1

Word Count: 1529

Surveillance and Privacy

Many government officials, if asked about government surveillance, would say that it is

mainly used as a mechanism for the protection of the United States. Although this is true to some

extent, the evolution of government surveillance methods have led to an enormous increase in

privacy concerns around the world. According to Sam Adler-Bell, a specialist in economic

justice and surveillance from Brown University, phone and online ​communications from

ordinary american citizens are “ten times more likely” to b​e caught up into investigations than

communications of possible crime victims (Adler-Bell). This is​ due to the modern technologies

that make personal information so much more accessible than in the past. Surveillance, as

defined by ​Merriam Webster Dictionary, ​is “a close watch kept over someone or something”

(“Surveillance”).​ While traditional methods of surveillance, including spies, watch lists, closed

circuit television, and personal files, are still being used today, new modern methods are being

developed and operated for the purpose of deeper exam​inations (Zurcher). H​owever, if

technology continues to evolve at such a rapid rate, future surveillance methods possess a

frightening potential. According to ​Stimulus Source #2 ​by ​Gershon Dublon and Joseph A.

Paradiso​, a PhD candidate and college professor​, sensors within technologies such as phones and

laptops are building a future of constant vigilance and scrutiny, where every aspect of life will be

closely observed and recorded ​(Dublon).​ With this said, the evolution of government monitoring

is brutally impacting the privacy rights of society, and the continuation of this manner will only

decrease the quality and enjoyment of life for everyone.

 2

Privacy has always been a concern due to the powerful nature of the government, but it

was not until 9/11 when security and surveillance underwent a huge upsurge because of the

daunting threats of terrorist attacks. According to Tamara Dinev, a Professor and Chair in the

Department of Information Technology, following this devastating event, the government

decided to augment the “surveillance authority of various government agencies” to combat and

boost awareness of potential terrorist threats (Dinev). The evolution of government ambition to

protect the United States against dangerous terrorist threats, by increasing and advancing

surveillance, has resulted in a tremendous controversy between security and privacy (Dinev).

The government does have intentions of protecting the United States, but their ability to check

civilians emails, browse history, and listen to calls has become an unethical infiltration of the

lives of not only US citizens, but people all around the world (Dinev).

Individuals around the globe are constantly being bothered and intruded through different

types of communications. These communications include anything from emails to phone calls.

Most ordinary citizens have nothing government threatening to hide. However, ​according to the

Pew Research Center, an organization known for their unbiased polls​, ​74% of Americans deem it

very crucial to be in control over who can get information about them (Wormald). This is a

staggering statistic, but many dominant and well known companies don’t provide the

confidentiality that most think they are receiving. According to Rainey Reitman, co-founder and

board member of ​the Freedom of the Press Foundation, ​numerous popular enterprises, such as

Verizon, Amazon, AT&T, and T-Mobile, provide little to none of the important security features

needed to keep consumer information secure (Reitman). These companies don’t inform users of

government data inquiries, nor do they make any promises to not betray their users (Reitman).
 3

Additionally, a new Facebook privacy scandal was recently released to the public. According to

Natasha Singer, a journalist for the New York Times, the chief executor of facebook claimed to

merely be using browser history and simple personal information to produce advertisements on

user’s feeds (Singer). However, the scandal stretched way farther than this. Much of their “data

mining” process included finding out personal information, using a program that tracked users

browsing activity just after closing the app, and even some use of face recognition technology

(Singer). According to ​Ellie Zolfagharifard, graduate of the University of Leicester, ​Facebook

has lost over 70 billion dollars in market value due to their lack of protection and respect for

users (Zolfagharifard).

Many of the major companies are just being exposed for their terrible lack of protection,

however, government surveillance is yet to be lessened or redefined by means of privacy. Within

the last five years, a government created computer software has been developed that is able to

take pictures through the small camera, intercept messages, and get other information without the

user knowing. According to ​Gabriella Bensur, an associate at White & Case LLP which is one of

the world's leading law firms, a lady named Crystal Byrd rented a computer and later discovered

that the computer company received email chats, took screenshots of her and her husband from

the tiny camera, and looked at her “bank statements, addresses, social security number, and

phone numbers” (Bensur). This awful infiltration of personal information and privacy at home is

also clearly seen through the use of surveillance cameras. Surveillance cameras have become

such a norm over the past years but the number of them are increasing rapidly, which is in turn

increasing societies vulnerability for intense monitoring. According to Jonathan Shaw, editor of

Harvard Magazine, privacy is necessary for humans to develop and live the right way (Shaw).
 4

Close monitoring is not allowing for individuals to live a normal life, as they cannot read, think,

and communicate privately. Not only is society prevented from performing these things in

private, but they are more paranoid now when in public as a result of fears of being caught for

saying or doing something wrong (Shaw). These fears are proven to cause stress, decreased trust,

and conformity with other groups, says Zawn Villines, a journalist with numerous publications

(Villines). Government monitoring is very unethical and invasive, however, surveillance

technology is not totally useless.

While the unknown location of surveillance cameras throughout many high crime cities

watch over ordinary citizens like a hawk, cities like Manhattan, in New York, greatly benefit

from them. According to Marcus Baram, a journalist, reporter, and editor of 20 years, cameras

don’t necessarily prevent bad things from happening, but they establish fear and offer “good

forensic tools” (Baram). Documenting important events in history is also very important and

common ideal among a wide range of people and cultures. According to ​Stimulus Source #5 ​by

Arthur Schlesinger, a member of The Society of American Historians, even eyewitness history is

tampered with, forgotten, and revived to better suit modern culture (Schlesinger). However,

implication of security cameras could allow for actual live footage and recordings of colossal

events. In this case, historic information and evidence could no longer be tampered with and

changed to fit perspectives of historians and teachers as real life footage could be used in

classrooms to educate and document effectively (Schlesinger).

Government surveillance does have its obvious benefits, but new technology has allowed

for monitoring to get out of hand. According to John Dowell, the human “right to privacy” is

given to all americans by virtue of the “fourth amendment,” which prohibits unreasonable
 5

privacy invasions (Dowell). The fourth amendment, written in the American Constitution, clearly

shows how unethical surveillance is in many aspects, demonstrated in the lack of information

protection and excessive amount of video and call surveillance. ​With this rapid development of

governmental surveillance methods, a promising future full of technology might not seem so

marvelous any more. Again, ​Stimulus Source #2 ​by ​Gershon Dublon and Joseph A. Paradiso

shows how ​with ubiquitous computing, a method of experiencing an online world in real time,

information will be collected from scattered microphones and cameras. ​If the government

continues to implement and advance new methods of surveillance, the United States could end

up as a high surveillance state, similar to the current conditions in Northwestern China. A lot of

the daily life of someone living in Northwest China consists of passing a police blockhouse

every hundred meters, seeing video cameras on every street corner with lamp posts that

recognize people by their face and track their whereabouts, and always having personal

information, and biometric data, fixed to an ID number, which is constantly scanned wherever

they go (Milward). To prevent a future of mass surveillance, there are many possible solutions.

Society needs to be educated on the competence of the government and how their monitoring

methods work. This will increase awareness of the unethical and disturbing aggression used

when the government feels threatened, hopefully influencing people to stand up for their rights.

As a community, people can also gather together and stop supporting the big companies that do

not provide adequate privacy protection. Commonly used and supported phone and network

companies are not as reliable as said in commercials. The companies should no longer be

supported if they do not support individuals and their privacy rights. The evolution of

government surveillance has been growing and developing for ages, however changes need to be
 6

made to the system in order to respect the integrity of individuals all over the world. Privacy is a

very important value that the government has no authority to take away. While without

surveillance, the world may be a daunting mess, a world with mass surveillance will be even

more frightening.
 7

Works Cited:

Adler-Bell, Sam. “10 Reasons You Should Still Worry About NSA Surveillance.” ​The Century

Foundation,​ 16 Mar. 2017, tcf.org/content/facts/10-reasons-still-worry-nsa-surveillance/.

Accessed 12 March 2018.

Baram, Marcus. “Eye on the City: Do Cameras Reduce Crime?” ​ABC News​, ABC News

Network, 9 July 2007, abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3360287&page=1. Accessed 12

March 2018.

Bensur, Gabriella E. “Cover your Webcam: The ECPA's Lack of Protection against Software

That Could Be Watching You.” ​Cornell Law Review,​ vol. 100, no. 4, pp. 1192-1216,

2015, ​http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol100/iss5/4​. Accessed 12 March 2018.

Dinev, Tamara, et al. “Internet Users, Privacy Concerns and Attitudes towards Government

Surveillance - An Exploratory Study of Cross-Cultural Differences between Italy and the

United States.” ​BLED 2005 Proceedings, 2​ 005,

http://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1080&context=bled2005​. ​Accessed 12

March 2018.

Dowell, John. “Technology Invading Privacy”.​ Michigan State University,

https://msu.edu/~casechri/135/Chp3paper2.html​. Accessed 14 March 2018.

Dublon, Gershon, and Joseph A. Paradiso. “Extra Sensory Perception.”​ Scientific American, ​July

2014,

https://www.scribd.com/document/372387378/seminar-pt2-directions-stimulus-packet-20

18-0-1?secret_password=KQCe6nUI8cpJbeJI6mkz#fullscreen&from_embed. Accessed

11 March 2018.
 8

Millward, James A. “What It's Like to Live in a Surveillance State.” ​The New York Times,​ The

New York Times, 3 Feb. 2018,

www.nytimes.com/2018/02/03/opinion/sunday/china-surveillance-state-uighurs.html?rref

=collection/timestopic/Surveillance of Citizens by

Government&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics&region=stream&module=str

eam_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=5&pgtype=collection. Accessed 11 March

2018.

Reitman, Rainey. “Who Has Your Back? Government Data Requests 2017.” ​Electronic Frontier

Foundation,​ 1 Dec. 2017, www.eff.org/who-has-your-back-2017#executive-summary.

Schlesinger, Arthur. “The Historian as Participant.” ​Daedalus​, vol. 100, no. 2, pp. 339-358, 1

Apr. 1971, ​www.jstor.org/stable/20024007?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents​. Accessed 12

March 2018.

Shaw, Jonathan. “The Watchers.” ​Harvard Magazine,​ 18 Dec. 2016,

harvardmagazine.com/2017/01/the-watchers. Accessed 20 March 2018.

Singer, Natasha. “What You Don't Know About How Facebook Uses Your Data.” ​The New York

Times,​ The New York Times, 11 Apr. 2018,

www.nytimes.com/2018/04/11/technology/facebook-privacy-hearings.html​. Accessed 12

March 2018.

“Surveillance.” ​Merriam-Webster​, Merriam-Webster,

www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/surveillance​. Accessed 11 March 2018.

Villines, Zawn. “Watch Out: The Psychological Effects of Mass Surveillance.”

GoodTherapy.org Therapy Blog,​ 5 Sept. 2013,

 9

www.goodtherapy.org/blog/watch-out-psychological-effects-of-mass-surveillance-09101

37​. Accessed 20 March 2018.

Wormald, Benjamin. “Americans Hold Strong Views About Privacy in Everyday Life.” ​Pew

Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech​, 19 May 2015,

www.pewinternet.org/2015/05/20/americans-attitudes-about-privacy-security-and-surveil

lance/pi_15-05-20_privacysecurityattd00/​. Accessed 14 March 2018.

Zolfagharifard​, Ellie “It Will Take 'a Few Years' to Fix Facebook's Privacy Issues Says Mark

Zuckerberg as He Admits He Didn't Spend Enough Time Looking at the 'Downsides'.”

Daily Mail Online​, Associated Newspapers, 2 Apr. 2018,

www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5569845/Facebook-needs-years-fix-problems-Z

uckerberg.html​. Accessed 12 March 2018.

Zurcher, Anthony. “Roman Empire to the NSA: A World History of Government Spying.” ​BBC

News,​ BBC, 1 Nov. 2013, ​www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24749166​. Accessed 11 March

2018.