The Future of the Surveillance Society

The past and present state of surveillance technology has been a fascinating topic to cover and debate. Now that we are entering the final week of this class (SOCI 149), I would like to analyze the future of the United States growing surveillance society. Like I have countlessly mentioned, 9/11 seriously altered our national beliefs and policies. Once a nation proudly living by our constitutional rights, the United States impulsively moved their reliance to "Big Brother". Only a month after the attack, the United States government had decided that national security now eclipsed the importance of civil liberties. On October 26th, 2001, former President Bush passed the Patriot Act, which reduced restrictions on law enforcement's and made it ridiculously easy for them to do their job without the burden of maintaining personal privacy. The controversial law was suppose to expire at the end of 2009, but President Barrack Obama surprisingly called to extend all three provisions of the law for another year. The fact that the now majority-run democratic Congress decided to extend the law was unexpected because most democrats were adamantly against it when Bush first implemented the act. Even Obama, back in May when running for president said, it was a "shoddy piece of legislature"...that most be changed to "track and take out the terrorist without undermining our constitution and freedom". Many believe that now that the democrats are in power and hold the responsibility for the act, they have no choice but to uphold it (it was easy to contradict it when Republicans were doing it). In Obama's defense, he did make some reforms to provide additional privacy protection but they were very minor because the government refused to reduce the effectiveness of the provisions. The government can still give law enforcements access to business records, jurisdiction to wiretap many suspecting phone lines, and the ability to "conduct surveillance on suspects with no known link to foreign governments or terrorist groups" (lone wolf provision); therefore, completely ignoring the the 4th amendment's importance of "probable cause". So we are certain of one thing for our future: The Patriot Act will sill be around for at least another year to justify our forgotten constitutional rights of privacy. Our system of checks and balances are in danger; some believe that we are now following a new political order. "We have moved from a state of emergency into a permanent state of exception with no end in sight". We cant keep acting on suspicion, we must fight for our privacy rights unless we want to create a government with too much authority and a society with fewer and fewer rights.

New Marketing Strategy: Privacy for Sale!

The United States is clearly transforming into a surveillance society. With new surveillance advances happening frequently, its hard not to take advantage of its technology. Business's have been changing their marketing strategies to keep up with the modern day technologies in a way that arguably crosses a line in personal privacy. Companies set up video cameras in their stores to not only keep an "eye" on suspecting shoplifters but to also identify every individual that nears the shop. Many firms have invested in face recognition cameras in order to record each customer's visit. Once the person is identified, companies can easily find consumer email address' and later send consumers a message reminding them of the company. Without consumer consent, a company can gain valuable personal information (email adress, name, age, residence..) about individuals to improve their marketing success. Due to selective attention, or the idea that each individual only "pays attention to things that interest them or are consistent with their attitudes, opinions, and beliefs", businesses feel the need to back-check possible customers in order to inform each individual of products that relate to their unique wants or needs.

Online companies are even worse when it comes to back-checking their customers. Most online companies have rights to their websites and therefore have the right to monitor them. Some companies on the Internet keep track of each searchers visit and monitors what products or services they browse through. Then, like physically run companies, online business's realize each individuals interests and informs them of similar products via email. They can also collect, organize and analyze all customer records (by age, sex, region..) to better decide future marketing techniques. Especially if a customer buys something online, a business can take their credit card number and find their personal financial accounts, face-book page, email address, and even medical records. The reason it is so easy for electronic business's to attain this kind of information is due to 1) i.p addresses and the 2) Gramm-Leach-Billey bill. Most people do not know what a i.p address is: it is "a numerical label that is assigned to computer network devices that interface identification and location addressing". So even if an individual just visits a site and does not buy anything (therefore not giving their credit card number) business' can still have access to at least consumers' name and residence. Even though those two things could help companies expand their knowledge on their target consumers, they still want more! Lucky for them the Gramm-Leach-Billey bill was passed. This bill "effectively gives companies permission to sell their customer's data to anyone they choose" (bill passed especially for financial institutions). Therefore, companies all of the world can sell and share information about their consumers to each other for a likable profit. Unfortunately for personal privacy, companies have even been known to sell consumer information to the government. This dangerous transaction could lead the government to alter citizen liberties if threatened by public data. In the end, companies risk destroying personal privacy and increasing the power of the Big Brother, all one thing: profit.

The Expansion of Phone Communication: The Fight for Security Access

I spoke in an earlier post (Smile, you're on Camera) about the United States growing obsession with public digital video recordings and electronic monitoring following the aftermath of 9/11. The United States, as well as the rest of the world, is determined to ramp up national security to enforce laws and regulations at all costs. Many governments have claimed that they have "the legitimate power to gather, store, and distribute massive collections of information about its citizens". To many Americans, this is a clear violation of the 4th amendment which guarantees US citizens the right of privacy. Unfortunately for people who fear the extinction of privacy, we are becoming a surveillance society with few barriers and set laws regarding the use of such technology.

This growing surveillance-dominating world is not run solely on digital camera or World Wide Web monitoring. Some of the most controversial political and social issues surrounding surveillance technology has to do with the growing demand for phone records. For years, governments all of the world have dealt with phone tapping allegations or rumors of gaining public call information without proper consent. Now, it seems that many national securities around the world are becoming dependent on collecting public information from cell phone services. Their dependence is in some ways understandable; phones are rapidly expanding their uses. Cell phones are no longer used for just calls, but email, messaging, surfing online and other valuable information that is arguably relevant to maintain government protection. Recently, the United Arab Emirates has threatened to ban Blackberry services by October 11th, 2010, unless the phones manufacturers (Research In Motion [RIM]) agree to give the government open access to all cell phone users personal calls. UAE argues that under "lawful interception", RIM, as a service provider, must "give law enforcement agencies access to the communications of private and corporate citizens." At first, RIM refused such demands because it violated consumer privacy and threatened to tarnish the the BlackBerry name. Unlike all its rivals, RIM controls its own server; therefore, making the BlackBerry a very safe form of communication. So private in fact that the UAE needed authorization to collect consumer data and catch possible criminals. (There is a video below describing the early reporting of the story). The United States Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton, comments that there are "legitimate security concerns" but also "legitimate concerns surrounding the right of access". Eventually, RIM folded. Taking into account the millions of cell phone users they would lose, they are now giving "initial approval" to UAE demands. Some people are outraged that RIM gave in to such an undemocratic demand and set a "dangerous precedent in limited freedom of information". UAE's success is causing others countries (Kuwait, India, China) to strive for access to public phone records. Is this the end to private calls?

Are some countries national security based on a culture of command and control or is there still hope of maintaining democratic rights of privacy?

CCTV technology (organizational structure and marketing strategies)

CCTV surveillance is recognizable for its advance video recording features such as face recognition, and missing object detection. This technology is most widely used in a variety of stores around the country to monitor company premises and customer behavior. CCTV is supplied by such companies as CPS, CCN and J&S. J&S has been a reliable partner to CCTV surveillance since 1988. The company was first set up in Taiwan but is now opening another office in Hong Kong; showcasing their digital products with the new Jet.com Brand Name. Their geographic move and investment in a new brand name lead the annual turnover of J&S to increase up to 25 million US dollars. The financial growth portrays customer confidence in the brand name and satisfaction with their products. Although the J&S made a lot of changes, they stuck to the organizational structures they have been following since the companies creation. The company environment is one of constant supervision and encouraged improvement. J&S follow Total Quality Management principles; this management system uses "strategy, data, and effective communication" to integrate high-quality performance. The company is run similar to Weber's 4th Ideal Type which focuses deeply on performance monitoring for rational improvement. On the J&S website, they stress the importance of testing their technology and constantly monitoring workforces activity to ensure "state-of-the-art" and reasonably priced products for customer satisfaction. Therefore, like Weber's 4th Ideal type, J&S may keep records of employee or department performance to make decisions on wether to improve company procedures. The organizational chart (meaning more horizontally structured) of the company is located above.

I would also like to quickly touch on CCTV's marketing techniques. I found this video that stresses the importance of customer perceptions. The speaker argues that, in terms of selling a product, companies most assume customer perceptions are realities. What we think dictates how we act and affects what we ultimately buy. Therefore, in order to sell CCTV surveillance, firms must create a reality that appeals to the consumer first and the product second. They indirectly showcase the importance of the 4 P's of marketing (Promotion, Product, Price, Place), which all sell the product around customer perception. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sarrneJhYOU

America's Growth in Technology and Suspicion (Week2)

The history of the American utilization of surveillance technology began with the creation of the video cassette recorders as early as the 1970's. Each tape only held about 24 hours worth of memory, but it was still a step up from closed circuit television systems (CCTV). Video surveillance did not become widespread until the 1980's when business's, governments, and even private sectors started preserving them for possible judicial evidence. The technology proved to grow rapidly; not even a decade later, by the 1990's, Digital Multiplexing, which allowed several cameras to record at once, hit the market. By the mid- 1990's, it was not rare to see video cameras set up in business or government buildings. Most people during that time knew of their existence but didn't feel the technology affected their lives that much. Nothing changed the public's awareness of video surveillance as much as the devastating events of September 11th, 2001. When the twin towers, two of the most impressive man-made structures in American history, were destroyed in less than an hour, it seemed that American trust had suddenly vanished. Surveillance technology became a necessary form of national protection rather then a desired legal precaution almost over night. In less then a year, by May 2002, American companies had developed face recognition software and installed these more advanced cameras all over Washington DC and New York. The revolution of satellite technology, which signals can be found on the Internet, even allows any American to spy on almost anyone in the world at any time with little to no viewable boundaries. The American people became so paranoid about being prepared for a future attack or crime that the public, businesses and especially the government seem to act as if public surveillance eclipses the importance of personal information and privacy.

America is now surreptitiously being overrun by the business of personal information. People are dangerously unaware that they are under surveillance almost everyday. Companies that are unheard of (Verint, Choice Point, indentix, just to name a few), work for the government to set up advance types of surveillance that allow them to create personal informational records on millions of America. The technological abilities that are now possible are impressive but also daunting to say the least. They do not just monitor suspecting criminals but everyone. They can find out someone's location, sexual desires, past internet searches and even more information that was once thought to be private. Here is a video that clearly depicts the Americas growing obsession with surveillance technology http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDSCC5iR_DE

“The United State is at risk of turning into a full-fledged surveillance society"(Jay Stanley). An intense lack of national trust has caused us to revert back to a time of suspicion and extreme strategies to stay “in control” of our lives. I worry that America will become too dependent on video surveillance and that it will be hard for our society to mature in an environment that refuses to trust others. However, others believe that video surveillance is an effective way to prevent crime and is the best way to keep our nation safe. What do you think?

Smile, you're on Camera =)

à When people walk into retail stores, business firms, fancy hotels or national banks, many can expect to run into the sign "Smile, you're on camera". It makes many suddenly look around for the security camera at first, but then go about their daily activities. The sign serves as a reminder; it not only encourages moral behavior, but also indirectly highlights surveillance technologies advances in our society. Many people still think of surveillance as a secretive form of technology that, without public awareness, catches people when they are most vulnerable. However, many places clearly inform people when they are being watched as if to coax good behavior. This, I believe, is the best and most respectful way to use public recordings. Despite this type of surveillance, the growing reliance on surveillance protection has created different ways to spy on others; ways that revert back to the secretive sense of the technology. In this generation, you can find not only business's and the government using surveillance, but mothers and even schools. Anybody using the technology can arguably decide to use it in a surreptitious manner. Everyone has heard rumors of nanny cams or even changing room cams. The question is wether many of these cameras cross a line on personal privacy.

One school in the Philadelphia district decided to secretly install cameras in the laptop computers given to each student. When the school showed a picture of a student with a pill, representing drugs, in his hand while in the comfort of his own home, the secret was out. The school may have released the photo to attempt to scare kids away from drugs. However, not only was the way in which the picture taken arguably illegal and a complete violation of privacy, the supposed pill was just a mikes ikes candy. The family of the photographed child sued the school for wrongfully spying on their child. Here is the news report on the incident along with many interesting comments from the public. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-G6dN8DYHE

Surveillance technology is known for monitoring and analyzing public actions and behaviors. Many automatically associate such technology with video recordings. However, there are a plethora of different types of surveillance technology that reaches far beyond the stationary cameras spoken about above. It can involve telephone taping, online scanning, biometric surveillance (like DNA identification), ariel surveillance, satellite imagery, Radio Frequency Identification, GPS (Global Positioning Stations), or even disease surveillance (used to monitor the progress of disease). These types are just the start of what surveillance technology can soon advance towards in the near future. Please keep an "eye" out for more forms of surveillance. If anyone wants me to research further into a more unique one, please let me know!

Indroduction

My Blog topic is going to be Surveillance Technology. I will really enjoying creating this blog because the subject matter is so broad that it can be researched and analyzed in great depth. The many types of Surveillance Technology conjure up constant social, professional and political issues. Surveillance obviously has a huge and growing impact on our everyday lives, but what are the effects? The public either despises such technology because it violates their privacy or they greatly appreciate it due to its sense of public protection. I really want my readers to also consider the more inconspicuous debates and facts surrounding this topic: Does all surveillance technology have to do with video recordings of "spying" on the public? Is it difficult to have jurisdiction to set up such technology in society or is it a personal choice to do so? What is the financial strain surveillance technology is putting on corporations or even the nation? In order to answer such questions as these and many more, I will attempt to analyze the past, present and future social effects behind many different forms of surveillance technologies while also debating the business and political reasons and effects of their creation.