They are always watching you.

Imagine life under constant surveilance. This is the reality for the 2.3 million Americans who are currently incarcerated. What role does CCTV play in our prisons? Is it a violation of inmates' privacy?

What is CCTV?

Closed-circuit television (CCTV) is another term for video surveillance. CCTV cameras are used to capture footage of people and ongoing events in a specific location. The footage that is captured by CCTV cameras can be stored and retrieved afterwards or monitored in real time.

Closed-circuit television (CCTV) is said to benefit society by ensuring high security and monitoring in public locations. The prevalence of CCTV regularly ignites debates regarding privacy between communities and the government and/or private entities. However, one space in which CCTV is heavily used that we rarely think about is within the prison population in American prisons.

Public vs. prisons

The main reason why video surveillance is used—both in prisons and the public spaces we frequently visit—is to provide security. However, the way CCTV is used in prisons somewhat differs from what we encounter on a daily basis. Firstly, CCTV cameras in prisons are often placed in both public spaces (e.g. hallways, dining halls, etc.) and semi-private areas (e.g. cells, living areas, etc.) In contrast, although most people might expect to be subject to video surveillance in the public, there is some semblance of privacy within private spaces like our homes. In addition, inmates are fully aware that they are being surveilled and they know that there is little they can do to keep their privacy intact. Since inmates know that they’re being watched, the role of CCTV isn’t only to document unethical or illegal behavior, but to influence them to behave as intended as they are being recorded.

A LACK OF OVERSIGHT

Most private companies are forced to receive consent from users when they’re collecting their data and users receive updates on changes on their privacy policy. Although we are often unaware of how much of our data is collected, its usually possible for us to find out. Video surveillance, especially in prisons, rarely operates in the same way. There are no terms and conditions to accept. Inmates are forced to comply with the rules. They do not know how and where their data is being stored and retrieved. Additionally, the CCTV footage that is recorded from public cameras is rarely stored beyond the necessary amount of time. In prisons, however, the CCTV footage taken of inmates can theoretically be stored for an indefinite period of time. There are limited guidelines and no oversight for how long prison CCTV footage is stored, and inmates aren’t able to know this information or speak out in public about this.

DOES CCTV EVEN WORK?

In theory, it seems obvious that CCTV universally improve inmate behavior. But the research conducted by Allard et al. implies otherwise. Inmates often reported feeling indifferent towards being surveilled. The researchers discovered that most assaults that occurred outside of the supervision of cameras and officers are planned. However, attacks under the direct supervision are most likely cause by impulsiveness. Surveillance was not an effective tool in dissuading impulsive violence. CCTV can be helpful in some circumstances, but it is not a flawless solution as some people might think.

real concerns

In theory, it seems obvious that CCTV universally improve inmate behavior. But the research conducted by Allard et al. implies otherwise. Inmates often reported feeling indifferent towards being surveilled. The researchers discovered that most assaults that occurred outside of the supervision of cameras and officers are planned. However, attacks under the direct supervision are most likely cause by impulsiveness. Surveillance was not an effective tool in dissuading impulsive violence. CCTV can be helpful in some circumstances, but it is not a flawless solution as some people might think.

an example

In Washington State, there are stations that allow for “authorized individuals” to access both live footage and archived recordings. But we do not know who exactly has access to these stations, how long CCTV footage is kept, how often footage gets deleted, whether this footage is stored securely, or who decides what footage is kept or deleted. Furthermore, the “authorized individuals” who have access to CCTV footage are in a unique position of power which allows them to violate the privacy of inmates as they please.

In 2013, a lawsuit was filed against the Puyallup city jail accusing police officers of video recording DUI suspects with CCTV cameras, with attractive women being recorded more than others.

One suspect from the same facility also testified that police officers had joked about her using the toilet when she had been arrested and that she found out that the video of her urinating existed two years later when her lawyer contacted her. The U.S. District Court in Tacoma ruled that it was not an invasion of privacy.