Who’s Watching You?
Given the broad scope of access granted to users by the internet, virtually any type of interaction is within reach. Tasks such as ordering a pizza to booking a flight ticket have nearly become unfathomably simple. The advent and widespread use of the internet has enabled many to live a very enjoyable life. With our internet surfing, however, comes the ability to be easily monitored. Not only can users be monitored, but the extent of such surveillance has raised many questions on the ethical and legal ramifications of such abilities. This new way of keeping tabs on people can be beneficial yet harmful on the same token. Digital monitoring of the activities of internet users can be beneficial in preventing crimes catalyzed by the net, yet it can be detrimental when used as a broad spotlight into the lives of ordinary civilians.
The internet’s rise and ease of use can catalyze many criminal interactions. Unfortunately, this includes illegal transactions. The vehicle for a large majority of illicit internet use is through the “Dark Web”, a portion of the internet that enables individuals to access websites they otherwise are prohibited from accessing. This technology ensures anonymity and virtual immunity to its users by way of complex software (Haaszf 2016).
Similar to tasking the police with weeding out potential criminals, implementing technology that disables criminals can be a boon to law enforcement agencies in combating those frequenting the ‘Dark Web’. Automated monitoring of hard drives harboring such software is an extremely effective and practical way of tracking individuals on the verge of illegal activity. Preventing crimes such as pedophilia and drug trafficking is a responsible aim of monitoring individuals’ actions on the internet.
The task gets muddier when instead of only monitoring for specific violations, the monitoring becomes broad and unfocused. This type of monitoring is not atypical of how the government involves itself in the monitoring of its civilians. Recent whistle-blowing by the likes of former NSA agent Edward Snowden revealed that the government has in fact conducted the unproductive and aimless monitoring of any and all citizens for reasons they see fit ( Haaszf 2016). The internet made spying on innocent citizens easier, but the act itself is known to have happened before the internet era.
When the powerful tool that is individual citizen monitoring falls into the wrong hands, history shows that the matter becomes concerning for those innocent of legal wrong doing. The former head of the Federal Bureau of Investigations J. Edgar Hoover is known to have wielded notable power by sending agents to follow and spy-on anyone he deemed worth monitoring. Through the intelligence he gathered from these practices, he would then use blackmail and other coercive tactics. Enforcing the law in this way is against rational thinking, and as is seen with Mr. Hoover, can lead to more extreme tactics. Perhaps the solution is to keep this ability out of the hands of those prone to abuse it. Simply having the ability itself is a level of oversight that is uncharacteristic of the ideals held by this country and its government (Reilly 2013).
Ordinary citizens have the right to live their lives without worrying whether or not anyone is looking over their shoulders. However, in certain cases such monitoring can provide a benefit to society and provide individuals with a means to thwarting certain law breakers. The fears become justified when government organizations, or those funded by the government, gain access to the data gathered by automated tracking programs, and then use this access to leverage political situations favored by the organization itself, or an affiliate. The power of possessing such abilities aligns itself with the intentions of real life law enforcement, and seems sound in — theory. Practically, however, the tool might be too powerful to possess.
References
Haaszf, A. (2016). UNDERNEATH IT ALL: POLICING INTERNATIONAL CHILD PORNOGRAPHY ON THE DARK WEB. Syracuse Journal Of International Law & Commerce, 43(2), 353–380.
Reilly, R. J. (2013, December 11). J. Edgar Hoover Ordered FBI To Ignore Rep Who Badmouthed Him. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/11/jack-brooks-fbi-file_n_4426501.html