Why Privacy Matters Analysis

According to “A Surveillance Society” By William E. Thompson there are camera everywhere, watching everything you do at all times. Cameras are found everywhere and are used by everyone, including the governments of the world who use it the most to track its citizens and potential threats to the safety of their nation. People are more willing to be watched in order to feel safer everywhere they go such as the supermarket to your own workplace. Governments can now look into your email, travel records, credit history and your personal life without your knowledge of them ever doing so, even your neighbors can now easily buy tools to spy on others or to protect themselves from danger; Things such as security cameras

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

Thesis statement: Though some might argue that the wearing of body cameras violate privacy, in fact the use of the cameras will minimize violence, show accountability, and a human side of policing.

Throughout his article, he discusses both sides of the issue. He begins by stating that many believe cameras are needed to maintain security in modern times. However, he also mentions that the cameras are expensive to acquire, maintain and that they are an invasion of privacy. Brasch mentions that with the cameras there is "less overtime paperwork from officers having to defend themselves or explain how a traffic stop happened in court" and that it keeps more people honest (2). Brasch then goes on to include information about a police department that got rid of the law enforcement cameras in their department due to the cost and maintenance. He also mentions a police department that will not install any cameras because they believe it is against individual rights. The author then goes on to include that the cameras would help clear up situations that are difficult to understand such as police-officer related deaths. Other opinions believe the cameras would not help clear up the controversy caused when there is shooting incidents. The author concludes that although cameras have pros and cons not all problems can be solved with them. This article is very informative to read when one wants to be informed about law enforcement cameras. Brasch provides support for each point he makes on both sides of the argument. He also maintains a neutral tone in his writing, the only bias coming from the quotes he takes from sources. However, Brasch does not elaborate long on the opinion that cameras invade privacy. This is a weakness for his article since the opinion can easily be disproved by looking to other sources for information. The article "Public Video Surveillance: Is It An Effective Crime Prevention Tool?" by Marcus Nieto states that the cameras "surveillance is physically

The topic of this paper is privacy. It will talk about the ethical and legal reasons for maintain privacy. The audience for this paper is high school level teachers in a school with one-to-one devices for every student.

Many will argue that the security measurements the government are taking are going too far, so far that it is being questioned whether privacy is being invaded, Bailey Nunn investigates. T he on-going intractable nature of the “privacy vs. security” debate has, for numerous years, been unresolved. Those who believe in security over privacy intend to make a safer city, whilst others believe that their privacy is being unnecessarily invaded, nevertheless, this topic is argued globally. In many countries, the use of surveillance cameras has become very prevalent, inevitably leading to more privacy issues being raised by citizens. The use of surveillance devices has become so common that it has affected our way of living, we are no longer able

In his essay “Why Privacy Matters” from The Wilson Quarterly, Jeffrey Rosen offers a compelling account of the harmful effects of eradicating our privacy. Rosen ventures into several different fields affected by the ever-growing intrusion of our privacy, offering a rich compendium of illustrations from the real world. From Monica Lewinsky’s fate under her investigation, to a Charles Schwab employee, Rosen offers a prolific arsenal of incidents where the dignity of privacy is challenged. In his descriptive examples, Rosen demonstrates a broad expertise within the field by taking his time to describe a careful characterization of each case by both implying his own personal experience

Today’s government can implement surveillance like in 1984, but the surveillance our government would do would be nothing like the surveillance in 1984. In 1984 the surveillance was to keep all citizens within Party protocol, where as today’s surveillance would be in place for the safety of the citizens. Today’s security cameras are not used to control people like in 1984, but instead are used to keep a watchful eye over the citizens and try to protect them or make them feel more safe. In the article, “Long Beach Police to Use 400 Cameras Citywide to Fight Crime,” the author talks about today’s use for security cameras and how they are being used to attempt to keep our cities safe, rather than being used to spy on the citizens

Thesis statement: Though some might argue that the wearing of body cameras violate privacy, in fact the use of the cameras will minimize violence, show accountability, and a human side of policing.

The people against surveillance also pressure the fact that cameras can bring to mind off-putting emotions in citizens, giving citizens a feeling of being constantly observed and somewhat controlled. This refers both to adults and children, who have already recognized their views on the society, government, and the state, or who are in the process of developing a view. Jay C. Stanley, a higher-ranking policy analyst for the American Civil Liberties Union thinks, “Constant surveillance, from the time children enter school to the time they leave, teaches the wrong thing about the relationship between the citizen and the government in a democratic society.” Stated succinctly, children may believe the state has a right to interfere in the private

I was very surprised when I first heard that police officers in certain states of the United States were going to be required to wear body cameras. I was surprised because I thought many people would be against the intrusion of their privacy, and the fears of government intrusion would normally bring fierce debates against the authorities. However, I became even more confused when it became clear that the cameras were not for the surveillance of

In the text “A Surveillance Society,”, authors William E. Thompson and Joseph V. Hickey provided information about growing surveillance trends, new types of technology, and the impact of the surveillance. First, many surveillance trends are becoming more popular all throughout the world. Today, there are cameras everywhere you go, whether it is on the streets or in grocery stores, almost all of the time people are being watched. Since the technology of surveillance is more common, a lot of people are being photographed many times during the day. Even if it is not a photograph of your face, the cameras can photograph your license plate and link the car back to you. A main reason these surveillance trends are growing

Due to the recent shootings and protests of Michael Brown in Ferguson MO, Eric Garner in Staten Island NY, Walter Scott in North Charleston SC, and Freddy Gray in Baltimore, Maryland the subject of police body cameras has gained momentum. (12) Thomas Jefferson once stated, “Whenever you do a thing, act as if all the world were watching. “Psychologists have supported the fact that when people feel that they are being watched, even when it is a pair of eyes on a poster, their behavior is better and thefts are reduced within that vicinity. (2) There are many arguments both for and against this technology such as it holds everyone accountable, privacy concerns for not just the public but officers, transparency, and trust. (1) Over 77% of

Possibly the technological feature creating the most controversy is surveillance cameras. What is seemingly there for public safety could also inhibit safety by exposing the public’s private life. Every move made under the hawk-like vision of the camera is observed and judged by someone sitting behind the scenes. Women risk being stalked by sexual predators, and assailants have been known to memorize the schedule of a subject in order to time the perfect attack (Stead). “Bad cops” may gain insight to a personal life that allows for the watcher to blackmail the victim. In recent studies it has been proven that an increase in surveillance cameras does not decrease the crime rate; it

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