U.S. government should strongly keep monitoring U.S. citizens or not still is a long and fierce dispute. Recently, the debate became more brutal when technology, an indispensable tool for modern live, has been used by the law enforcement and national security officials to spy into American people’s domestic.
As technology allows for the constant possibility that someone might always be watching you — whether it’s the government, your friends, or
Current advancements in technology has given the government more tools for surveillance and thus leads to growing concerns for privacy. The two main categories of surveillance technologies are the ones that allow the government to gather information where previously unavailable or harder to obtain, and the ones that allow the government to process public information more quickly and efficiently (Simmons, 2007). The first category includes technologies like eavesdropping devices and hidden cameras. These are clear offenders of privacy because they are capable of gathering information while being largely unnoticed. The second category would include technologies that are used in a public space, like cameras in a public park. While these devices
Howard Rheingold notably mentioned, "You can’t assume any place you go is private because the means of surveillance are becoming so affordable and invisible." Judging by the efficiency of American surveillance, it would seem that Rheingold’s outlook stands as of today. Technology has advanced so powerfully that surveillance has become predominant in our society. On nearly every front, American citizens are under a great threat of control as well as persistent, high-tech surveillance.
In 1948, George Orwell wrote about a society in which individual privacy was nonexistent. In this society, which he imagined would become a reality in the 1980s, surveillance was foremost. Everything one did was under surveillance by “Big Brother”, an unseen figure who was always watching you. Surveillance in this society was imposed and malicious. Although this type of society has never fully become a reality in the Western world, changes in technology and media are indirectly bringing this imagined society, one of complete surveillance, to life. With the rise in corporate business and commercialism, surveillance in society increasing; however, new media has brought about a significant shift in its use. In the 20th century, surveillance was primarily used for “protective measures”, as Orwell had imagined. In the 21st century, there has been a rise in its use for commercialism. This essay will critically analyze the developments in new media that have contributed to this shift, as well as explain the reason for the ubiquitous nature of surveillance in today’s western society. To aid with this analysis, surveillance will hereby be defined as a “focused, systematic, and routine attention to personal details for purposes of influence, management, protection or direction” (Lyon 2007:14).
The breath-taking expansion of police power that the United States government took after 9/11 now poses as a troubling issue. Americans need to address the issues of government surveillance because it affects t...
Although they can be easily tracked, people overlook the invasion of privacy possibility because of the convenience they bring to every day life. Systems like OnStar installed in cars have made the tracking of stolen cars practically effortless. Similar tools are being used by law enforcement, Penenberg stated “cell phones have become the digital equivalent of Hansel and Gretel’s bread crumbs” (472). He then goes on to discuss how in Britain in 1996, authorities installed 300 cameras in East London. Although this didn’t affect the terrorism, it did affect the crime rate which fell 30 percent after the cameras were put into place. Penenberg closes his essay by mentioning that the surveillance is not only used to watch the citizens but also for citizens to keep an eye on the government. Through his organization, relevant information, and professional tone, Penenberg creates an effective
Taylor, James Stacey. "In Praise of Big Brother: Why We Should Learn to Stop Worrying and Love Government Surveillance." Public Affairs Quarterly July 2005: 227-246.
Most people concerned about the privacy implications of government surveillance aren’t arguing for no[sic] surveillance and absolute privacy. They’d be fine giving up some privacy as long as appropriate controls, limitations, oversight and accountability mechanisms were in place. ”(“5 Myths about Privacy”). The fight for privacy rights is by no means a recent conflict.
Nieto, Marcus. "Public Video Surveillance: Is It An Effective Crime Prevention Tool?" California State Library. N.p., June 1997. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.
Privacy is not just a fundamental right, it is also important to maintain a truly democratic society where all citizens are able to exist with relative comfort. Therefore, “[Monitoring citizens without their knowledge] is a major threat to democracies all around the world.” (William Binney.) This is a logical opinion because without freedom of expression and privacy, every dictatorship in history has implemented some form of surveillance upon its citizens as a method of control.
There are many benefits to having law enforcement security cameras, which people take for granted, and are quick to point out the negative. Having a network of cameras on every street in the city increases the chances of preventing a crime, along with the ability to capture a criminal on video. Some people argue that the cameras generate an overwhelming amount...
Basically security cameras are basically good and bad in all ways due to helping the public and bad for invading peoples privacy daily which would not surprise me that the government is also up to no good doing all of this but if it helps catches people who are hacking computers from other countries then oh well with that stuff. So in all ways they are good and bad for most public areas besides stores and high criminal activity area parking lots for the US otherwise crime will not stop for the people in the US and privacy will keep being invaded as long there is crime.