The Importance Of Public Surveillance

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

Developed in the 1960s, facial recognition technology has been used by the government and companies to identify people by matching them to photos. By 2001, the novelty of more powerful and rapid facial recognition technology grasped the public’s attention. During the January 2001 Super Bowl, surveillance cameras captured images of the crowd to find people with criminal records (FBI 2013). This potential invasion of privacy under the pretense of public safety sparked a public debate about the government taking private information from citizens. So what limitations should be put on the use of facial recognition software in America in order to keep the public feeling secure? In recent years, many companies who use this technology claim it is

A Surveillance Society by Thompson and Hickey is about how public surveillance is everywhere, looking at everything, and is never turned off. First, the PATRIOT Act was passed by Congress shortly after 9/11, and has allowed the government to start watching people. Ever since then the U.S. has increased its use of cameras in public places. Today, just about everywhere businesses and shoppers are, there are cameras. High-tech surveillance devices are more prevalent across populated areas. Corporations, agencies and even individuals monitor social areas with surveillance. With today’s technology, cameras are able to scan images and identify people. Organizations regularly share databases, swapping personal information. Some are opposed

The digital image of the face of a person can be matched against a record of other images by using face recognition software. In case that some of the images in the database go with the digitized image, the owner is reported about it by the system. Automatic face recognition has been studied and investigated extensively since 1990s and its usage is turning out to be no-nonsense in the present times. Although a number of automatic face recognition applications are relatively agreeable and harmless (access regulation to armaments, currency, illegal proof, nuclear equipment/supplies etc), there are still several dangers of face recognition systems that include violation of privacy and civil liberties, unrestrained exploitation, identity theft, illegal use of database, free access to personal data on social media etc. (Agre, 2001).

The use of surveillance is becoming increasingly evident around the world. Surveillance is carried out in many different forms from simple methods such as video surveillance to more complex methods such as call and browser monitoring. Although it might seem that surveillance is undeniably convenient when pursuing a criminal or preventing a terrorist attack, it is often misused and many are beginning to question why there

and what they are equipped to do. Some of these devices are able to scan and analyze , what they

Developed in the 1960s, facial recognition technology has been used by the government and companies to identify people by matching them to photos. The data for this software was originally entered manually, limiting the scope of use. By 2001, the novelty of more powerful facial recognition technology grasped the public’s attention. During the January 2001 Super Bowl, surveillance cameras captured images to find people with a criminal record (FBI 2013). This potential invasion of privacy under the pretense of public safety sparked a public debate about what private information the government was allowed to take from us. So should we be putting limitations on the use of facial recognition software in America in order to keep

With the seemingly exponential propagation of inexpensive digital communications technologies over recent years, the general public is becoming more aware of the issues surrounding information privacy and government surveillance in the digital age. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry with a smart-phone has to be wary of how they use their private information for fear of that information being collected and used in a way contrary to their wishes. "Leaky" smartphone apps that transmit private information across the internet can be unethically used by government agencies. The issue of privacy is a balancing act; the public usually wants increased privacy and the government usually wants increased access.

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

The Chicago state government’s decision of closing over 61 school buildings and 54 public schools, mostly attended by children of color from low-income families is an example of the contemporary practice of “Newspeak” - making as may as 30,000 youths uneducated. Of the 61 schools closed, 49 served elementary school students, 90 percent of whom are African American.

Government surveillance in the past was not a big threat due to the limitations on technology; however, in the current day, it has become an immense power for the government. Taylor, author of a book on Electronic Surveillance supports, "A generation ago, when records were tucked away on paper in manila folders, there was some assurance that such information wouldn 't be spread everywhere. Now, however, our life stories are available at the push of a button" (Taylor 111). With more and more Americans logging into social media cites and using text-messaging devices, the more providers of metadata the government has. In her journal “The Virtuous Spy: Privacy as an Ethical Limit”, Anita L. Allen, an expert on privacy law, writes, “Contemporary technologies of data collection make secret, privacy invading surveillance easy and nearly irresistible. For every technology of confidential personal communication…there are one or more counter-technologies of eavesdropping” (Allen 1). Being in the middle of the Digital Age, we have to be much more careful of the kinds of information we put in our digital devices.

To what extent should governments and companies be using biometric information obtained from facial recognition technology for surveillance and convenience in identifying individuals in society? This article discusses the legislature that must be implemented to protect our right to privacy. We will reach a conclusion by further analyzing the benefits and the risks of the new technology, evaluating the privacy issues that accompany, and discussing faults in the

Thesis statement: Government surveillance should be stopped because it is an invasion of privacy and gives the government control that is not enumerated in the constitution.

“The consciousness of being at war, and therefore in danger, makes the handing-over of all power to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival” (Orwell). The world today is full of many dangers domestic and abroad. It has become a routine in the news to report on the daily mass shooting or update with the war on terror. We live in a world where being worried is justified; however, we should not give up our constitutional rights in the face of fear. The NSA’s dragnet surveillance programs, such as PRISM, are both ineffective and are surpassed by less questionable national security programs. The FISA court's’ approval of NSA actions are not only illegal, but exist as an embarrassing formality. Surveillance is a necessary

In the modern world there have been a lot of technological advances within societies. Technology concerns about security and surveillance has changed the thoughts of people. This surveillance technology consist of spying video cameras, CCTV security and surveillance cameras, surveillance electronic communications, face recognition and many others. Some people think this technology is okay while others carry a different view.  These people feel that it is an invasion of privacy, especially when it is in a public place. Use of surveillance technology are impinging on our privacy as they are affecting student moral, privacy at workplace, behavior of people, life