Abstract
This chapter discusses how mass surveillance is increasingly used in liberal democracies in order to protect national security, but how such policies run up against the right to privacy. It shows that there is significant potential for state intrusion into privacy through mass surveillance of citizens’ digital communications, given the large extent to which people use digital communications and the detailed picture that this builds of their lives. To explore the rise of mass surveillance policies, and the privacy challenges that they raise, this chapter initially focuses on the USA as a case study. The USA is the global intelligence hegemon with vast spending on mass surveillance, but also has a strong constitutional commitment to privacy rights.
Examining this case study therefore provides important insights into the struggle between human freedoms, such as the right to privacy on the one hand, and security on the other hand. This struggle is illustrated in the concerns that Edward Snowden’s leaks in 2013 raised on oversight of intelligence agencies, and oversight of the telecommunications and social media platforms that form part of the wider “intelligence elite.” Widening the focus beyond the USA, this chapter observes two key problems with such mass surveillance policies and their inadequate oversight, namely: chilling effects and the drift to tyranny.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Created in 1952, the NSA is a US intelligence agency responsible for global monitoring, collection, and processing of information and data for foreign intelligence. It is estimated that Snowden leaked more than 1.7 million intelligence files, although only a small proportion have since been published.
- 2.
Greenwald & MacAskill, “NSA.”
- 3.
Ball, Harding, & Garside, “BT and Vodafone.”
- 4.
“Metadata” is a US term. In the UK this was called “communications data”—although since the Investigatory Powers Act (2016) it has been called “secondary data.”
- 5.
Bakir, Intelligence Elites, 125–128.
- 6.
Ball, Borger, & Greenwald, “Revealed.”
- 7.
Rosenbach, Poitras, & Stark, iSpy; O Globo Fantastico, “NSA.”
- 8.
Greenwald, No Place to Hide, 97.
- 9.
BBC News, “Report: NSA.”
- 10.
Ball, “Angry Birds.”
- 11.
Ofcom, The Communications Market.
- 12.
Newzoo, “Top 50 Countries/Markets by Smartphone Users.”
- 13.
Risen & Poitras, “NSA Gathers.” Bakir, Intelligence Elites, 191.
- 14.
Intelligence and Security Committee, Privacy, 47.
- 15.
Mayer-Schönberger and Cukier, Big Data.
- 16.
McStay, Privacy, 124–125.
- 17.
Risen & Poitras, “NSA Collecting.”
- 18.
Canadian Journalists for Free Expression, Snowden Surveillance Archive.
- 19.
Greenwald, “XKeyscore.”
- 20.
Privacy International, Secret Global Surveillance Networks.
- 21.
Bauman, Bigo, Esteves, Guild, Jabri, Lyon, & Walker, After Snowden.
- 22.
The leaked document, FY2013 Congressional Budget Justification: Volume I: National Intelligence Program Summary shows that in the decade following 9/11, the US spent more than US $500 billion on intelligence. It shows that in constant dollars, the 2013 budget request was about twice the estimated size of the 2001 budget, and that in 2013, the NSA was in line to receive $10.5 billion (Gellman & Miller, “‘Black Budget’ Summary”).
- 23.
Hersh, “Huge CIA Operation Reported in US against Antiwar Forces,” 1.
- 24.
Church Committee, Final Report.
- 25.
Erwin & Liu, NSA Surveillance, 6.
- 26.
The Five Eyes is a partnership of signal intelligence agencies from the UK (GCHQ), the US (NSA), Canada (CSEC), Australia (ASD), and New Zealand (SIS). The 1948 UK–USA agreement divides collection responsibilities and specific regional duties between them.
- 27.
Campbell, “Somebody’s Listening,” 10–12.
- 28.
Hager, Secret Power.
- 29.
Wright, European Parliament.
- 30.
Schmid, Report 11 July 2001, 11.
- 31.
Piodi & Mombelli, The ECHELON Affair, 41.
- 32.
Ewing, The Patriot Act Reader.
- 33.
Risen & Lichtblau, “Bush Lets US Spy.”
- 34.
House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary, Reining in the Imperial Presidency.
- 35.
Yoo, War, 104.
- 36.
Ibid, 106.
- 37.
US House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary, Reining in the Imperial Presidency, 162–167.
- 38.
Greenwald & MacAskill, “NSA Prism.” Greenwald & Ball, “The Top Secret Rules.”
- 39.
Bakir, Intelligence Elites, 207.
- 40.
The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, Report on the Telephone; The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, Report on the Surveillance.
- 41.
Anderson, Independent Report, 58.
- 42.
Fidler, “Introduction.”
- 43.
Bakir, Intelligence Elites, 192.
- 44.
Erwin & Liu, “NSA Surveillance,” 2.
- 45.
Ibid, 2.
- 46.
Ibid, 9.
- 47.
Wright & Kreissl, European Responses to the Snowden Revelations, 14.
- 48.
Bakir, Intelligence Elites, 194.
- 49.
The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, Report on the Telephone.
- 50.
The President’s Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies, Liberty.
- 51.
Kayyali, “The Way.”
- 52.
Electronic Frontier Foundation. A Church Committee for the 21st Century, 8.
- 53.
Anderson, Independent Report, 58.
- 54.
Privacy International & Amnesty International, Two Years After Snowden.
- 55.
Marquis-Boire, Greenwald, & Lee, “XKEYSCORE.”
- 56.
Privacy International, Secret Global Surveillance.
- 57.
Bakir, Intelligence Elites, 10–22.
- 58.
Mills, The Power Elite.
- 59.
Gill, Intelligence Democratisation.
- 60.
Keefe, “Privatized Spying.”
- 61.
Priest & Arkin, “Top Secret America.”
- 62.
Greenwald, “Mike McConnell.”
- 63.
Harris, @War, 30–31.
- 64.
Gellman & Miller, “‘Black Budget’ Summary.”
- 65.
Ball, Harding & Garside. “BT and Vodafone”; Wright & Kreissl, European Responses to the Snowden Revelations.
- 66.
Gellman & Poitras, “NSA Slides Explain PRISM.”
- 67.
Gellman & Poitras, “US Intelligence Mining Data.”
- 68.
Harris, @War, xvii–xviii, 183–184.
- 69.
Ibid., 184.
- 70.
Penney, Chilling Effects.
- 71.
Marthews and Tucker, “Government Surveillance and Internet Search Behaviour.”
- 72.
Hampton, Rainie, Lu, Dwyer, Shin, & Purcell, Social Media and the “Spiral of Silence.”
- 73.
Stoycheff, “Under Surveillance.”
- 74.
Lashmar, “No More Sources?”
- 75.
Pew Research Center, Investigative Journalists and Digital Security, 2.
- 76.
PEN, Chilling Effects; Williams et al., Scottish Chilling.
- 77.
Article 19, The Expression Agenda Report 2017–18.
- 78.
Freedom House, Attacks on the Record.
- 79.
Article 19, The Expression Agenda Report 2017–18.
- 80.
European Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, On the US, Finding 14.
- 81.
Article 19, The Expression Agenda Report 2017–18.
- 82.
WikiLeaks, The Spy Files.
- 83.
Privacy International, TheGlobalSurveillance Industry.
- 84.
Ibid.
- 85.
Bauman, Bigo, Esteves, Guild, Jabri, Lyon & Walker, After Snowden.
- 86.
Article 19, The Expression Agenda Report 2017–18.
References
Anderson D (2016) Independent report: investigatory powers bill: bulk powers review. August. CM 9326. Home Office, London. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/investigatory-powers-bill-bulk-powers-review
Article 19 (2018) The expression agenda report 2017–18: the state of freedom of expression around the world. https://www.article19.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/XPA-Report_A19.pdf
Bakir V (2018) Intelligence elites & public accountability: relationships of influence with civil society. Routledge, London
Ball J (2014) Angry birds and ‘leaky’ phone apps targeted by NSA and GCHQ for user data. The Guardian, January 28, 2014. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/27/nsa-gchq-smartphone-app-angry-birds-personal-data
Ball J, Borger J, Greenwald G (2013a) Revealed: how US and UK spy agencies defeat internet privacy and security. The Guardian, September 5, 2013. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/05/nsa-gchq-encryption-codes-security
Ball J, Harding L, Garside J (2013b) BT and Vodafone among telecoms companies passing details to GCHQ. The Guardian, August 2, 2013b. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/aug/02/telecoms-bt-vodafone-cables-gchq
Bauman Z, Bigo D, Esteves P, Guild E, Jabri V, Lyon D, Walker RBJ (2014) After Snowden: rethinking the impact of surveillance. Int Polit Sociol 8(2):121–144. https://doi.org/10.1111/ips.12048
BBC News (2014) Report: NSA ‘Collected 200m texts per day’. BBC News, January 17, 2014. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-25770313
Campbell D (1988) Somebody’s listening. New Statesman, August 12, 1988, pp 10–12. http://web.archive.org/web/20130420093650/http://duncan.gn.apc.org/echelon-dc.htm
Canadian Journalists for Free Expression (2015) Snowden surveillance archive. https://snowdenarchive.cjfe.org/greenstone/cgi-bin/library.cgi
Church Committee (1976) Final report of the select committee to study governmental operations with respect to intelligence activities, United States Senate. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. https://archive.org/details/finalreportofsel01unit
Electronic Frontier Foundation (2015) A church committee for the 21st century: the need for a joint select committee on mass surveillance practices by the intelligence community. https://www.eff.org/document/new-church-committee-21st-century
Erwin MC, Liu EC (2013) NSA surveillance leaks: background and issues for congress. Congressional Research Service, July. http://journalistsresource.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/CRS_NSA_July2013.pdf
European Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (2014) On the US NSA Surveillance Programme, Surveillance Bodies in various member states and their impact on EU citizens’ fundamental rights and on transatlantic cooperation in justice and home affairs. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+REPORT+A7-2014-0139+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN#top
Ewing AB (ed) (2005) The patriot act reader. Nova Science Publishers, New York
Fidler DP (2015) Introduction. In: Fidler DP (ed) The Snowden reader. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, pp 1–16
Freedom House (2018) Attacks on the record: the state of global press freedom, 2017–2018.https://freedomhouse.org/report/special-reports/attacks-record-state-global-press-freedom-2017-2018
Gellman B, Miller G (2013) ‘Black Budget’ summary details US spy network’s successes, failures and objectives. The Washington Post, August 29. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/black-budget-summary-details-us-spy-networks-successes-failures-and-objectives/2013/08/29/7e57bb78-10ab-11e3-8cdd-bcdc09410972_story.html
Gellman B, Poitras L (2013a) NSA slides explain the PRISM data-collection program. The Washington Post, June, 6, 2013. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/prism-collection-documents/
Gellman B, Poitras L (2013b) US intelligence mining data from nine US internet companies in broad secret program. The Washington Post, June 7, 2013. https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html?utm_term=.3133cf5f3cb4
Gill P (2016) Intelligence democratisation: a comparative analysis of the limits of reform. Routledge, London
Greenwald G (2010) Mike McConnell, The WashPost & the dangers of sleazy corporatism. Salon, March 29, 2010. http://www.salon.com/2010/03/29/mcconnell_3/
Greenwald G (2013) XKeyscore: NSA tool collects ‘Nearly everything a user does on the internet’. The Guardian, July 31, 2013. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-secret-program-online-data
Greenwald G (2014) No place to hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the US surveillance state. Hamish Hamilton, London
Greenwald G, Ball J (2013) The top secret rules that allow NSA to use US data without a warrant. The Guardian, June 20, 2013. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/20/fisa-court-nsa-without-warrant.
Greenwald G, MacAskill E (2013) NSA prism program taps into user data of Apple, Google and others. The Guardian, June 6, 2013. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data
Hager N (1996) Secret power: New Zealand’s role in the international spy network. Craig Potton, Nelson
Hampton KN, Lee R, Lu W, Dwyer M, Shin I, Purcell K (2014) Social media and the “spiral of silence.” Pew Research Center, Washington, DC. http://www.pewinternet.org/files/2014/08/PI_Social-networks-and-debate_082614.pdf
Harris S (2014) @War: the rise of the military-internet complex. Headline Publishing Group, London
Hersh S (1974) Huge CIA operation reported in US against antiwar forces, other dissidents in Nixon years. The New York Times, December 22, 1974, 1
House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary (2009) Reining in the imperial presidency: lessons and recommendations relating to the presidency of George W. Bush. House Committee on the Judiciary Majority Staff Report to Chairman John Conyers, Jr., 2009. https://fas.org/irp/congress/2009_rpt/imperial-final.pdf
Intelligence and Security Committee (2015) Privacy and security: a modern and transparent legal framework. House of Commons, 2015. http://isc.independent.gov.uk/
Kayyali D (2014) The way the NSA uses section 702 is deeply troubling. Here’s why. Electronic Frontier Foundation, May 7, 2014. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/05/way-nsa-uses-section-702-deeply-troubling-heres-why
Keefe PR (2010) Privatized spying: the emerging intelligence industry. In: Johnson LK (ed) The Oxford handbook of national security intelligence. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 297–309
Lashmar P (2017) No more sources? The impact of Snowden’s revelations on journalists and their confidential sources. Journal Pract 11(6):665–688. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2016.1179587
Marquis-Boire M, Greenwald G, Lee M (2015) XKEYSCORE: NSA’s Google for the world’s private communications. The Intercept, July 1, 2015. https://theintercept.com/2015/07/01/nsasgoogle-worlds-private-communications/
Marthews A, Tucker CE (2017) Government surveillance and internet search behaviour. SSRN, February 17, 2017. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2412564
Mayer-Schönberger V, Cukier K (2013) Big data: a revolution that will transform how we live, work and think. John Murray, London
McStay A (2017) Privacy and the media. Sage, London
Mills CW (2000) The power elite. Oxford University Press, Oxford. [1956]
Newzoo (2018) Top 50 countries/markets by smartphone users and penetration. newzoo.com. https://newzoo.com/insights/rankings/top-50-countries-by-smartphone-penetration-and-users/
O Globo Fantastico (2013) NSA documents show United States Spied Brazilian Oil Giant. O Globo Fantastico, September 8, 2013. http://g1.globo.com/fantastico/noticia/2013/09/nsa-documents-show-united-states-spied-brazilian-oil-giant.html
Ofcom (2015) The communications market 2015, August, 2015. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-research/market-data/communications-market-reports/cmr15/
PEN (2013) Chilling effects: NSA surveillance drives US writers to self-censor. PEN American Center, New York. http://www.pen.org/sites/default/files/Chilling%20Effects_PEN%20American.pdf
Penney JW (2016) Chilling effects: online surveillance and Wikipedia use. Berkeley Technol Law J 31(1). https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38SS13
Pew Research Center (2015) Investigative journalists and digital security: perceptions of vulnerability and changes in behaviour. February 5, 2015. http://www.journalism.org/files/2015/02/PJ_InvestigativeJournalists_0205152.pdf
Piodi F, Mombelli I (2014) The ECHELON affair. The EP and the global interception system 1998–2002. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg
Priest D, Arkin WM (2010) Top secret America: a hidden world, growing beyond control. The Washington Post, July 19, 2010. http://projects.washingtonpost.com/top-secret-america/articles/a-hidden-world-growing-beyond-control/
Privacy International (2016) The global surveillance industry. https://privacyinternational.org/explainer/1632/global-surveillance-industry
Privacy International (2018) Secret global surveillance networks: intelligence sharing between governments and the need for safeguards. https://privacyinternational.org/report/1741/secret-global-surveillance-networks-intelligence-sharing-between-governments-and-need
PrivacyPrivacy International & Amnesty International (2015) Two years after Snowden: protecting human rights in an age of mass surveillance. https://www.privacyinternational.org/sites/default/files/Two%20Years%20After%20Snowden_Final%20Report_EN.pdf
Risen J, Lichtblau E (2005) Bush lets US spy on callers without courts. The New York Times, December 16, 2005. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html?r=0
Risen J, Poitras L (2013) NSA gathers data on social connections of US citizens. The New York Times, September 28, 2013. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/29/us/nsa-examines-social-networks-of-us-citizens.html?_r=0
Risen J, Poitras L (2014) NSA collecting millions of faces from web images. The New York Times, May 31, 2014. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/01/us/nsa-collecting-millions-of-faces-from-web-images.html?r=0
Rosenbach M, Poitras L, Holger S (2013) iSpy: how the NSA accesses smartphone data. Der Spiegel, September 9, 2013. http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/how-the-nsa-spies-on-smartphones-including-the-blackberry-a-921161.html
Schmid G (2001) Report 11 July 2001 on the existence of a global system for the interception of private and commercial communications (ECHELON Interception System) (2001/2098(INI)). Temporary Committee on the ECHELON Interception System. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&reference=A5-2001-0264&format=XML&language=EN
Stoycheff E (2016) Under surveillance: examining Facebook’s spiral of silence effects in the wake of NSA internet monitoring. J Mass Commun Q 93(2):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699016630255
The President’s Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies (2013) Liberty and security in a changing world. http://icontherecord.tumblr.com/ppd-28/2015/seeking-independent-advice
The Privacy and Civil LibertiesOversight Board (2014a) Report on the telephone records program conducted under section 215 of the USA PATRIOT ACT and on the operations of the foreign intelligence surveillance court. January, 2014. https://www.pclob.gov/events/2014/january23.html
The Privacy and Civil LibertiesOversight Board (2014b) Report on the surveillance program operated pursuant to section 702 of the foreign intelligence surveillance act. July, 2014. https://www.pclob.gov/events/2014/july02.html
WikiLeaks (2014) The spy files. http://wikileaks.org/spyfiles/
Williams N, McMenemy D, Smith L (2018) Scottish chilling: impact of government and corporate surveillance on writers. Scottish PEN and the University of Strathclyde. https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/66291/8/Williams_etal_PEN_2018_Scottish_chilling_impact_of_government_and_corporate_surveillance_on_writers.pdf
Wright S (1998) European parliament document PE 166.499: an appraisal of technologies of political control. Scientific and Technological Options Assessment (STOA). January 6, 1998. http://aei.pitt.edu/5538/
Wright D, Kreissl R (2013) European responses to the Snowden revelations: a discussion paper. Increasing Resilience in Surveillance Societies. http://irissproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/IRISS_European-responses-to-the-Snowden-revelations_18-Dec-2013_Final.pdf
Yoo J (2006) War by other means: an insider’s account of the war on terror. Atlantic Monthly Press, New York
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bakir, V. (2021). Freedom or Security? Mass Surveillance of Citizens. In: Ward, S.J.A. (eds) Handbook of Global Media Ethics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32103-5_47
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32103-5_47
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-32102-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-32103-5
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)