Spying is Unsafe It is illegal to make privacy of one's life. Surveillance is a commonplace occurrence in the society today. It exists in every corner of a nation from the corner of streets to discussion topics in movies, lecture halls, theater arenas and books. The privacy word is mentioned many times till its losing taste of its meaning. Surveillance is the exercise of keeping a close watch on something, somebody or set of activities (Richards 56). Many people say that Surveillance is unscrupulous. Nonetheless, we mainly do not distinguish the reason. People only have vague intuition the fact, and this accounts the reason the courts of justice do not protect it or the victim of circumstance of such. We recognize we don’t like it, and by the virtue that it contains something too with privacy, but past that, the revelations can be ambiguous (Boghosian 67). We have been to stay in this state of operation substantially because of the threat of constant Surveillance has been consigned to the realms of scientific studies and fictional activities and moreover to unsuccessful authoritarian states. Nevertheless, these warnings are no longer fictions due to …show more content…
science. The current digital technologies have revolutionized everything about our daily and furthermore created minutely and detailed records about such livelihoods. During terror threats or ages under which terror attacks, different concerned governmental agencies has always been keen on acquiring pieces and later utilize it for purposes that are not clear. It’s on notice that the state has been purchasing and acquiring private-sector databases (Richards 45) Major Dangers of Surveillance The increase in government surveillance in the name of protecting persons against war or any feuds from enemies fuels the unending excuse to monitor the good personalities (Boghosian 69).
People are exposed severally on the government gallery, and they are little things they can always do to protect them from such. Unregulated surveillance could in a greater manner strip individuals of their privacy rights, and by addition, restrict coming together of people, organizations and in such a comprehensive way that could vindicate us back to the most grievous errors in history swinging back to the present day (Boghosian 89). People, non-governmental institutions are living under such oppressive realms but cannot clearly articulate their concerns and issues that affect the society for fear of state cameras (Song
89). At levels of theory, surveillance stills turn out to be utmost dangerous. Surveillance is of much harm it’s a prerequisite to chill the practice of civil freedoms. With regards to civil liberties, I consider the inspection with the view of how they are thinking, studying and communicating cooperate or personal ideas to bring issues on board concerning social concerns or political remedies and bring about solutions to such (Song 87). Such intellectual monitoring is very dangerous and highly curtails the freedom of most people. The individuals cannot exercise their intellectual property capabilities, and this implies that individuals cannot experiment with controversial, new and deviant ideas and upcoming in the society. To protect our value and capacity to think and express without any interference from the state or oversight of the same, we need to have intellectual privacy (Lyon 34). Next, government surveillance is detrimental in the effect it has on the power dynamic between the individual under inspection and the being who is the viewer. This particular risk creates a disparity and possible stratification identities between the two parties (Lyon 56). The risks associated with this include coercion, discrimination, and the potential hazard of discerning enforcement where anyone found critiquing the governing body can be blackmailed or prosecuted for doing wrongs that are not related to the purpose of conducting the surveillance (Lyon 34). Blackmailing is a dangerous activity that is performed by various state councils to silence free or otherwise influential individuals found opposing the government and its corrupt malpractices. From a practical perspective, principles should be put strategically to guide the future advancement of the law of surveillance, to allow an adequate balance between the costing and profits of such government undertaking. It’s important to notice that surveillance transcends the public and private divides. Secluded and extensive monitoring are related divisions of the equivalent hazard, somewhat than being wholly distinct (Bennett 76). Total surveillance is prohibited, and there is a need to reject official acceptance to record all content present on the internet, and this creates an avenue of the abuse of privacy of the owners of such content. The protection of individual rights is highly curtailed and their very little confidence in governments to develop laws that potentially protects their intellectual belongings. The state is more concerned with monitoring things related to the public and not private individuals (Marthews 77). Government scrutiny of the Internet is a clout with the prospective for gross misuse. Comparable to its predecessor of telephone eavesdropping, it has exposed expressive legal procedure to authorization. Surveillance exposition significantly exists in the different department of the state and other private organizations and distinct division especially the media. Laws bounding mass media are retrogressive and serve to edge people from the liberty of information (Marthews 81). Surveillance on what degree a media personality needs to express information is oppressive. The media is responsible for the dissemination of several kinds of information ranging from secret documentaries and planned governmental operations (Wu 45). The revelation of such is at no time allowable by most by security details. Journalists are monitored and controlled on what information they need to air news to viewers (Greenwald 90). There is much intimidation in the media, and the involved parties have to brave the government regulation on what they need to express to the general at times contrary to the real truth. Entirely this transpires owing to surveillance from the state The collection of data and video monitoring continue rising as technological progression trickles deeper and deeper into more sects of our nation, either impoverished into our bodies as wearable computers or soaring over the municipalities and towns as low-cost drones that screen individuals from the heavens (Bennett 76). Conclusion Surveillance is central in the world today. Individuals are increasingly being monitored by an overlapping and entangled assemblage of government watchers. This design of monitoring is sticky. Surveillance further kills our intellectual privacy and threatens the advancement of individual beliefs in ways that are an inconsistency with fundamental commitments of societies that are democratic. Individual, who fall prey of surveillance, possibly face blackmail. That becomes traumatizing if it effects on a person’s economic and social standing in the community. Laws, therefore, need to be developed that prevent people from unauthorized surveillance and grant individuals with the much-needed privacy. Privacy allows the members of the general public to isolate themselves and selectively express themselves. Work Cited Richards, Neil M. "Dangers of Surveillance, The." Harv. L. Rev. 126 (2012): 1934. Boghosian, Heidi. Spying on democracy: Government surveillance, corporate power and public resistance. City Lights Publishers, 2013. Song, Peipei, et al. "Screening for and surveillance of high-risk patients with HBV-related chronic liver disease: promoting the early detection of hepatocellular carcinoma in China." Bioscience trends 7.1 (2013): 1-6. Lyon, David. "Surveillance, snowden, and big data: capacities, consequences, critique." Big Data & Society 1.2 (2014): 2053951714541861. Marthews, Alex, and Catherine Tucker. "Government surveillance and internet search behavior." Available at SSRN 2412564 (2014). Greenwald, Glenn. No place to hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the US surveillance state. Macmillan, 2014. Bennett, Colin J., and Kevin Haggerty, eds. Security games: surveillance and control at mega-events. Routledge, 2014. Wu, Huai-Hui, et al. "A dengue vector surveillance by human population-stratified ovitrap survey for Aedes (Diptera: Culicidae) adult and egg collections in high dengue-risk areas of Taiwan." Journal of medical entomology 50.2 (2013): 261-269.
“With surveillance technology like closed-circuit television cameras and digital cameras now linked to the Internet, we now have the means to implement Bentham's inspection principle on a much vaster scale”(Singer) Bentham's inspection principle is a system that allows the collection, storing and dissemination of data on individuals, corporations, and the government. This collection of data has large implications in regard to privacy and security. “There is always danger that the information collected will be misused - whether by regimes seeking to silence opposition or by corporations seeking to profit from more detailed knowledge of their potential customers.”(Singer) What is done with the information collected is the main issue in terms of privacy. We do not want to be marketed to, or inundated with spam from third-party sources. We also do not want our private social circles and experiences to appear that they are being monetized or subjected to surveillance outside our control. In addition, surveillance has a large effect on the government that can beneficial or detrimental to democracy. Exposure of government secrets may make officials tread carefully when making decisions, ensuring that politicians are nothing but just and fair.“The crucial step in preventing a repressive government from
James Stacey Taylor's article, "In Praise of Big Brother: Why We Should Learn to Stop Worrying and Love Government Surveillance" begins reviewing the concept of "Big Brother" as it was originally presented in George Orwell's 1984. The Big Brother started off as a fictional character in 1984-- a dictator of Oceania within a totalitarian state. Set within a society in which everyone is under complete surveillance by the authorities, mainly by telescreens, the people are constantly reminded of this by the phrase “Big Brother is watching you” (Wikipedia) . Taylor goes on to explain some examples of recent surveillance technology and how it is applied in lives today. An interesting note and comparison between today’s technology and that of the telescreens in 1984, is that people could be sure that they could not be watched by Big Brother’s telescreens by going out of the cities into the country, where they only had to take care that their conversations were not monitored by hidden microphones (Taylor 227). He contrasts the two, highlighting the fact that “Such an escape is not impossible, for spy satellites can be used to monitor people wherever they go” (277). From there, Taylor perpetuates the framework for his position on the Big Brother notion. Taylor argues that, "rather than opposing such an expansion of surveillance technology, its use should be encouraged -- and not only in the public realm" (227). Taylor’s argument presented in a more formal construction is as follows:
1984, a novel by George Orwell, represents a dystopian society in which the people of Oceania are surveilled by the government almost all the time and have no freedoms. Today, citizens of the United States and other countries are watched in a similar way. Though different technological and personal ways of keeping watch on society than 1984, today’s government is also able to monitor most aspects of the people’s life. 1984 might be a dystopian society, but today’s condition seems to be moving towards that controlling state, where the citizens are surveilled by the government at all times.
Many citizens today are truly unaware of how much of their private lives are made public. With new technological advances, the modern democratic government can easily track and survey citizens without their knowledge. While the government depicted in 1984 may use gadgets such as telescreens and moderators such as the Thought Police, these ideas depicted can be seen today in the ever evolving democratic government known to be the "equivalent" of the people's voice. Orwell may have depicted a clearer insight into modern day surveillance than one may have imagined from this "fictional" novel. Furthermore, a totalitarianism based government is a dictatorship, in which the dictator is not limited by constitutional laws or further opposition.
With today’s technological surveillance capabilities, our actions are observable, recordable and traceable. Surveillance is more intrusive than it has been in the past. For numerous years countries such as the United State and the United Kingdom have been actively monitoring their citizens through the use of surveillance technology. This state surveillance has been increasing with each passing year, consequently invading the citizen’s fundamental constitutional right to privacy,. This has lead to the ethical issues from the use or misuse of technology, one such ethical issue is should a government have the right to use technology to monitor its citizens without their knowledge or approval? For this reason this paper will examine what the terms ethics, ethical issue and state surveillance refer to. Next, an exploration into the ethics of governmental monitoring from the perspective of a variety of ethical systems such as: ethical formalism, act utilitarian, rule utilitarian and subjective relativism model. From this examination of state surveillance through ethical syste...
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
Privacy is a complex concept with no universal definition as its meaning changes with society. Invasion of privacy occurs when there is an intrusion upon the reasonable expectation to be left alone. There has been a growing debate about the legitimacy of privacy in public
Many people live in fear that they are constantly being watched. Michael Jackson sang it best in the 80 's by saying, "I always feel like, somebody 's watching me," in his hit song with Rockwell. That 's exactly what the NSA and other government organizations are doing today with domestic surveillance. Everywhere Americans go and every corner they turn there is a camera, and every website or email they send is being monitored closely. So what can society do about this? Educate others on the situation and stand up for what is right. Some people believe they must give up some freedoms for protection, but at what cost? What is happening in America is not what the founding fathers fought for. Domestic surveillance should not be allowed because
Surveillance is the monitoring of behaviour. In addition, surveillance system is the process of monitoring the behaviour of people, objects or processes within systems for conformity to expected or desired norms in trusted systems for security control (Cohen and Medioni, 1999). Video surveillance systems have existed 25 years ago whereby it started with 100% analogue system and gradually becoming digital system. The closed-circuit television (CCTV) camera is the most popular video surveillance because of its reliability and low price. The camera does not broadcast images but it records them, so that user can always check to see what occurred while they were away. It is widely used at public spaces and residences for security purposes.
The word “privacy” did not grow up with us throughout history, as it was already a cultural concept by our founding fathers. This term was later solidified in the nineteenth century, when the term “privacy” became a legal lexicon as Louis Brandeis (1890), former Supreme Court justice, wrote in a law review article, that, “privacy was the right to be let alone.” As previously mentioned in the introduction, the Supreme Court is the final authority on all issues between Privacy and Security. We started with the concept of our fore fathers that privacy was an agreed upon concept that became written into our legal vernacular. It is being proven that government access to individual information can intimidate the privacy that is at the very center of the association between the government and the population. The moral in...
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.
The world erupted in outrage following revelations by Edward Snowden regarding the extent of surveillance perform by the National Security Agency. Privacy becomes one of the hottest topic of 2013 and was chosen by the world’s most popular online dictionary, Dictionary.com, as the Word of the Year. However, the government is not the only one that conduct data gathering and surveillance. Employers often monitor their employees, and businesses collect data on theirs customer. The morality of these practices is a topic that generates heated debate.
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.
Using surveillance and investigation the government would be able to detect if someone has committed a crime and imprison them based on the evidence. If the person did not commit the crime they would go free and their name cleared. Yet these suspects have not been jailed before hand. In this scenario, why is it ethical for the government to surveill these people? The reason that this is considered ethical is because the government knows how to carry out surveillance and the proper people trained in information gathering are carrying it out and the information is being properly handled. Police officers, detectives or other officers of the law, those who carry out surveillance are trained in it and know how to handle the information gathered. They are the correct people to verify someone’s innocence because they know how to verify innocence or guilt. Surveillance does have a valid purpose of verification and justice, and if the alternatives are worse, nonexistent or need surveillance to supplement the evidence then it would be necessary to use surveillance and the purpose is proportional to the means of surveillance. Their cause is valid, if a crime has been committed to maintain justice and the safety of the people it is
“I always feel like somebody’s watching me!” This is the hook from a song by Rockwell in 1984. It is twenty years later and these words still speak the truth, but have a much deeper meaning. Today you can’t make any moves in this world without someone possibly knowing what it is. In general, privacy is the right to be free from secret surveillance and to determine whether, when, how, and to whom, one's personal or organizational information is to be revealed. The development of social media outlets and the advancements in technology today are making privacy an outdated concept and a thing of the past. The question now becomes how far is too far and have we lost our basic right to privacy in the name of advancement. The idea of privacy in this ever changing world of technological advancement is slowly becoming a thing of the past. Everything from cell phone equipment with video camera, to camera on stop lights, to people being able to steal your identity over a WiFi connection, to stating every move you make in your daily life on Facebook, it now seems that nothing is off limits.