Perspective: How do you really feel about e-snooping?

In this era when the federal government says it must take steps to combat and prevent terrorism, the knee-jerk assumption might be to believe that the American public supports governmental surveillance steps.

Wrong! Actually, there also is measurable public concern about the monitoring activities of businesses and employers.

The Ponemon Institute provided CNET News.com with the organization's recent report, titled "Americans' Perceptions About Surveillance" (click here for PDF). The privacy think tank's data indicates that Americans worry about how the government and others monitor their communications and activities.

•  Approximately 90 percent of survey respondents reported that they are not in favor of or are unsure about governmental use of wiretaps.

•  Practically all respondents rejected the notion of the government implanting chips in people for identity verification purposes.

•  More than 85 percent said they are against or unsure about spyware being placed on their personal computers that monitors Internet browsing or shopping behavior.

•  Over 72 percent are not in favor of or expressed mixed feelings about the use of electronic tags, such as RFID, that are embedded in products that could be used to track identities from short distances.

The statistics do not mean that the American public opposes all forms of monitoring. Even though people polled expressed reservations about government snooping, more than 66 percent of respondents said they do not mind having their telephone conversations monitored when contacting customer service representatives.

Interestingly, about 57 percent reported that they are not against having their employers monitor their e-mail and Internet activities in the workplace. Also, more than 57 percent said they would not mind if law enforcement authorities use hidden cameras to monitor traffic or speeding.

By the same token, more than half the people surveyed were not against being selected for additional passenger screening at airports. And about half of the respondents said they do not mind if retailers use one-way mirrors or video cameras in store dressing rooms.

The data suggests that Americans do indeed appear to have aversions to the monitoring of their communications and activities. But again, they seem to be of two minds as they appear less concerned when it comes to monitoring in their employment and in other business settings.

There's also disagreement along gender, class and age lines. Women are more worried about surveillance than are men. People with an advanced education are the most negative about surveillance, while middle-age people are less concerned than are younger and older people.

Maybe the only clear conclusion is that surveillance is taking place whether you like it or not, and you may not have as much privacy as you think.

Biography
Eric J. Sinrod is a partner in the San Francisco office of Duane Morris. His focus includes information technology and intellectual-property disputes. To receive his weekly columns, send an e-mail to [e-mail] with "Subscribe" in the subject line. This column is prepared and published for informational purposes only, and it should not be construed as legal advice. The views expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author's law firm or its individual partners.

More Perspectives

[emeraldgate]

privacy

The whole argument that the U.S. government is interested in doing surveillence of internet and other forms of communications to protect the people is bogus. What they are interested in doing is protecting their control of the means of communication to further their agenda of One World Government. They have absolutely no respect for the privacy or safety of the people whatsoever. The governments of North America are involved in the most horrific human rights abuses in history. Daily they allow the drugging and raping (with animals) of thousands of women who the porno pimps then sell on the internet. The internet is the modern day auction block for slavery. Sex slavery. The use of rohypnol to chemically kidnap the victims is widely known. When people look at these horrific websites they think that the women are willing because they appear lucid. They are not. Rohynol anaesthetizes the frontal lobe of the brain and leaves the rest of the brain functioning. It was the CIA and their rescued Nazi 'doctors' who developed this crap in the l950's. (Check out the MKUltra experiments) The police forces, criminal justice system, all government agencies the hospitals etc. are themselves participating in these attrocities. They are making a fortune off of it. The internet companies serve the victims up. They are the ones who have made available the means by which these monsters are making a fortune off of the unknowing, unwilling victims.

Google hosts over 3 million of these sites, many of which openly declare that they are rape sites. If the government, or Google or anyone in the Justice system had any kind of integrity or morality they would stop this crap. The criminals always site the 4th Amendment as their defence, since when does the 4th Amendment justify the savagery portrayed on the beastiality websites. Since when does the 4th Amendment supercede the rights of individuals to control their own brain and bodies. What about the constitutional rights of the victims? What about their rights to safety and privacy?

Dianne Robinson

[computertech195]

privacy

Well. first Diane, if you look back in history, you see a great deal of war, rape and pillage. We are at war, we are being raped and pillaged by the very government that is so-called governing us. So to make a long story short, we are in deep caca if we don't take a stand for whats right. Our human rights, let alone our constitutional rights are a thing of the past, and what we have now is a complete police state and martial law. There wasn't much thought about the ramifcations of the Patriot Act when we didn't bother to really pay close attention to the attack on U.S soil, did we? If we are so conscious now, what happened back then? Surely, we could have avoided a major portion of the damage done.

[emeraldgate]

privacy

The whole argument that the U.S. government is interested in doing surveillence of internet and other forms of communications to protect the people is bogus. What they are interested in doing is protecting their control of the means of communication to further their agenda of One World Government. They have absolutely no respect for the privacy or safety of the people whatsoever. The governments of North America are involved in the most horrific human rights abuses in history. Daily they allow the drugging and raping (with animals) of thousands of women who the porno pimps then sell on the internet. The internet is the modern day auction block for slavery. Sex slavery. The use of rohypnol to chemically kidnap the victims is widely known. When people look at these horrific websites they think that the women are willing because they appear lucid. They are not. Rohynol anaesthetizes the frontal lobe of the brain and leaves the rest of the brain functioning. It was the CIA and their rescued Nazi 'doctors' who developed this crap in the l950's. (Check out the MKUltra experiments) The police forces, criminal justice system, all government agencies the hospitals etc. are themselves participating in these attrocities. They are making a fortune off of it. The internet companies serve the victims up. They are the ones who have made available the means by which these monsters are making a fortune off of the unknowing, unwilling victims.

Google hosts over 3 million of these sites, many of which openly declare that they are rape sites. If the government, or Google or anyone in the Justice system had any kind of integrity or morality they would stop this crap. The criminals always site the 4th Amendment as their defence, since when does the 4th Amendment justify the savagery portrayed on the beastiality websites. Since when does the 4th Amendment supercede the rights of individuals to control their own brain and bodies. What about the constitutional rights of the victims? What about their rights to safety and privacy?

Dianne Robinson

[computertech195]

privacy

Well. first Diane, if you look back in history, you see a great deal of war, rape and pillage. We are at war, we are being raped and pillaged by the very government that is so-called governing us. So to make a long story short, we are in deep caca if we don't take a stand for whats right. Our human rights, let alone our constitutional rights are a thing of the past, and what we have now is a complete police state and martial law. There wasn't much thought about the ramifcations of the Patriot Act when we didn't bother to really pay close attention to the attack on U.S soil, did we? If we are so conscious now, what happened back then? Surely, we could have avoided a major portion of the damage done.

[Hobyx]

it looks like people 'adapt' then

Well, from this survey data, it appears that people:

1. are against forms of surveillance that they see as new and

2. have come to accept forms that they're used to.. and likely
feel powerless to reverse.

This is a bad sign.. It means that whatever form of oppression
(in this case, privacy invasion) people of 'authority' put into
practice, people will eventually adjust to.. and even grow to
prefer, which is sick and wrong.

People of the world! Don't put up with this! Abuses of authority
won't stop unless people object to them! They'll only get worse
if you stay silent and 'adapt'!

[Hobyx]

it looks like people 'adapt' then

Well, from this survey data, it appears that people:

1. are against forms of surveillance that they see as new and

2. have come to accept forms that they're used to.. and likely
feel powerless to reverse.

This is a bad sign.. It means that whatever form of oppression
(in this case, privacy invasion) people of 'authority' put into
practice, people will eventually adjust to.. and even grow to
prefer, which is sick and wrong.

People of the world! Don't put up with this! Abuses of authority
won't stop unless people object to them! They'll only get worse
if you stay silent and 'adapt'!