Surveillance vs. Privacy
Andy Nguyen
Liberty University
BUSI 472
Abstract
Everyone has an opinion when it comes to privacy and their views on how much
surveillance should take place. Businesses utilize a variety of surveillance methods in order to
conduct research on persons of interest, maintain security within and around the enterprise and
verify performance with the consumer. The utilization of surveillance methodology carries a vast
range of benefits, however with an increase of surveillance comes a loss of privacy in turn. The
desire to have control of one’s information is challenged, and various circumstances complicate
the degree of control an individual actually has on that information. The Bible gives countless
examples of surveillance and the weight that comes with that choice.
Current Business Practices
Every business uses some form of regulation to evaluate and monitor potential hires and
current employees. A company often benefits from some form of reconnaissance to validate
persons of interest. Surveillance is the collection and processing of targeted information for the
accomplishment of a specific objective. In today’s era, technological advances have generated
numerous surveillance capabilities (Lyon & Zureikv, n.d.). The public is aware of surveillance
from the private sector and the government. These entities are justified in their practices in
order to investigate and minimize criminal behavior in the future (Kumar, 2017). These methods
of searches vary from; in-depth background checks, validating employee history and confirming
information presented during the screening process. Companies request references in order to
cross examine information already gathered with the data that has been presented.
Organizations often take advantage of information openly available through mediums like social
media to gather more information on the persons of interest. Another procedure applied is the
interview. The employer or hiring official gets a direct feel for the person and can validate all
information presented and make a final decision. Once employed at the company the business
continues to monitor those within the organization through a multitude of means. They monitor
time cards to validate the times the employees are at work and when they leave. Another
practice a company often uses is computer usage monitoring within the firm to ensure that
assets are being utilized appropriately and no employee is wasting resources or accessing
unauthorized or inappropriate material. Companies take advantage of crime surveillance
methodologies to provide a deterrent against crimes (Heek, Arning, & Ziefle, 2016). Security
cameras monitor foot traffic on and around company grounds ensuring security and record all
activity that happens throughout the day. Employees are asked to be informants whenever they
know or witness any infraction or misconduct within the company. Workers may also be
subjected to a variety of drug testing to ensure that they are not consuming drugs while they
are associated with the company. As a prerequisite, some businesses may even require that
their employees have not taken drugs at all prior to employment (Gilliom, n.d.). Corporations
also employ measures in order to protect consumers, the public, and ultimately themselves
from infringement of rights. They often use a statement of acknowledgement, which tells the
employees that the company will look into and continue to monitor them, these surveillance
methodologies don’t always stop within the organization. The marketing industry often uses
other techniques such as surveys and polls to gauge the consumers interest and evaluate their
satisfaction levels. Business departments have a keen eye on growing or newly rising trends
within the public in order to stay ahead of the curve in order to exploit every opportunity
possible and turn the most profit. The use of conjoint analysis is an algorithm designed to assess
products and product configuration to help determine pricing (Heek, Arning, & Ziefle, 2016).
When the consumer utilizes certain website services, during the session cookies generated are
stored on the internet browser. These cookies can be viewed by corporations to tailor
advertisements to best cater to the customers interests. The information gathered by these
organizations is considered protected information. A practice used to protect employees and
the consumer are privacy statements to ensure that personal information is protected and
safeguarded from unauthorized access. Most firms value the practice of discretion and privacy
when it comes to their clientele (Hosmer, 2014). The employment of a variety of surveillance
practices has proven beneficial to organizations in the past, but with all these benefits come
some potential privacy conflicts.
Benefits and Conflicts
The rationale behind surveillance is to provide a certain level of security for the benefit
of the company and other people. When companies increase the amount of surveillance it
provides additional security, thereby applying indicators to risk factors and a deterrence from
breaking rules and regulations. The corporation has a right and responsibility to put measures in
place to ensure that assets and resources are appropriately utilized and that nothing is being
used other than for its intended purpose. All these measures can be taken for the achievement
of company missions or to further company goals. However, with the growing rate of
surveillance the loss factor of privacy comes into play. Privacy is the state of protecting or
concealing one’s personal information from unintended parties (Posner, 2008). The definition of
what is considered a violation of one’s privacy has been a subject of debate for decades. In the
Constitution of the United States of America the Fourth Amendment protects the people from
unauthorized search and seizures. More recently the Electronic Communications Privacy Act
was initiated to protect communication system privacy (Richards, 2013). Arguments have been
made that organizations use far too invasive means of acquiring information that infringe upon
an individual’s privacy, as well as losing control of that information to unintended parties
(Macnish, 2016). The government, corporations, even people utilize various surveillance
methods in order to investigate a person or group so that; information can be acquired, activity
can be monitored, and a heightened level of security can be attained. Although utilized to
protect interests and other people, the concern of too much security has risen. Many within
today’s society would like to maintain a certain level of discretion when it comes to their private
lives. The public generally accepts methods of surveillance such as cameras in and around
buildings to ensure that they are being protected. If a crime is committed, someone is watching
and action can be taken. However, many are opposed to outside parties monitoring their private
activities such as one’s internet usage. Some individuals believe that they have a right not to be
investigated past a certain level. However, in the past companies have utilized social media to
research potential employees. Some may view this as a breach of privacy. When an individual
chooses to disclose information online, the post should only be seen by the intended audience.
Within the cyber domain information is passed and processed at astounding rates. When an
individual posts or shares something online they are essentially releasing that information to
the public. Although the information being shared may be meant only for a target audience, the
act of releasing the information into the cyber domain comes with a forfeiture of rights to that
information. It’s like making a speech in public. in this instance, there is a target audience for
which one’s words were designed. Although the message was designed and delivered to a
specific people group it doesn’t stop others from sharing what they heard at the speech, nor
does it prevent people passing by from seeing and hearing the speech. However, in recent years
we have seen several instances where the public’s information has been seen and used by
unintended recipients for other means. The use of telecommunications is one the majority of
the population utilizes. This form of communication is often viewed as protected, that only the
recipient on the other side will know who is talking on the receiving end of the communique. In
2013 the public became aware of the NSA (United States National Security Agency) program,
code-named PRISM, through the unauthorized release of information by Edward Snowden (Lin,
Voad, Pescapè, & Mueller, n.d.). Even though full disclosure on security issues may be the
desirable goal for some, it is often not the case. If organizations like the NSA were forthcoming
on all techniques and practices they employ to protect the nation, then the parties that wish to
do the country harm would cease using those, potentially identifiable methods and begin
utilizing different means. After the NSA leak, former President Obama stated when he had
addressed the actions of the NSA he said, “The people at the NSA don’t have an interest in
doing anything other than making sure that where we can prevent a terrorist attack, where we
can get information ahead of time”. The NSA doesn’t care about an individual’s personal life,
their goal is to identify hostile actions against the United States from terrorist parties (Amoore,
2014). Even though the actions of Snowden seemed noble and may have been done with good
intentions unfortunately his actions did carry consequences. Snowden was an intelligence
community employee, so he possessed a Top-Secret security clearance. This clearance is by no
means easy to obtain, and personnel go through a deep background check and other security
checks to include a polygraph test to ensure the reliability of the trustee. Snowden underwent
all of this and like many who possess this level of security clearance, had signed a nondisclosure
statement. Despite all the measures taken to validate people, Snowden still got through and he
still leaked sensitive information. This leak may have been a desirable eye opener for the public
but his actions caused significant damage to the intelligence community. The lack of surveillance
on his actions damaged the reputation of the NSA in the publics’ eyes, and it also strained
relations with other organizations within the intelligence community and the costumers they
cater to. The actions of Snowden changed many things, one of which led to an increase in the
investigation process to validate those pursuing higher level security clearances (Patsakis,
Charemis, Mermigas, Pirounias, & Papageorgiou, 2018). Surveillance may not be desirable by all
but it certainly does carry significant benefits to security. Even if some may prefer to be
unobserved so they are free to conduct themselves in whatever manner they wish without any
oversight, that is not the case and it is a factor that the public isn’t able to control. The concept
of constant supervision is not foreign and it is something that will continue for a long time.
Teachings of The Bible
All Christians understand that the Lord is the ultimate authority and that He is the one
that will judge each and every soul before they are able to enter His kingdom. Our Father is all
powerful and omnipresent. He knows that we sin and that we have strayed from His grace but
none the less He continues to watch each of us and has given us all a way to return to Him
through His son. Looking at Psalms 91:1-3 it states “He that dwelleth in the secret place of the
most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty. I will say of the LORD, [He is] my
refuge and my fortress: my God; in him will I trust. Surely he shall deliver thee from the snare of
the fowler, [and] from the noisome pestilence”. Our Heavenly Father surveils us and is there
when we fall or are in need of His love and guidance. With His example, we can become more
like Him. The Lord is our foundation and if we obey Him and accept Him into our hearts He will
see this and we will surely be welcomed into His Kingdom. The Father Almighty is with each and
every one of His children: this is evident in Psalm 33:18 where it states “Behold, the eye of the
LORD is upon them that fear him, upon them that hope in his mercy”. The Lord keeps an eye on
each one of us, and many do not have a problem with this because if we don’t break the earthly
law set upon us then we need not be afraid of being watched. The scripture states in Proverbs
15:3 “The eyes of the Lord are in every place, beholding the evil and the good”. He watches all
of us indiscriminately as we do right or wrong and in the end, He will weigh all the facts of what
we have done when it is our time for judgement. The Bible teaches its followers in 1 Peter 5:8 to
“Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about,
seeking whom he may devour”. This verse instructs us that we must be vigilant in order to
protect ourselves from the evils of the devil. A certain level of surveillance is necessary in order
to protect ourselves from the potential evils of the world. A lack of such precaution would
subject oneself to unnecessary danger and harm. The Word of God instructs us in Acts 20:28
“Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath
made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood”,
The Lord has instructed us to watch over all of those under one’s oversight to bring others
closer to God since He has paid for all of us through the blood of His Son. Like a parent who
oversees His child to make sure they are doing what is right, our Father watches over all of His
children. The Lord is continuously monitoring and assessing His creations, steering them to the
completion of His ultimate plan. As God surveils His people He maintains high hopes that we
will fulfill His plan, and that all of us will return to Him when we are called to our final resting
place.
Conclusion
Surveillance methodology is on the rise and has been continuously evolving in the recent
decade as technological advances increase. With the vastly increasing capability business are
able to employ a multitude of surveillance techniques in order to achieve desired effects. The
use of surveillance practices carries significant benefits in terms of security but it also carries a
certain amount of conflict when it comes to privacy infringement. As the use of surveillance
techniques increases, the public has also seen the improper use of these techniques. Many
argue if such levels of surveillance are needed and that all the methods being employed are
violating individual privacy rights. The Bible tells of how God watches all of us. A Christian
understands that the Lord is with all of His children, He will see the good and the bad. People
should not be concerned with this level of oversight unless they have something they wish to
hide. As todays technologies continue to evolve and new surveillance techniques of monitoring
the public develop, it will be interesting to see what happens between the line of too much
oversight and not enough oversight. These methods being utilized to try and provide a certain
level of security for all, will certainly not go away. However, how far the lines shift throughout
the years between too much monitoring and too little and the results of those decisions will be
worth closely surveilling for years to come.
References
Amoore, L. (2014). Security and the Claim to Privacy. International Political Sociology, 8(1), 108-
112. doi:10.1111/ips.12044
Gilliom, J. (n.d.). Surveillance, Privacy, and the Law: Employee Drug Testing. Retrieved from
https://books.google.co.kr/books?
hl=en&lr=&id=kMjQPJBRScYC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=surveillance+privacy&ots=7hqgQX5
uaO&sig=V0ioNb8-Y8Ef82g_6r4VgQ_J2Q0#v=onepage&q=surveillance
%20privacy&f=false
Heek, J. V., Arning, K., & Ziefle, M. (2016, June 21). Understanding Age-Related Differences in
Privacy-Safety Decisions: Acceptance of Crime Surveillance Technologies in Urban
Environments. Retrieved June 8, 2018, from
http://rx9vh3hy4r.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info
%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid
%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx
%3Abook&rft.genre=proceeding&rft.title=Lecture+Notes+in+Computer+Science+
%28including+subseries+Lecture+Notes+in+Artificial+Intelligence+and+Lecture+Notes+i
n+Bioinformatics%29&rft.atitle=Understanding+age-related+differences+in+privacy-
safety+decisions
%3A+Acceptance+of+crime+surveillance+technologies+in+urban+environments&rft.au=
Van+Heek%2C+Julia&rft.au=Arning%2C+Katrin&rft.au=Ziefle
%2C+Martina&rft.date=2016-01-01&rft.isbn=9783319399423&rft.issn=0302-
9743&rft.eissn=1611-
3349&rft.volume=9754&rft.spage=253&rft.epage=265&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007%2F978-
3-319-39943-0_25&rft.externalDBID=n
%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=611254166¶mdict=en-US
Hosmer, L. T. (2011). The Ethics of Management: A Multidisciplinary Approach (7th ed.). New
York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Kumar, P. (2017, January). Corporate Privacy Policy Changes during PRISM and the Rise of
Surveillance Capitalism. Retrieved June 6, 2018, from
https://doaj.org/article/08fa3031f3fe4a939cd57b3d5f59ee39
Lin, Y.-D., Voad, J., Pescapè, A., & Mueller, P. (n.d.). Communications and Privacy under
Surveillance. Retrieved June 6, 2018, from https://ieeexplore-ieee-
org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/document/7433344/authors
Lyon, D., & Zureikv, E. (n.d.). Computers, Surveillance, and Privacy. Retrieved June 7, 2018, from
https://books.google.co.kr/books?
hl=en&lr=&id=InizrnZlrY8C&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=government+surveillance+privacy&ots
=f25vh_kctn&sig=TxdigZEci_90Dp4GKh1xltgJLxs#v=onepage&q=government
%20surveillance%20privacy&f=false
Macnish, K. (2016, May 19). Government Surveillance and Why Defining Privacy Matters in a
Post?Snowden World. Retrieved June 6, 2018, from https://onlinelibrary-wiley-
com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/doi/abs/10.1111/japp.12219
Patsakis, C., Charemis, A., Mermigas, D., Pirounias, S., & Papageorgiou, A. (2018, March). The
market's response toward privacy and mass surveillance: The Snowden aftermath.
Retrieved June 6, 2018, from https://www-sciencedirect-
com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/science/article/pii/S016740481730233X
Posner, R. (2008). Privacy, Surveillance, and Law. The University of Chicago Law Review, 75(1),
245-260. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20141907
Richards, N. (2013). THE DANGERS OF SURVEILLANCE. Harvard Law Review, 126(7), 1934-1965.
Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23415062
