The Relative Moral Risks of Untargeted and Targeted Surveillance
Is surveillance that is targeted towards specific individuals easier to justify than surveillance that targets broad categories of people? Untargeted surveillance is routinely accused of treating innocent people as suspects in ways that are unfair and of failing to pursue security effectively. I arg...
Главный автор: | |
---|---|
Формат: | Электронный ресурс Статья |
Язык: | Английский |
Проверить наличие: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
Опубликовано: |
Springer Science + Business Media B. V
2014
|
В: |
Ethical theory and moral practice
Год: 2014, Том: 17, Выпуск: 2, Страницы: 187-207 |
Другие ключевые слова: | B
Privacy
B Стигматизация (мотив) B Discrimination B Surveillance B Reciprocity |
Online-ссылка: |
Presumably Free Access Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
Итог: | Is surveillance that is targeted towards specific individuals easier to justify than surveillance that targets broad categories of people? Untargeted surveillance is routinely accused of treating innocent people as suspects in ways that are unfair and of failing to pursue security effectively. I argue that in a wide range of cases untargeted surveillance treats people less like suspects than more targeted alternatives. I also argue that it often deters unwanted behaviour more effectively than targeted alternatives, including profiling. In practice, untargeted surveillance is likely to be least costly morally and most efficient when used as a means of enforcing the rules of a specific activity or institution. Targeted alternatives are likely to be more appropriate means of law enforcement. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1572-8447 |
Второстепенные работы: | Enthalten in: Ethical theory and moral practice
|
Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1007/s10677-013-9428-1 |