Current State of Government Surveillance

The ubiquitous increase of mobile phones – undoubtedly the greatest increase of a technological device, as more people have access to mobile phones than they do to toilets – has impacted the ways through which we communicate our thoughts and ideas, as well as how we obtain and access information. Almost everyone uses this technological device; according to a poll by the Pew Research Center, 97% of people in the United States between the ages of 18-44 own a cell phone. An easy way to know an individual’s tendencies is by quickly glancing through their mobile device and looking at the search history, scanning through text messages and calls, and analyzing social media accounts. Therefore, government spy agencies assume that potential terrorists must also utilize this technology, leaving a digital footprint behind that may help thwart the next terrorist attack.

Following the attacks of 9/11, there was a sudden surge in the number of surveillance programs. The attack on the Twin Towers resulted in the USA PATRIOT Act, which bolstered the power of the then already growing surveillance programs in place. It is interesting to see the fickle nature of how the sheer size of government surveillance has changed, to reach the level where it is today. In 1928, The Supreme Court declared in Olmstead v. United States that warrantless police wiretaps did not violate the Fourth Amendment right of no “unreasonable searches and seizures.” However, the Supreme Court overturned this ruling in 1967, requiring warrants before conducting wiretaps. From this point onwards, government surveillance began its gradual expansion. In 1986, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act expanded warrantless government wiretaps of telephones to electronic communications by computer. As mentioned earlier, matters escalated after the strategically planned attack by al-Qaeda on the financial capital of the United States in 2001. However, as time went on and the 9/11 attacks became a tragedy of the past, government surveillance began to face increased opposition and less popularity. Furthermore, a distinctive shift away from government surveillance occurred in July of 2013, when a former NSA contractor, Edward Snowden, exposed the spy agency’s electronic eavesdropping programs.

Edward Snowden is perhaps the most famous hero and/or traitor in recent American history. He gave up his job, family, and country to allow us to have this conversation today. This conversation — the debate of government surveillance and its encroaching nature on our privacy — is so complicated that most Americans don’t understand it fully. It’s difficult to conceptualize a system that is so massively complex, and on top of that, so invisibly conducted. Although not everyone is expected to be uniformly informed, most people do understand that the NSA has the greatest surveillance capabilities that we’ve ever seen. However, the government agencies argue that, even though that they have numerous capabilities, they will not use them. For example, they have stated that, in order to surveil foreign targets, they must submit an application for proper oversight. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) reported that between 1979 and 2013, out of the 35.434 national security requests, only 12 were rejected. Although there is a system of checks and balances, its seems like these government agencies have the ability to spy on whomever they choose.

Not only do government agencies have the ability to collect metadata such as who you call and interact with, but they also have the ability to collect the exact content of your communications. As scary as that may seem, it is true. Government programs under agencies like the National Security Agency (NSA) can capture all of the pictures, texts, and other forms of communication that you transmit as a user of the Internet and modern communications infrastructure. The alarming issue is the fact that they are collecting this data massively without targeting specific possible criminals. Indeed, the lack of restrictions allows these programs to mass surveil and collect bulk information on ordinary citizens like you and me. Snowden’s release of those documents proved all this and more. According to annually conducted polls by PEW, 47% of people in 2013 believed that the government has gone too far with anti-terrorist policies, compared to only 26% in 2007. Similarly, only 35% of people in 2013 believed that the government has not gone far enough to protect the country, compared to 55% in 2007. So, there has clearly been a reversal in the way that Americans view government surveillance.

This shift in view is completely different from previous shifts due to many reasons. First of all, it wasn’t a natural transition like others before it have been. Even though the terrorist attacks of 9/11 may seem like a huge catalyst in the holistic view of government surveillance, they served as an additional boost to the momentum of the already growing government surveillance powers at the time. The release of the files by Snowden were more abrupt and shocking, causing people to question the government’s authority and decisions more than ever before. Another reason why this shift is completely different from other shifts on surveillance is due to technology. Over the last decade, there has been an unprecedented increase in the number of technological devices that an individual owns. Alongside the new-found saturation of technology, there was a simultaneous increase in the reliance and trust that we placed in these devices.

Trust is perhaps the single-most reason that this shift has occurred. Most people trust their devices with a little too much information. As technology increases the speed and flexibility of communication, many people have been using their mobile devices for sexting. According to Merriam-Webster's dictionary, sexting is the sending of sexually explicit messages or images by cell phone. A poll conducted in 2012 by The Huffington Post found that adult sexting is on the rise. It reported that approximately 1 in 5 adults send explicit text messages. Additionally, according to a report in a journal titled Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking from August 2014, 80 percent of 21-year-olds said they had received a sext, and 67 percent had sent one. Snapchat, an image-sharing app, might be responsible for this revolutionary movement, as it offers the promise of consequence-free sexting. This sexting culture was perhaps best popularized by then-congressman Anthony Weiner, who sent explicit sexual images to about six women under the pseudonym “Carlos Danger”. Similarly, the 2014 celebrity photo scandal, a release of a collection of over 500 private pictures of various celebrities, many containing nudity, displayed the extent of consumer faith in technology.

This shift was the result of both a change in behavior and a change in values. Initially, a change in our human behaviors took force, as more members of society began to use technology for more sensitive information than ever before. This change in behavior lead to a change in the values placed on technology. When placing more personally identifiable information in technology, individuals would like this information to remain private. Consequently, since the number of people using these smart devices has increased exponentially. it would impact each and every individual more than it would have done so many years ago. In other words, the increase of technology leads to higher value placement on the devices, causing individuals to focus more on privacy rather than safety.

Many people are concerned about our Fourth Amendment rights, against being subjected to unreasonable search and seizure, being infringed upon. There is is no clear distinction or line drawn for what the acceptable practices should be regarding surveillance. Along with government snooping programs, there has been increasing concern over remote-controlled drone aircrafts, which have the ability to surveil targets like no other technology before. FBI Director Robert Mueller remarked that they have been used inside the United States, causing Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein to call drones “the greatest threat to the privacy of Americans.” Adding more controversy to this issue is the covert use of StingRay technology, a cellular phone surveillance device that was intended exclusively for the military and intelligence community, but has been extended to many local and state law enforcement agencies across the United States. The StingRay device has the capabilities to mimic a wireless carrier tower by sending out strong pilot signals which forces all mobile phones and cellular data devices to connect to it. From here, the StingRay operator can target the specific device and intercept all communications. In essence, these devices, all methods of collecting data, add to the increasing concern of the legal boundaries the government is overstepping.

Increased technology means that there are more and more ways that the government can collect data. Spy agencies have utilized supercomputers that have the ability to analyze massive amounts of data, known as big data computing. These supercomputers capture phone call data, tweets, and other social media posts to look for patterns to spot potential terrorist activity. An article by The Wall Street Journal reported that NSA has the capacity to reach 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic. There are many NSA programs such as 702 surveillance, Executive Order 12333, PRISM, Upstream, MYSTIC, and Gilgamesh that are still actively capturing and analyzing data. Although there have been legislative efforts to end some of these programs, it will still take a lot of time, as the US court system usually does. At the end of spring 2015, Congress passed the USA Freedom Act, which ended the bulk collection of phone metadata and reformed some surveillance practices — a small victory in a large war.

We all naturally want a world in which there is both perfect privacy and perfect security. These two things may never coexist. The Obama administration showed a willingness to adjust its surveillance initiatives to strike the right balance between safety and privacy. Although we are now aware of the potential threats to our privacy, there is no way in knowing what the future of government surveillance holds due to its fickle nature. Current events, such as terrorist attacks, can have a direct impact on popular views on surveillance. For example, the attacks in Paris, France, have caused people to prioritize safety over privacy for the time being. Kevin Bankston, the director of New America’s Open Technology Institute, claimed that politicians often use moments like these to support their personal agendas. “It's horribly disappointing, but unsurprising, that law enforcement and intelligence officials would use the opportunity by the Paris attacks as an excuse to push for whatever new powers they were already asking for," Bankston said. "It's a part of their playbook and it's how we ended up with the Patriot Act.”

Government programs built on the premise of fear for our safety have somehow (and quite ironically) made us more fearful. There is no clear solution or perfect balance between the harmony of safety and privacy. What is clear, however, is that through a technological revolution, the behavior and values of the American people have changed. There is first and foremost a need for education of the masses on the intricacies of this issue; for the people to be best governed how they want to be, they must understand and express their views on privacy and surveillance. To be sure, what is perhaps one of the most complex dilemmas in the US right now calls for one of the most united efforts, not only by its politicians, but by its citizens as well. Only then can progress be made.