tom_thinks
Friday, June 11, 2004
Big Brother Marches On
The city wants companies capable of building the system to submit bids by the end of this month. "The purpose of the ... system is to provide for the homeland defense ... while also reducing crime and public disorder," reads the request for proposals. "Cameras will only observe and record that which a police officer or private citizen could legally see."
At a surveillance center in the Atrium Building on Howard Street, 13 to 15 retired police officers or criminal justice college students will monitor images, said Elliot Schlanger, Baltimore's chief information officer.
The system will be owned by the city and managed by Schlanger's office. The network would be able to connect with the state's existing system of closed-circuit cameras that monitor highways, he said.
Eventually, Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Carroll, Harford and Howard counties would plug their systems into the city's hub.
The city would also work to link its network with the closed-circuit television systems in use by the University of Maryland, the Downtown Partnership, Oriole Park at Camden Yards and other private institutions on downtown's west side.
The network could also hook up to closed-circuit cameras in city schools during a possible terrorist attack, according to the city's request for proposals.
Isn't it comforting to know that from one central location you could watch the goings on of an entire city? Will they soon add the digital cameras in police patrol cars to their plethora of video streams? While this system doesn't include the many private security feeds from businesses in Baltimore, is such a system looming in the future?
I realize that this isn't the first time or place that outdoor surveillance cameras are being used. As a matter of fact, here in Gainesville, the new traffic lights have built in cameras. Their official purpose is monitoring traffic and I'll admit they would be pretty inefficient in trying to watch people; but the idea of public video surveillance seems to be catching on.
There are currently cameras in most large retail stores, every ATM, traffic lights, cop cars, public buildings and even home security systems. In many cases one could argue that there isn't much of an expectation of privacy in public spaces and the existence of these systems only furthers the erosion of that expectation. However as such surveillance systems grow in usage and scope other concerns arise. Information from these systems can be recorded and thus any privacy we may have assumed due to the fleeting nature of our public behavior, will also be lost. (currently I do not believe these feeds to be recorded due to the sheer size of the data, but data storage is becoming cheaper and easier by the minute)As is the case with home videos, embarrassing moments can be immortalized. Since such systems are not widely in use its hard to say what the legal uses of surveillance technology will be. Would sometime in the future, video recordings of public places become public information or would it be solely controlled by the government? When crimes are caught on tape by these systems they will undoubtedly be used as evidence in court; but will access be granted to those wishing to use such tapes to prove their innocence or as evidence in civil suits? (An interesting related story;'Curb Your Enthusiasm' clears murder suspect)
Will Big Brother share? Would these video recordings be available to private companies? Even without attaching personally identifying information like names and blurring faces these video feeds could be used for behavioral research much the way they are used by marketers in department stores. (Yes, they are watching and analyzing your behavior in the mall and Wal-Mart.) Marketers have used such information to design product displays and arrange their sales floors. They use alterations in the store environment to encourage more spending (They know how long you compare prices and how often you look on the bottom shelf. For a great book on this subject read Douglass Rushkoff's Coercion).