Editorial-Electronic Government Surveillance In this world where anyone could be under surveillance at any given moment, personal privacy and the security of information have become one of the greatest and most controversial issues at hand. The burden of having a digital footprint that is fully accessible by the government is a concern for many, and there have been countless debates over whether it is constitutional or not for the government to conduct such intrusive electronic surveillance. The U
others feel a sense of safety and protection. Electronic surveillance consists of cameras in public places to watch over the city streets or parks. Their purpose is to allow policemen and the state government to know when crime is happening and where in the city. Cameras provide a great advantage of protection over just having police officers patrol the cities. These men and women cannot be everywhere at one time, but the cameras can. Electronic surveillance should be accepted worldwide because it can
Our society would not survive in the 21st century without the help of electronic surveillance. Safety is one of the main purposes of electronic surveillance. Safety is the state of being secure and free from danger of any sort. Today, many would rather give up their privacy for safety (Smithsimon). In fact, surveillance gadgets such as cameras, radio tracking chips and house alarms are used in many places to ensure safety. For instance, a parent can easily place a hidden camera in a stuffed animal
When it comes to government electronic surveillance, we as a society have to ask questions. What is being monitored, what is considered private, and does this infringement upon my right to privacy? How long has this been going on and where will the line be drawn? One thing is certain, there are multiple ways that we are being monitored and we do not even know it. How much further will this go? The questions are endless. Government electronic surveillance is here whether we like it or not and it does
expression and thus on a larger scale democracy. Mass surveillance is an invasion of common man’s privacy. Recent development in the way in which technology can invade privacy has heightened the need for greater protection freedom of expression. However, a major problem in this area is that the public are not provided with adequate information to act against such invasion of their rights. To date, there has been little agreement to what extent mass surveillance should be allowed in the name of providing security
Electronic Surveillance: The FBI Carnivore Program Is Big Brother watching our every computer move? Is the government (FBI, specifically) reading and filtering our email and where we go on the web? According to the critics of the FBI’s new CARNIVORE program, the answer is a resounding “yes”. However, according to FBI spokesperson John Collingwood (in a letter to the LA Times on August 7, 2000), CARNIVORE is not a government-backed spy program to invade the privacy of US citizens--it is an effective
January 20,1969 Richard M. Nixon elected the thirty-seventh president of the United States 1969 Ehrlichman suggests to Caulfield that he leave the White House and set up a private security business that would provide security to the 1972 Nixon campaign. This project, Sandwedge, would be similar to the Kennedy security firm, Intertel. June 5, 1970 With the goal of increasing cooperation between various intelligence agencies within the government, a meeting was called in the Oval Office. Those
the Internet. Advocates of privacy such as the ACLU believe that Carnivore violates Fourth Amendment rights and that the FBI cannot be trusted not to abuse Carnivore. In return, the FBI believes that the public should trust the FBI with electronic surveillance. Basically, the debate around Carnivore is the FBI versus everyone else. Both sides of the Carnivore debate use mainly argument of definition to present their points. Since the integrity of the FBI has been called into question, the FBI’s
stop.” Although Jason Lane said most of the thefts are found out later on surveillance cameras retailindustry.com quotes Hayes, president of Loss Prevention Specialists, as saying that “technology is critical to maintaining low loss levels.” In their article he said, “Because shoplifters are largely targeting small, highly desirable merchandise, these retailers have increasingly turned to electronic article surveillance devices to protect their merchandise.”
The War of Privacy and Security The U.S. government uses the act of surveillance in basic and complicated operations. Government agents use surveillance techniques such as undercover operations and electronic monitoring to solve and stop crime. Electronic monitoring, though, has caught the eye of numerous citizens. Although surveillance protects people from threats, citizens believe that the government should not let their agents invade personal telephone calls or call histories because it invades
confronting employees in the workplace today is the use of electronic surveillance. Some people believe that electronic surveillance is necessary to ensure that employees are being productive members of the workplace. Others, however, feel that employees should have a reasonable expectation of privacy while on the job. This paper will discuss two of the more common types of surveillance that is used in the workplace, computer and video surveillance. It will discuss the benefits of each method as well as
though the use of electronic monitoring may work to monitor a defendant while waiting for trial, there are still crucial reason to believe that traditional caseworker surveillance is still needed. The authors also wanted to determine which surveillance style and which agency was more geared toward control crime, performing risk management, treat and assist. With that said, the author reviewed many articles to measure the importance of electronic monitoring or using caseworker surveillance or both. Also
America. You’re every move, internet post, and banking transaction are being monitored by the government. That is a fact. We know that to be true. So the question everyone is wondering; is surveillance of U.S. citizens for national security or to rid privacy laws? I believe that the government has the right to surveillance for the purpose of national security. As better said by Benjamin Franklin "they who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety"(Franklin)
Drawing on the work of Foucault, discuss the claim that ‘we live in a surveillance society’. The concept of surveillance is a phenomena addressed by a wide range of disciplines- including sociology, psychology, law, criminology and politics (Crampton and Elden, 2007), and has been defined as the systematic investigation or monitoring of the actions or communications of one or more persons (Clarke, 2000). Its purposes vary according to the subject in question, although most ordinary language users
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
information about the surveillance of ordinary citizens by the U.S.A.’s National Security Agency (N.S.A.), and its interconnection to phone and social media companies. The motion picture Citizenfour (2014), shows the original taping of those revelations. Snowden said that some people do nothing about this tracking because they have nothing to hide. He claims that this inverts the model of responsibility. He believes that everyone should encrypt Internet messages and abandon electronic media companies that
Electronic Monitoring and Workplace Privacy Workplace privacy is one of the biggest issues facing businesses today. Do you feel like you are being watched all the time, all your e-mails being read, and every key stroke is being monitored by your boss? Some people feel this way and that is why privacy in the workplace is a problem with many businesses today. Employees feel like they are not being trusted, or feel the company invades on their personal privacy, or violates their fourth amendment
realizing the risk they may face and that their personal information can be in the hands of others without consent being granted. However the effects of online surveillance are quite more complex than what we’d expect them to be. Many are not aware of what the consequences of such behavior done by organizations like the NSA are. The surveillance actions that take place by the government are unethical because they invade the privacy of individuals by accessing and retaining personal information without
Domestic Surveillance Elizabeth Mahan SOC 120 Introduction to Ethics & Social Responsibility Instructor: Cari Lynn Beecham-Bautista June 29, 2015 DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE Introduction Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary defines domestic as “relating to or made in your own country”. The word surveillance is defined as “the act of carefully watching someone or something, especially in order to prevent or detect a crime”. Therefore, the term Domestic Surveillance in its simplest terms can be defined
critically analyze the effects of surveillance on human online communication. Review of Literature Reporters Without Borders (2014) present a detailed list of some of the institutions worldwide that are involved in communications surveillance of citizens or online users within their countries. Their report is titled “Enemies if the Internet” and seeks to inform the reader of the fact that it is not the entire government apparatus that is responsible for internet surveillance, rather small distinct entities