A Difference of Opinion
There have been some mischaracterizations of the kind of data the NSA is collecting on Americans. Inaccurate or unclear reporting led some to interpret that the NSA was collecting and storing the specific content of the cellular or digital communication. This is incorrect. The NSA collects metadata, which is information about a communication, such as the phone number, time and duration of a call. Paired with the Internet metadata collected around the world, the NSA has access to a vast amount of information that when synthesized could reveal terrorist threats. But does the agency really need all this data? The NSA argues that it does.
As the spy agency digs through webs of international relationships that might relate to terrorist plans, it may become necessary to track communications within the United States. Troves of phone call metadata allows the NSA to follow up on new intelligence by searching past metadata, potentially uncovering other nefarious individuals in a terrorist network. Absent large servers packed with Americans’ phone metadata, the NSA would be limited in its ability to track terrorist associates within the United States. Sometimes an associate may not be identified without reviewing phone call data.
There have been some mischaracterizations of the kind of data the NSA is collecting on Americans. Inaccurate or unclear reporting led some to interpret that the NSA was collecting and storing the specific content of the cellular or digital communication. This is incorrect.
Civil liberties groups, however, argue that data collection on this scale presents a threat – if not a direct attack – on the Fourth Amendment. While metadata does not include what is discussed on a phone call, it could potentially reveal personal information, such as shopping habits, locations frequently visited or services solicited. That kind of access to Americans’ personal lives leaves some anxious about just how much the NSA is bending the Fourth Amendment. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has for years brought multiple lawsuits against the NSA for its data collection sins, and at every turn, the ACLU’s challenges have been rejected by the courts. A similar result was seen in the above-mentioned Supreme Court case brought by EPIC.
As with Internet metadata collection, the primary concern is the potential for abuse of collected information. Keeping metadata out of government hands is a barrier that helps protect the sanctity of the Fourth Amendment. This is the heart of the privacy versus security debate. The desired balance is sharing just enough information to stop terrorism but not so much information that it creates additional risk, such as a threat to civil liberties.
Recent revelations about NSA surveillance activities have prompted protests from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and others, but polling has suggested that Americans don’t understand what exactly the NSA does. Stop Watching Us photo
While the ACLU, EPIC and other organizations are proactive proponents of heightened privacy protection, their efforts have thus far not been sufficient to sway the courts or push legislation. It may be that public opinion is the most potent force that could move the needle in the security-privacy debate. The challenge for privacy advocates, however, is that the public attention span is brief, its memory short and its knowledge of the issues sadly limited.
The Lights Are On But…
Recent public opinion polls have revealed several startling findings about just how much Americans understand the NSA revelations. A survey from TechCrunch showed that public opinion has changed little since Snowden began releasing secret documents. About 50 percent of Americans found the NSA’s practices “acceptable” in 2006; the same percentage of Americans gave the NSA the OK when asked the same question in an October survey this year. This might indicate public endorsement, if the American public had a clear understanding of the issues and the NSA’s data collection programs. They do not.
The same TechCrunch survey found that 43 percent of Americans believe the government has collected and reviewed the contents of e-mails and phone calls. While there has been some inadvertent collection of domestic data, it does not come close to 43 percent of the country’s cellphone and Internet users. Interestingly, however, many of the respondents who believed their communications were being monitored were not troubled by it.
A separate survey, conducted by YouGov and sponsored by Amy Zegart, the co-director of Stanford University’s Center for International Security and Cooperation, found widespread misunderstanding of NSA programs: nearly 40 percent of respondents believed NSA phone data collection includes content. What is worse, there is not much understanding about what the agency even does. About 70 percent of respondents either thought the NSA runs kill or capture operations abroad or didn’t know if they did. And 77 percent either thought the NSA interrogates detainees or weren’t sure. This ignorance may be working to the NSA’s advantage. Zegart’s survey found that the more Americans knew about the NSA and its programs, the less they supported it.
About 70 percent of respondents either thought the NSA runs kill or capture operations abroad or didn’t know if they did. And 77 percent either thought the NSA interrogates detainees or weren’t sure. This ignorance may be working to the NSA’s advantage. Zegart’s survey found that the more Americans knew about the NSA and its programs, the less they supported it.
In a survey by the Huffington Post, more than 50 percent of the country thinks there is inadequate oversight of government data collection. And yet, nearly 60 percent of the survey respondents were not even aware that the NSA was recently implicated in spying on foreign leaders, despite a week’s worth of headlines covering German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s outrage at having her personal cellphone tapped.
If so much of the voting public is unclear or misinformed about the NSA’s work and a significant number of Americans have an incorrect understanding of NSA programs, how then can the country have an informed national discussion about the balance between privacy and security? To effectively reform (or approve) NSA data collection techniques, the debate requires robust public input. The public, however, is not privy to secret NSA programs. And even if they were, it seems unlikely (given survey results) that most Americans would even understand or be aware of what they were being told. What’s a nation to do?
In the final installment of this series, we look at how other government agencies and even private companies monitor and collect digital information and detail the steps the country can take to inform the public, drive discussion, and ultimately find some resolution in the privacy-security debate.