The Pros And Cons Of Mass Surveillance

2. Mass surveillance infringes on people’s privacy against their will

In a Harvard Law Review article entitled “What Privacy is For”, Professor Julie Cohen argues “privacy is shorthand for breathing room to engage in the process of…self-development.” Privacy is fundamental to self-actualization as it gives us freedom to explore our individual identities, away from public scrutiny. It dignifies us, giving us a sense of freedom and comfort.

Privacy is well enshrined in society. To protect privacy, countries have legal provisions preventing governments from encroaching into citizens’ private lives. Notably, the Fourth Amendment enforces the notion that “each man’s home is his castle” (Justia). Evidence obtained through means that violate privacy, such as wire-tapping, is also inadmissible in court (National Paralegal College).

Defenders of mass surveillance, however, claim that privacy is justifiably encroached upon, as individuals consent to giving up their privacy in areas the government monitors. For instance, individuals who are aware of government surveillance on social media choose to continue using these websites. Individuals’ consent, therefore,

By spying on the telephone conversations of “Gérard Davet, a reporter at … Le Monde”, French intelligence exposed Department of Justice whistleblower David Senat. He was fired. Senat had provided information about the trail of billionaire Liliane Bettencourt – who had illegally funded French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s 2007 election campaign, among other crimes (Antoine and Lantier). This illustrates the increased risk that anonymous sources face when providing journalists with the truth. With no guarantee of anonymity, whistleblowing is greatly reduced, reducing the ability of the press to check on the