Final Thoughts

We all desire to have the freedoms that most of us have been afforded since birth. With that come the complexities of how to protect it. The government of this country is certainly taking direct action in utilizing these technologies in its efforts to secure and surveil. In search of breeches that effect and are in direct opposition to our security and safety. The issue is at what price and how constitutional is it? There is a heightened since of fear and skepticism that has permeated our culture since 9-11 and the resulting war on terrorism. With all this being said there are plenty of individuals that have a growing concern there privacy and the public domain in which we live. The impact is that it does impede free speech and public communication online. It is clear that users of computer-mediated communication are using “new media to become informed” and “to inform others” (Kahn and Kellner, 2004). Here again, we live in such a state of increased security concerns, that concern has been founded, and we feel it all around us. We all have a human need and desire to feel safe and secure even with our individual political differences set aside. The important concept is that we utilize new technology to protect our interest as well as to insure our freedoms.

An Introduction

Our reliance on computer mediated technology is pervasive, it impacts all of our lives if not directly then indirectly. There have been incredible advances in the speed and bandwidth by which we access this technology, which has allowed us to have greater communication throughout the world. Because of the dependence on such technology it has become a fertile ground by which to gain intelligence some believe by both the government and terrorist organizations alike. The government has tapped this resource is utilizing this technology to secure, surveil in this time of warfare and increased national security. While it may have shocked most Americans to discover that the Pentagon’s National Security Agency was logging phone calls since the events and resulting tragedy of September 11th 2001 it certainly has stunned a nation to find that, scientists have discovered that the NSA is now funding research into mass harvesting of the information that individuals post about themselves on social networks such as MySpace (Marks, 2006). We live in such a state of increased security concerns, that concern has been founded, and we feel it all around us. We all have a human need and desire to feel safe and secure even with our individual political differences set aside. Which begs the question, where is our right to privacy that is our constitutional guarantee and the protection of the nation by which granted us and protects such luxuries begin and end? It is indeed a complicated question. It is an issue that the government and the people of this country will inevitably negotiate, renegotiate, and at times refuse to negotiate on. According to Marks (2006), “The NSA is pursuing its plans to tap the web, since phone logs have limited scope. By adding online social networking data to its phone analyses, the NSA could connect people at deeper levels, through shared activities, such as taking flying lessons” (p. 30). The idea here is that these individuals cluster and form highly organized groups which make them more apparent. This data can result in how many links or degrees of separation are visible to individuals that are connected to blacklisted organizations (Marks, 2006). Here we will look at how the use of computer mediated communication is used in security, surveillance and warfare.

Computer-Meditated Communication in Surveillance

Surveillance by our government, employers, and even terrorists is not a new subject. This has been going on for many years but when our country is in a time of defense surveillance and security is increased. Surveillance in our country since the events of September 11, 2001 has increased tremendously (http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/30634.php). Our country is in a time of war and protection against terrorism is our number one goal. To achieve this goal surveillance of all things that can be a potential threat is necessary. The government has monitored many different things such as telephone conversations, credit card transactions, travel records, and interactions on the internet (http://www.cnss.org/tia.htm). Some people do not like the idea and others believe in all of its efforts.

Surveillance can be viewed in a variety of ways. When talking about surveillance related to security and warfare, you would think there would a fine line about what is considered invasion of privacy and what is protection but there is not. According to Shields (2005), people feel that an increase in surveillance erodes citizens’ privacy. When we are in a state of peace there are no reasons to be constantly monitoring, but in the situation that our country is in now since 911, I think it is necessary to be always searching for threats. The only reason the government uses surveillance to this extreme is to protect our country. If they did not do the necessary monitoring and something happened, people would be asking why the government was not looking out and protecting us more. The best way to summarize this would to say it is a “necessary evil.” Not everyone is going to agree with this surveillance and most will go against the government but when the country is in need of security and protection it is the right thing to do.

There are many ways to go about using surveillance on the internet. The government uses certain tracking software to monitor citizens and look for potential terrorist. These types of software programs or bugs can allow the government to get information about people that are using the internet. In addition, look for certain details in conversations or interactions that might be a threat to our country. The FBI recently has started using an internet surveillance technique that collects more data on citizen than ever before. According to McCullagh (2007), “This kind of full-pipe surveillance can record all Internet traffic, including Web browsing--or, optionally, only certain subsets such as all e-mail messages flowing through the network” (http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-151059.html). This can help us find any thing out on the internet that might be harmful to us. There are other forms of surveillance that the government uses to monitor phone conversations which are called wiretaps. President Bush in July, 2008 signed an expansion on wiretap laws which broadens the governments surveillance power. This is allowing phone company’s to bug their customers phone conversations without a court approval if asked by the NSA. The goal of this is to wiretap potential terrorist or foreign intelligence agencies (http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=expanded-wiretap-law).

All of these different types of surveillance are getting citizens more concerned about there privacy than ever before that is affecting our society. According to Thurlow, Lengel, and Tomic (), “State censorship of the internet and online surveillance continues to threaten free speech and public interaction online, whether is be in the form of official blocks to access or hidden monitoring of messages”(p.91). In the sense of protection against terrorism, surveillance is a great tool but the governments monitoring has to have its limits as well. Freedom is what this country stands for and people should never feel like that is being taken away from them. However, when using the internet nothing is private. Like Conlin (2006) said, “People need to realize that this is like putting stuff up on the 6 o’clock news” (p.118). That is all under that users control so if you do not want something private about yourself being known do not use the internet to say it. If you do this surveillance should nott be a problem or affect you. People are also concerned with the fact that we are providing a system for our enemies to hack into.

References:

(2005). Prof probes impact of post 9/11 surveillance. Medical News Today. Retrieved August 4, 2008, from http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/30634.php

Corman, S. (2008). How Enemies Could Use Our Wiretaps. COMOPS Journal. Retrieved August 4, 2008, from http://comops.org/journal/2008/02/09/how-enemies-could-use-our-wiretaps/

McCullagh, D., (2007). FBI turns to broad new wiretap method. ZDNet. Retrieved August 4, 2008, from http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-151059.html

Shields, P. (2005). When the ‘information revolution’ and the US security state collide, New Media and Society, 7, 483-512.

Thurlow, C., Lengel, L., Tomic, A. (2004). Computer Mediated Communication: Social Interaction and The Internet. Sage Publications Inc. Retrieved August 4, 2008, from http://books.google.com/books?id=kzeS1LHFzBAC&pg=PA91&lpg=PA91&dq=Surveillance+Computer+mediated+communication&source=web&ots=gUEXl6nHFm&sig=4g-yprP0E6r5S9XjsDqYXtWVcaI&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=5&ct=result#PPA91,M1

Total information awareness. Retrieved August 4, 2008, from http://www.cnss.org/tia.htm

Computer-Mediated Communication in Security

We live in an age of heightened national security concerns as well as home and personal security concerns. Since the events of September 11, 2001 and the events surrounding Hurricane Katrina, we have concerns for any additional attacks on our homeland as well as concerns for the safety and security of our families, friends as well as ourselves. Fortunately, we live in an age of advanced technology which allows for faster and perhaps more efficient means of communication. We must better understand the role of computer-mediated communication in our homeland security as well as our home and personal security.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was created in 2002. The goals of the newly created Department of Homeland Security were to “Prevent terrorist attacks within the United States; Reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism; and Minimize the damage and recover from attacks that do occur.” (www.dhs.gov, n.d.)

According to their web site, the strategy of the Department of Homeland Security was to, “prepare our Nation for the work ahead in several ways by: providing direction to the federal government departments and agencies that have a role in homeland security, suggesting steps that state and local governments, private companies and organizations, and individual Americans could take to improve our security and offered incentives for them to do so, and recommending certain actions to the Congress.” (www.dhs.gov, n.d.) Please refer to the following link in order to read the “First National Strategy for Homeland Security” which was issued in July 2002: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/nat_strat_hls.pdf

Since the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and the advent of Hurricane Katrina, several additional issues had to be addressed. In 2007, the Department of Homeland Security published the following directive regarding information sharing strategies.

“Fostering information sharing is a core Department mission. The Department must use the established governance structure to make decisions regarding information sharing issues. The Department must commit sufficient resources to information sharing. The Department must measure progress toward information sharing goals. The Department must maintain information and data security and protect privacy and civil liberties. Department employees share information every day in support of our mission, and the Department as a whole has made significant strides in improving our collaboration internally and with our federal, state, local, and international partners. This strategy outlines the path forward for focusing our efforts on achieving specific goals that will benefit the Department and our stakeholders, especially the American public whom we serve.” (www.dhs.gov, n.d.) Please refer to the following link to in order to read the “Department of Homeland Security Information Sharing Strategy” which was issued in October 2007: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/nat_strat_homelandsecurity_2007.pdf

On April 18, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security issued an additional publication addressing information sharing. Within this publication, the Department of Homeland Security outlines their “multi-faceted mission” which is to “prevent and protect against terrorist attacks; respond to both man-made and natural disasters; perform the law enforcement and other crucial functions of the Department’s component agencies; and play a central role in augmenting the Nation’s ability to gather, analyze and disseminate information and intelligence.” (www.dhs.gov, n.d.) Please refer to the following link in order to read the “Department of Homeland Security Information Sharing Strategy” which was issued on April 18, 2008: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/dhs_information_sharing_strategy.pdf

The Department of Homeland Security has provided links to learn more about “information sharing & analysis, prevention & protection, preparedness & response” (www.dhs.gov, n.d.). They have also provided means to receive e-mail updates and RSS (Really Simple Syndication) feeds from a variety of homeland security web sites (www.dhs.gov, n.d.).

Aside from the information available from the Department of Homeland Security, I personally recommend the following two (2) web sites as means to stay informed regarding our homeland security as well as our home and personal security. The first of the two is http://www.ready.gov/. This web site provides information through hyperlinks to help prepare American citizens, businesses, and kids for a wide variety of emergencies (www.ready.gov, n.d.). The second of the two is “The Emergency Email & Wireless Network” located at http://www.emergencyemail.org/. Emergency Email Network, Inc. operates this web site. Their mission is to “Provide notification to citizens of local, regional, national and international emergencies utilizing the Internet and electronic mail (email) in a secure and expedient manner” (www.emergencyemail.org, 1999). This is a free public service which provides emergency notification by email, cellular telephone, or pager (www.emergencyemail.org, 1999).

The computer-mediated communication tools provided at these web sites will go a long way to help make American citizens more secure. It is clear that users of computer-mediated communication are using “new media to become informed” and “to inform others” (Kahn and Kellner, 2004). In light of this, “We need to appreciate how” computer-mediated communication tools “affect our lives at home and at work and how we can use them wisely to preserve our perception, priorities, and, above all, principles” (Bugeja, 2005).

Not everyone has access to computer-mediated communication via the internet. This “digital divide” defined as “the troubling gap between those who use computers and the internet and those who do not” (Mehra, Merkel, and Peterson, 2004) is significant. Mehra, Merkel, and Peterson (2004) cited The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) who addressed this “digital divide by saying “Disparities in technology access and use are related to socioeconomic status, with income, educational level and race among the factors associated with technological attainment.” Efforts must be made to bridge this “gap” so that more and more people can have access to the computer-mediated communication tools that will notify and inform them of an emergency.

The following journal article provides an interesting insight as to how computer-mediated communication was applied in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Brian Thevenot (2005) reported how computer-mediated communication assisted him in reporting and writing about the devastating aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. He mentioned that “Since the storm hit, our Web site traffic on nola.com has exploded to more than 30 million page views a day” (Thevenot, 2005). He reported what he was observing so people in the path of the hurricane as well as those looking on from a distance could get an accurate account of what happened and become informed of how to obtain assistance if needed.

With the advancement of computer-mediated technology, more people can secure themselves, their families, and their homes with warning systems that will notify them and inform them of impending disaster and emergencies. Computer-mediated communication does play and will continue to play a vital role in securing ourselves, our homes, as well as our homeland.

References

Bugeja, M. (2005). Interpersonal divide: The search for community in a technological age. New York: Oxford.

Department of Homeland Security. (n.d.). Department of Homeland Security. Retrieved August 3, 2008, from http://www.dhs.gov/index.shtm.

Emergency Email Network, Inc. (1999). Emergency Email. Retrieved August 3, 2008 from www.emergencyemail.org.

Kahn, R., & Kellner, D. (2004). New media and internet activism: From the ‘battle of Seattle’ to blogging. New Media and Society, 6, 87-95.

Mehra, B., Merkel, C., & Petersen, B. A. (2004). The internet for empowerment of minority and marginalized users. New Media and Society, 6, 781-802.

Ready. (n.d.). Ready. Retrieved August 3, 2008 from http://www.ready.gov/.

Thevenot, B. (2005). Apocalypse in New Orleans. American Journalism Review, October/November 2005. Retrieved August 3, 2008, from http://www.ajr.org/article.asp?id=3959.