Ethics of Data Surveillance

Surveillance is the observation or monitoring of a person.  It includes visual observation as well as the observation of behavior, speech and actions.  Some examples of surveillance include cameras, wiretaps, GPS tracking and Internet surveillance.  Now, in the technology age, surveillance has become even more intrusive than it was in the past.  Electronics have made it easier for the government to perform surveillance. The USA PATRIOT Act (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism) was legislation passed after the 9/11/2001 attacks on the US. Now, the NSA maintains a database of all calls within US borders and international calls where one party is in the United States.  The citizen does not have the same rights to privacy when it comes to electronic surveillance and that is what is being debated currently.  Why should we care?

Most people don’t break the law and therefore should not have to worry about being targeted.  These citizens will be safer as criminals will be taken care of, and it will not have any impact on the citizen.  The government already has the ability to track where we are most of the time, what we buy, online activities, conversations on the phone and what is in our mail.  Is that ethical?  Should they be able to invade our privacy so much?  If we are okay with the way things are currently, the government easily can expand the surveillance programs of the future.  An example of this was given in a Stanford University project indicating, “Discussion has shifted towards DNA collection. British police are now pushing for the DNA collection of children who "exhibit behavior indicating they may become criminals in later life" (Wu).

How do we ensure the power of national security is not used irresponsibly?  For example, sometimes by nature of the fact that the state is acting to secure us, other acts of wrongdoing are exposed.  Does that mean that it is time to use that information to disclose the wrongdoing?  Typically then there is a “leak” and the information becomes public. 

Right now the US has massive surveillance Internet activity.  The debate is the balance between citizen privacy and ensuring national security.  These are moral debates because we are talking about things that are secret.  The Constitution calls for a system of checks and balances.  The press helps to expose the government.  The system in place now calls for the collection and minimization of data, but only if the suspect poses a reasonable threat or suspicion. 

56% of people say that security is more important than privacy (Wu).  It is something that works to keep us safe.  These people see the risk of immediate danger.  Others may not remember the threat of twelve years ago with 911.  Where is the line between privacy and security?

Wu, Tony, et al. "Ethics." The Ethics (or not) of Massive Government Surveillance. Stanford.edu, n.d. Web. 21 June 2013. <http://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~eroberts/cs201/projects/ethics-of-surveillance/legal.html>.