Last week, Jane wrote about the growing use of cameras to issue tickets for traffic violations as a law-enforcement technique. In an exercise of internal democracy, I thought it would be interesting to continue the discussion and expand it a bit to explore how these issues quickly unravel where there are privacy concerns at play in the 21st Century.
I don’t have a problem with enforcing traffic laws, or even raising revenues for municipalities. I have been issued exactly one speeding ticket in my driving career – I was late for an appointment, no one else was on the road, and I didn’t see the cop who was purposefully stationed to catch unsuspecting drivers like me bending the rules on a deserted back road. When his siren went on, there was nothing to do but pull over, roll down the window and sheepishly admit, “You got me.” It cost me $80 to learn the lesson that you can’t catch the clock with the gas pedal.
The only difference between my encounter and Jane’s was the method by which our infraction was documented and ticketed. In this context it’s hard to argue the problem since we were both clearly in the wrong, and the law would be worthless if it were not enforced. The slippery-slope potential for this surveillance technology, however, makes me slightly more wary of its routine integration into law enforcement as regards privacy concerns. If the top of the slope is getting a notice in the mail that includes the exact time and date of a traffic violation along with a picture of your license plate and the driver, what is at the bottom?
The Lower Merion School District in Pennsylvania, which includes Harriton High School (above), is the subject of a class-action lawsuit involving its covert use of webcams on school-issued laptops.
I recently saw a story that few would not argue constitutes a violation of privacy. In fact, it’s going to court as a class-action lawsuit. The
Lower Merion School District in Pennsylvania is being sued for remotely and covertly activating the webcam on school-issued laptops. The school’s administration has admitted that the spyware allowing them to access the webcam installed on the laptops they distributed to the students, but claim it was only meant to be used in case the computer was stolen. The story came to light when a student, whose parents are now suing the school district, was punished for “improper behavior in his home.” The evidence? A photo taken by the student’s webcam.
All of a sudden, we have slipped a lot further down the slope.
Though the “improper behavior” in this particular student’s case is not disclosed, is it just the fact that the student was in his home that makes this example so gut-checking? The fact that he is a minor? What if it had happened on school property – does that change our evaluation of documenting students without their knowledge? What if it is a wider-spread phenomenon than Lower Merion, Pennsylvania?
Other blogs that have commented on the Lower Merion story point to a recent episode of PBS Frontline that documents how the integration of new technology into a failing school in the Bronx in New York City helped turn it around. At one point, a school administrator demonstrates how he can remotely access any student’s computer at the school and see what they are doing – including taking a picture of them using the photo booth application to surprise them into getting back on task.
The potential for abuse and privacy violations is extreme in the digital age, and it’s a highly complex issue I think deserves more attention. In fact, I’ve got at least two more posts brewing in me on this already, but for now I’ll leave it here and hope that you continue the discussion in the comments below.