Posts Tagged ‘privacy’
Civil rights activists have long called for police officers to wear body cameras. But recently, after seemingly endless incidents of conflicts between police and citizens–many that led to the deaths of unarmed black men and were recorded on bystanders’ cell phone videos–more cities are implementing the use of body-worn cameras for their law enforcement personnel. About a third of the nation’s 18,000 police agencies are now either testing body cameras or have embraced them to record their officers’ interactions with the public.
Researchers from the University of Cambridge’s Institute of Criminology published the first full scientific study of the experiment they conducted on policing with body-worn-cameras in Rialto, California in 2012. The experiment showed that evidence capture is just one output of body-worn video, and the technology is perhaps most effective at actually preventing escalation during police-public interactions: whether that is attacks on or abuse of police officers, or unnecessary use of force by law enforcement. The study found that when the officers wore body cameras, public complaints against police were down 88% compared with the previous 12 months, while the officers’ use of force fell by 60%.
While the hope is that the cameras will increase transparency, accountability and boost police-community relations, their widespread use has also raised concerns about the privacy of people caught in body camera footage. There are also important questions about public access, review, storage, tampering and disciplinary action for officers who don’t use the devices properly. The cameras are also expensive. They can range in price from $300 to $800 per officer, and monthly video storage costs can cost hundreds of thousands more. In September, the Justice Department announced $23 million in grants for a pilot program to help agencies in 32 states to expand the use of body-worn cameras and explore their impact.
Should police officers be required to use body cameras?
This is the Essential Question explored in a recent addition to SIRS Issues Researcher’s list of over 345 Leading Issues: Police and Body Cameras.
For all Leading Issues, SIRS Editors create an engaging Essential Question, a summary for context, viewpoint statements, plus supporting articles to help build solid foundations for understanding the issues. Thousands of hand-selected, highly targeted newspaper and magazine articles, graphics, charts, maps, primary sources, government documents, websites, multimedia, as well as critical thinking questions, and timelines help broaden student comprehension of each topic. A Research Guide is offered to help guide each student through their assignment step by step.
Educators, direct your students to the new and updated SIRS Issues Researcher to dig deeper into the topic of Police and Body Cameras. Or they can explore these related issues:
Data gathering in schools goes beyond the collection of grades, test scores, and attendance. It even goes beyond recording what computer programs students use or what Web sites they visit.
Student “data” now encompasses students’ sleeping habits, health, fitness regimens, alcohol use, prescription drug use, financial situations, feelings, peer groups, interests…the list goes on.
Backlash against this increasing encroachment into students’ lives reached the House of Representatives in late April in the form of the Student Digital Privacy and Parental Rights Act of 2015. The legislation would prohibit certain invasions of student privacy.
As with most social issues, this one is complicated and complex. And as with most laws considered by U.S. politicians, the Student Digital Privacy and Parental Rights Act of 2015 has stirred controversy. There seem to be possible benefits and detriments to the stipulations of the bill, if passed. Further, some think that the proposed legislation is too strict; others, too lenient.
Many parents of students have voiced discomfort, and even alarm, about the sharing of their children’s information with third parties. According to current law, schools can share collected data strictly for the benefit of assessing and improving education. At its best, this procedure allows legitimate researchers and social scientists to study the results of the collected data and make suggestions for improvements. School districts then enact changes, and the education system improves.
This type of collaboration greatly benefitted the Chicago public-school system, and offers great promise to a current partnership between the Boston public-school district and early-childhood experts at Harvard University. Had the proposed legislation been in place, these collaborations would have been too costly for the schools. Specialized expertise in the field of education would be beyond most districts’ budgets.
The new legislation would stiffen the rules and regulations around such collaboration. Imagine the cost (in both time and resources) of requiring that schools request permission from each parent (or student, depending on his or her age) for the use of certain personal data in studies aspiring for educational improvements. This law would deter financially struggling schools or school districts from participating in valuable collaborative efforts.
This discussion–embodied within the issue of student privacy itself–is simply a small part of the much larger debate of privacy rights in the United States. Join SKS and its July Spotlight of the Month in delving into the 2015-2016 National High School Debate Topic: Surveillance: Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially curtail its domestic surveillance. Consider issues such as personal violations and national security; read what political commentator David Frum and journalist Julian Assange have to say about domestic surveillance; and quiz yourself on the country’s use of drones are unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVS).
Choose Privacy Week, May 1-7, is an American Library Association (ALA) initiative to teach librarians and library users about privacy rights in a digital age. And, this year’s featured event is a Webinar called Defense Against the Digital Dark Arts, which will offer advice on how to protect one’s privacy and personal data online.
Inventor of the World Wide Web, Tim Berners-Lee, has criticized the surveillance of citizens by governments and advocated an online Magna Carta to protect the rights of users. In addition, recent polls, including ones conducted by USA Today/Pew Research Center and AP-GfK, show that Americans are increasingly placing more value on privacy over protection from terrorism. Yet, national security and law enforcement agencies argue that enhanced national security is needed to prevent terrorist strikes.
Choose SIRS Issues Researcher to help your students answer the following question:
Should governments engage in surveillance of their citizens in the interests of national security?
When you direct your students to our National Security and Privacy Leading Issue in SIRS, they will find the tools and information they need to answer this essential question. There, they can read an overview, gather statistics, and retrieve editorially-selected articles and images and formulate an opinion on this issue.
Is your school or library celebrating Choose Privacy Week? If so, let us know what you’re doing in the comments section below.
The U.S. Department of Defense’s National Security Agency, known as the NSA, has the authority to gather information on foreign terrorists and spies through extensive computer and phone surveillance. This power is monitored by Congress and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), and many rules govern this surveillance, such as acquiring warrants to access phone records. But the agency’s practices have been in question, such as in 2006, when Americans learned that the agency was tapping the nation’s phone conversations.
On June 6, the details of a classified NSA program called PRISM were leaked to the press. Edward Snowden, who worked for the NSA, thought that this program was unethical and wanted the American people to know that their online privacy was being invaded. So he shared secret information about PRISM with journalists. He told the press that, through the PRISM program, NSA workers could access the main servers of nine U.S. Internet companies, meaning that the agency could view emails, videos, audio, photographs, and other documents of both U.S. citizens and people living in other countries.
Some people are supporting Snowden’s decision to reveal what he knows about PRISM. They believe, as he did, that the program violates Americans’ privacy rights. Others are calling Snowden a traitor, trusting that the U.S. government is doing what is necessary to protect the American people. What do you think? Visit this month’s Discoverer In the News, read over the article, and decide for yourself. Check out the accompanying editorial cartoon…what does it say about government surveillance and privacy rights?
October is National Cyber Security Awareness Month. Use this month as an opportunity to inform yourself on the Leading Issues surrounding your personal information on the Internet. Unlock the Identity Theft Leading Issue to understand how someone becomes a victim and ponder viewpoints and perspectives on how companies can protect consumer information. Prevent being a target by becoming informed with our overviews and selected quotes that provide different perspectives on the issue. Go deeper with our editorially-selected articles, primary source documents, websites, and multimedia. Critical Thinking and Analysis questions provide an additional avenue for exploration.
Wondering what can be done to protect you as a consumer? Some say the federal government should enact tougher regulations while others advocate self-regulation by industry to ensure that consumers are protected from identity theft and other abuses. You decide after examining our Consumer Privacy Leading Issue.
Cyber security and privacy is not just a personal issue but a national issue. Visit the National Security Leading Issue to examine the pros and cons of government’s surveillance of citizens’ personal information in the interests of national security.