Whether CCTV cameras are an unwarranted intrusion into the privacy of citizens going about their lawful business or a deterrent to crime depends on how the information gained is used.
That the number of publicly-owned CCTV cameras has tripled over the last 10 years suggests growing faith in their value as a deterrent -- the electronic equivalent of the watchful eye of the good neighbour.
The first cameras, strategically placed to monitor areas where trouble occurred, however, had the effect of displacing anti-social behaviour and assaults out of range of the camera. One of the main reasons for the increase in their number is to overcome that limitation.
The idea that only those who have something to hide have anything to fear from CCTV underpins its use and gives rise to the idea that cameras should increase a general sense of security. Yet the proliferation of cameras on streets and both inside and outside public buildings and increasingly in private and commercial buildings can have exactly the opposite effect, acting as an ever-present reminder of the threat of crime or even terrorist activity increasing the fear of crime.
Just as damaging is a false sense of security where cameras are useless because they have been switched off, have no film or are not monitored and recognised as an empty threat by those intent on anti-social behaviour.
Statistics, such as the one which shows the Western Isles as having the highest number of CCTV cameras per 1000 residents in the UK - largely as a result of having cameras attached to schools with very few pupils - can be misleading. It is more important to analyse how effective the cameras are. CCTV images provided significant evidence in two recent murder trials in Scotland, substantiating the claim that if they do not deter crime they can help to solve it.
It is time for a review of what we want to achieve from the use of CCTV and how effective it is, not least because Scotland now has more than its fair share of electronic eyes. Five years ago Richard Thomas, then information commissioner for England and Wales, warned that Britain was in danger of “sleepwalking into a surveillance society” if data from identity cards was linked with information from monitoring devices such as CCTV cameras. That would undoubtedly turn Big Brother from a protective to a threatening entity and must be resisted.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article