Surveillance is any collection and processing of personal data, whether identifiable or not, for the purposes of influencing or managing those whose data have been gathered [1]. Until modern times the scale of surveillance was generally small and the watching unsystematic. There were cost limitations as people would have to watch over each other and this could be impractical. Today, the most important means of surveillance comes from the use of computer power rather than people watching over each other. The massive growth in computer application areas and technical enhancement makes communication and IT central to surveillance and makes the idea of a ‘Big Brother’ type society possible.
All societies that are dependent on communication and information technologies for administrative and control processes are surveillance societies [1]. Nowadays, routine and mundane surveillance, usually mounted by organisations and agencies is embedded into every aspect of life. Everyday life is subject to monitoring, checking, scrutinising and it is now difficult to find a place that is totally secure from some form of purposeful tracking, tagging, listening, watching, recording or verification device. All of this is due to the various low cost ways to conduct surveillance.
The United Kingdom in particular is viewed as a pioneer of a mass surveillance society. At the end of 2006, a surveillance studies network described the UK as ‘the most surveilled country’ among the industrialised Western states. Since October 2007 telecommunications companies have been required to keep records of phone calls and text messages for one year. In 2008 plans were being made to collect data on people’s phones, e-mail and web-browsing habits. The database would hold information such as telephone numbers dialled, websites visited and addresses to which e-mails are sent but not actually the content of e-mails or telephone conversations. All of this would all be included in the Communications Data Bill [2]. Perhaps the most worrying part is that Britain is suggested to be the worst Western democracy at protecting individual privacy. This suggestion is not too far-fetched as there have been many embarrassing cases of data loss such as in 2007, when 2 computer discs were lost which included bank details of 25 million people [3].
Although mass surveillance is widely viewed with negative opinion, there are a number of reasons to justify why it is used on this scale. The most obvious reason is security – the UK is swamped with closed circuit television (CCTV) cameras. It is reported that there are 4.2 million CCTV cameras in Britain; that is about one for every 14 people [4] and on average, people appear on CCTV about 300 times per day. The effectiveness of CCTV is yet to be fully proven but one review concludes that CCTV does have a significant desirable effect on crime, even if the overall reduction is only 4% [5]. Sometimes the convenience of using telephone or credit cards means that we rarely think twice about the fact that calls and transactions are traceable and that others may profit from obtaining this data. In fact, Mr Bowden, the chief privacy advisor, EMEA Microsoft, suggests that 10-20% of the population will not even care much about privacy [6].
Another case of where convenience is the over-riding factor in people’s acceptance of being surveilled is with Oyster travel cards. Around 5 million Londoners who use this have records of their bus, tube and train journeys kept for the previous 8 weeks. Police have also been quick to take advantage of this to track the movements of criminals [7]. Mobile phones are also being used to track the movements of people. As long as a phone is switched on, mobile phone triangulation has now made it possible to establish the location of a mobile phone up to an accuracy of a few metres. In the UK, a request by the government means that the location of everybody’s mobile phone is recorded continuously by telecommunications companies and the data is kept for at least twelve months [8].
In the UK, there is anything up to 160 store loyalty card schemes. People may think that store loyalty cards are a great idea as using them can earn you discounts. However what some people forget is that the primary purpose of these cards is to collect information on shoppers spending habits. Nectar is the biggest loyalty scheme and they collect only data on how much is spent, where and when but this information can also be matched to other databases which include demographic information and so offers can be tailored to suit individual customers.
MP’s in the UK believe that the UK is not becoming a surveillance society but they admit that function creep (information collected for one purpose is gradually allowed to be used for other purposes which people may not approve of) still poses a danger. In particular, they were concerned that the increasing use of databases to store information on children could be used for predictive profiling, with the government able to single out children deemed by computers to be likely future criminals [9]. There are numerous rationales behind why politicians do not want the UK to be seen as a surveillance society. There are dangers present in large-scale surveillance systems as power does tend to corrupt or at least skew the vision of those who wield it. An example of this is in the USA, where many Muslim Americans find it difficult when trying to reserve flights as they will be subject to more intensive scrutiny than people of other races. This clearly goes against human and civil rights as white Americans will never really have to experience such problems. This is why people generally do not trust other people who know “too much” and consequently, this is why the UK government does not want their country to be viewed as a surveillance society.
In conclusion, it is evident that the UK is in fact becoming a surveillance society. MP’s may try to deny this but a 36-nation survey pointed out that Britain is one of the bottom five countries with “endemic surveillance”, with the 2 worst countries being Malaysia and China.
We are constantly being watched every day and with the exponential growth of technology, surveillance systems are always becoming cheaper to operate while also becoming more sophisticated. Police can find out information about your conversations, your contacts and friends, where you have been and the truth is: almost anything can be found out about anyone and nowadays, it is nearly impossible to remain unseen and anonymous.
All societies that are dependent on communication and information technologies for administrative and control processes are surveillance societies [1]. Nowadays, routine and mundane surveillance, usually mounted by organisations and agencies is embedded into every aspect of life. Everyday life is subject to monitoring, checking, scrutinising and it is now difficult to find a place that is totally secure from some form of purposeful tracking, tagging, listening, watching, recording or verification device. All of this is due to the various low cost ways to conduct surveillance.
The United Kingdom in particular is viewed as a pioneer of a mass surveillance society. At the end of 2006, a surveillance studies network described the UK as ‘the most surveilled country’ among the industrialised Western states. Since October 2007 telecommunications companies have been required to keep records of phone calls and text messages for one year. In 2008 plans were being made to collect data on people’s phones, e-mail and web-browsing habits. The database would hold information such as telephone numbers dialled, websites visited and addresses to which e-mails are sent but not actually the content of e-mails or telephone conversations. All of this would all be included in the Communications Data Bill [2]. Perhaps the most worrying part is that Britain is suggested to be the worst Western democracy at protecting individual privacy. This suggestion is not too far-fetched as there have been many embarrassing cases of data loss such as in 2007, when 2 computer discs were lost which included bank details of 25 million people [3].
Although mass surveillance is widely viewed with negative opinion, there are a number of reasons to justify why it is used on this scale. The most obvious reason is security – the UK is swamped with closed circuit television (CCTV) cameras. It is reported that there are 4.2 million CCTV cameras in Britain; that is about one for every 14 people [4] and on average, people appear on CCTV about 300 times per day. The effectiveness of CCTV is yet to be fully proven but one review concludes that CCTV does have a significant desirable effect on crime, even if the overall reduction is only 4% [5]. Sometimes the convenience of using telephone or credit cards means that we rarely think twice about the fact that calls and transactions are traceable and that others may profit from obtaining this data. In fact, Mr Bowden, the chief privacy advisor, EMEA Microsoft, suggests that 10-20% of the population will not even care much about privacy [6].
Another case of where convenience is the over-riding factor in people’s acceptance of being surveilled is with Oyster travel cards. Around 5 million Londoners who use this have records of their bus, tube and train journeys kept for the previous 8 weeks. Police have also been quick to take advantage of this to track the movements of criminals [7]. Mobile phones are also being used to track the movements of people. As long as a phone is switched on, mobile phone triangulation has now made it possible to establish the location of a mobile phone up to an accuracy of a few metres. In the UK, a request by the government means that the location of everybody’s mobile phone is recorded continuously by telecommunications companies and the data is kept for at least twelve months [8].
In the UK, there is anything up to 160 store loyalty card schemes. People may think that store loyalty cards are a great idea as using them can earn you discounts. However what some people forget is that the primary purpose of these cards is to collect information on shoppers spending habits. Nectar is the biggest loyalty scheme and they collect only data on how much is spent, where and when but this information can also be matched to other databases which include demographic information and so offers can be tailored to suit individual customers.
MP’s in the UK believe that the UK is not becoming a surveillance society but they admit that function creep (information collected for one purpose is gradually allowed to be used for other purposes which people may not approve of) still poses a danger. In particular, they were concerned that the increasing use of databases to store information on children could be used for predictive profiling, with the government able to single out children deemed by computers to be likely future criminals [9]. There are numerous rationales behind why politicians do not want the UK to be seen as a surveillance society. There are dangers present in large-scale surveillance systems as power does tend to corrupt or at least skew the vision of those who wield it. An example of this is in the USA, where many Muslim Americans find it difficult when trying to reserve flights as they will be subject to more intensive scrutiny than people of other races. This clearly goes against human and civil rights as white Americans will never really have to experience such problems. This is why people generally do not trust other people who know “too much” and consequently, this is why the UK government does not want their country to be viewed as a surveillance society.
In conclusion, it is evident that the UK is in fact becoming a surveillance society. MP’s may try to deny this but a 36-nation survey pointed out that Britain is one of the bottom five countries with “endemic surveillance”, with the 2 worst countries being Malaysia and China.
We are constantly being watched every day and with the exponential growth of technology, surveillance systems are always becoming cheaper to operate while also becoming more sophisticated. Police can find out information about your conversations, your contacts and friends, where you have been and the truth is: almost anything can be found out about anyone and nowadays, it is nearly impossible to remain unseen and anonymous.
References:
[1] Lyon, D, Surveillance Society – Monitoring Everyday Life, 2001
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_surveillance
[3] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7103566.stm
[4] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6108496.stm
[5] http://www.crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk/cctv/cctv31.htm
[6] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6107764.stm
[7] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4800490.stm
[8] http://mrslippery.blogspot.com/search/label/data%20retention
[9] http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/08/home_affairs_report_surveillance/
No comments:
Post a Comment