Controlling CCTV in Public Spaces: Is Privacy the (Only) Issue? Reflections on Norwegian and Danish Observations

Abstract

This paper examines data from an observation study of four CCTV control rooms in Norway and Denmark. The paper asks whether issues other than privacy might be at stake when public spaces are placed under video surveillance. Starting with a discussion of what values public spaces produce for society and for citizens and then examining CCTV practices in terms of those values, we find that video surveillance might have both positive and negative effects on key 'products' of public spaces. We are especially concerned with potential effects on social cohesion. If CCTV encourages broad participation and interaction in public spaces, for instance by increasing citizens' sense of safety, then CCTV may enhance social cohesion. But the discriminatory practices we observed may have the opposite effect by excluding whole categories of the populace from public spaces, thus ghettoizing those spaces and hampering social interactions. Though tentative due to limited data, our analysis indicates that structural properties of CCTV operations may affect the extent of discriminatory practices that occur. We suggest that these properties may therefore present 'handles' by which CCTV practices can be regulated to avoid negative effects on social cohesion.

Video Surveillance in Public Libraries: A Case of Unintended Consequences?

“…This phenomenon of discrimination through surveillance technologies has been referred to as "surveillance as social sorting", and has been documented in a variety of settings [18]. In their observational study of four CCTV control rooms in Scandinavia, Saetnan, Lomell, and Wiecek reported various patterns of discriminatory enforcement by private security firms [17].…”

“…Despite the lacking evidence base supporting video surveillance as an effective crime prevention tool, researchers have begun to find that CCTV systems may have actual effects on reducing antisocial and undesirable behavior [6,13] and may even be used to discriminate against certain sections of the populace by barring them from public spaces through targeted monitoring and coordinated officer interventions [17]. This phenomenon of discrimination through surveillance technologies has been referred to as "surveillance as social sorting", and has been documented in a variety of settings [18].…”

Experiências da vigilância: subjetividade e sociabilidade articuladas ao monitoramento urbano

“…O monitoramento é sentido como o que agiliza a ação policial e traz segurança, sendo capaz de diminuir a violência não só porque previne o crime, como também o combate de forma "menos agressiva" em relação a todos os envolvidos: policiais, criminosos e vítimas (Saetnan, Lomell, & Wiecek, 2004). A desorganização sofrida por aqueles que experimentam a violência (Caldeira, 2000) seria, assim, atenuada pela presença da vigilância na dinâmica da cidade, gerando a sensação de que a violência seria menor e, nesse sentido, as reações a um evento "violento" seriam muito mais brandas.…”

Surveillance Studies and Visual Art: An Examination of Jill Magid's Evidence Locker

“…The increasing use of pan-tilt-zoom cameras means that operators are constantly moving cameras, changing their focus and subsequently determining the content that is recorded. Several ethnographic studies of CCTV (Bannister, Fyfe and Kearns 1998;Fiske 1998;Norris and Armstrong 1999;Saetnan, Lomell and Wiecek 2004) have shown the extent to which camera operators target people based on visual appearance and their own personal bias, with young, black men being disproportionately surveyed. A third factor is the exclusively visual nature of the recording.…”