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
Kathleen, this is really interesting. I like the fact that you mentioned the extreme repercussions of September 11th. You're absolutely right; people's trust in society has diminished, and surveillance technology brings us one step closer to what we feel to be "safety". It's interesting because surveillance technology does not reinstate trust; in fact, it strengthens the lack of trust we have because it sort of shields us from finding alternate ways to regain the trust that we've lost. Do you think surveillance technology further disconnects us from having a close, trustworthy society or does it actually bring us closer to trying to fight crime together? It's a very interesting concept.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with the final comment you have posted at the end. That's where my initial thought process was going, for I'm one to believe that technology in general is starting to control our lives. I agree that surveillance technology is beneficial to fighting crime, but I don't think it's leading us to the ideal society of trust and cooperation. If surveillance technology is a bad thing, how do we transition out of it?
ReplyDeleteI never though of video surveillance and the effect that September 11th had on this technology. This was an interesting way to look at the aftermath of 9/11. Usually people only think of privacy invasion via phone taps that the government can use, completely ignoring the fact that with the internet, satellites can easily allow someone to have complete access to another person, without that person's knowledge or consent.
ReplyDeleteYou also mentioned a lack of trust in your posting, and that's definitely something that is worth mentioning. However, I think that it's completely warranted. The government has been exposed of lying to the American public a few times several times since 9/11. A perfect example would be the mysterious WMDs in Iraq. There might not be a way to reunite the country the way it was in the weeks immediately following 9/11, but since the public doesn't trust the government, I understand why the government feels the need investigate every citizen so thoroughly.
You also mention that video surveillance is used to prevent crime. I definitely see it used to prevent crimes such as shoplifting everyday. I know that it's intended purpose doesn't always work though. At my job, we get several professional shoplifters in everyday and that doesn't include the lower level shoplifting that occurs, while all of these people completely ignore the cameras.
Do you think that video surveillance will keep increasing with negative connotations or do you think a much more powerful surveillance technology will take over?
The idea that we would be willing to give up our civil liberties to be "safe" is an interesting thought. After 911 an agenda was pushed that allowed for more surveillance and and information gathering on ordinary people!
ReplyDeleteWould you be willing to give up your privacy to be safe? Is this the ideal society?
In response to
ReplyDeleteCnols4: I do not believe surveillance technology is completely a "bad thing" but it, like I explained in depth above, is not always a good thing either. If most people associate the technology with a negative connotation, its hard to say how we would transitions out of it. Americans, in general, are so rapped up in the necessity of complete national awareness that it would take many years and many changes (environmental, global, social, economical...) for us to even consider limiting our obsession with surveillance technology. We would some how have to gain our trust back. The only time that will happen is when America is no longer in war, the economy becomes more stable, or anything else to gain back our national confidence.
Jgibby:I cant saw whether views on surveillance will become increasingly negative because there are such a variety of views in America. However, more and more people are starting to loss faith in the government. If this is truly the case, the government could in theory soon loss the publics tolerance of surveillance technology used in their daily lives. On the other hand, America is such an innovative country that its not hard to believe that a more powerful surveillance technology could potentially "take over"; encouraging citizens to feel comfortably protected.
Professor Armstrong: I usually would lean towards the view of safety before privacy, but there is definitely a possible line to be crossed. In most cases, I believe, as long as I am told my privacy may be breached, I am more likely to let my guard down and give up privacy for protection. For example, the idea to scan airport passengers in a detector that can shows every personal aspect of each passenger seems relevant to airport safety and therefore not offensive to me. However, allowing the government to surreptitiously spy on use (without the knowledge of when and what info they take), is in my eyes, crossing the line. However, like I said, everyone has different views in society. What are your thoughts?