Current News
Surveillance Verses Privacy
Lisa Capasso Photos by Lisa Capasso
ARGO STAFF WRITER
The recent attacks in Paris are heartbreaking, and it has come to light that no
chatter or forewarning of the planned terrorism was picked up by security mea-
sures. Now, there is a renewed fear here that terrorism will be attempted in the
US. Although the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency), FBI (Federal Bureau of In-
vestigations), and NSA (National Security Agency) take active steps to uncover
threats in the making, is enough being done regarding surveillance? With digital
technology, the government monitors quite a bit of information electronically for
the purpose of public safety. Yet, the debate of surveillance verses privacy will
undoubtedly come to the surface again as increased security is anticipated.
One problem is that some people feel violated if governmental surveil-
lance is done without due cause. However, the reality is that uncovering due
cause usually does not occur until the discovery of a potential red flag happens
first, and the government does have a duty to protect society. After the 9/11/2001
terrorist attacks on the US, Congress quickly enacted the USA PATRIOT Act
(Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required
to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism). The Acts main purpose is to allow law
enforcement and federal agencies to investigate for terrorists activity without
warrants. Some people strongly protest against the current NSAs surveillance
program (Internet and phone spying).
Privacy seems to be a disappearing concept as social media is embraced.
Details of activities, thoughts, and feelings are put online for the world to see.
18 THE ARGO NOVEMBER 23 2015
Yet on the other hand, the claim is made by many of those people that the right
to privacy should take priority over the governments initiatives to thwart killers.
Perhaps its a little ironic. Clearly, privacy is not what it was as before the elec
-
tronic gadgets of today.
Digital technology has greatly changed the ways we live, are seen, and
see others; it is continuously evolving. Advances in communication have greatly
benefitted society as a whole, but this connectivity does come with costs and
sacrifices. In addition, newer private messaging apps with encryption and self-
destruction enable secrecy more than ever, even hidden from cyber security. Ex
-
perts say that infiltrating private message groups and actually increasing infor
-
mation gathering, not decreasing efforts, is necessary in order to stay ahead of
those looking to do harm.
Unfortunately, 100% safety against crime or terrorism is unachievable,
but surveillance can be used well as a tool to find those planning terrible inci
-
dents and raise the likelihood of preventing disaster. As seen in Paris, a breach of
security or missing any threat can result in grave consequences. Can both society
and privacy be protected? Should terrorists be allowed to plan in secret or should
civil liberties be sacrificed so that the government can monitor communications?
Due diligence and prudent proactive measures are required so as to avoid trag
-
edies and the need for reactive measures. Especially in these times of heightened
sensitivity, governmental intervention is warranted. Could it be worthwhile to
forsake enough privacy for the greater good of protecting society?