DOCSLIB.ORG

Mass Surveillance of Personal Data by EU Member States and Its Compatibility with EU Law

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mass Surveillance of Personal Data by EU Member States and Its Compatibility with EU Law UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) Mass Surveillance of Personal Data by EU Member States and its Compatibility with EU Law Bigo, D.; Carrera, S.; Hernanz, N.; Jeandesboz, J.; Parkin, J.; Ragazzi, F.; Scherrer, A. Publication date 2013 Document Version Final published version Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Bigo, D., Carrera, S., Hernanz, N., Jeandesboz, J., Parkin, J., Ragazzi, F., & Scherrer, A. (2013). Mass Surveillance of Personal Data by EU Member States and its Compatibility with EU Law. (CEPS Papers in Liberty and Security in Europe; No. 62). CEPS. http://ceps.eu/book/mass-surveillance-personal-data-eu-member-states-and-its-compatibility- eu-law General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl) Download date:01 Oct 2021 Mass Surveillance of Personal Data by EU Member States and its Compatibility with EU Law Didier Bigo, Sergio Carrera, Nicholas Hernanz, Julien Jeandesboz, Joanna Parkin, Francesco Ragazzi and Amandine Scherrer No. 62 / November 2013 Abstract In the wake of the disclosures surrounding PRISM and other US surveillance programmes, this paper assesses the large-scale surveillance practices by a selection of EU member states: the UK, Sweden, France, Germany and the Netherlands. Given the large-scale nature of these practices, which represent a reconfiguration of traditional intelligence gathering, the paper contends that an analysis of European surveillance programmes cannot be reduced to a question of the balance between data protection versus national security, but has to be framed in terms of collective freedoms and democracy. It finds that four of the five EU member states selected for in-depth examination are engaging in some form of large-scale interception and surveillance of communication data, and identifies parallels and discrepancies between these programmes and the NSA-run operations. The paper argues that these programmes do not stand outside the realm of EU intervention but can be analysed from an EU law perspective via i) an understanding of national security in a democratic rule of law framework where fundamental human rights and judicial oversight constitute key norms; ii) the risks posed to the internal security of the Union as a whole as well as the privacy of EU citizens as data owners and iii) the potential spillover into the activities and responsibilities of EU agencies. The paper then presents a set of policy recommendations to the European Parliament. This study was commissioned as a Briefing Paper by the European Parliament's Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. The original document entitled “National Programmes of Mass Surveillance of Personal Data in the EU Member States and their Compatibility with EU Law”, can be downloaded from the European Parliament’s website (www.europarl.europa.eu/studies). It is republished by the Centre for European Policy Studies with the kind permission of the European Parliament. CEPS Papers in Liberty and Security in Europe offer the views and critical reflections of CEPS researchers and external collaborators on key policy discussions surrounding the construction of the EU’s Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. The series encompasses policy-oriented and interdisciplinary academic studies and commentary about the internal and external implications of Justice and Home Affairs policies inside Europe and elsewhere throughout the world. Unless otherwise indicated, the views expressed are attributable only to the authors in a personal capacity and not to any institution with which they are associated. This publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form for non-profit purposes only and on the condition that the source is fully acknowledged. ISBN 978-94-6138-364-8 Available for free downloading from the CEPS website (http://www.ceps.eu) ©CEPS, 2013 Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... i Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1 1. Controversy between the actors about the scale of the problem .............................................................. 5 1.1 Large-scale electronic surveillance in democracies: Compatibility or not? ...................................... 5 1.1.1 Surveillance, Intelligence services and democracy ................................................................ 6 1.1.2 Large-scale surveillance and mass surveillance: What is at stake? ......................................... 7 1.2 Political and ethical controversies regarding the use of these technologies by intelligence services: The question of legitimacy ............................................................................................... 9 1.2.1 The position of the security services ..................................................................................... 9 1.2.2 The position of the other actors .......................................................................................... 10 2. EU member state practices in the context of the revelations of NSA large-scale operations .................. 12 2.1 Technical features ........................................................................................................................ 13 2.2 Scale ............................................................................................................................................ 14 2.3 Data types and data targets ........................................................................................................... 14 2.4 Processing and analysis of data .................................................................................................... 15 2.5 Cooperation between national and international security actors .................................................... 16 2.6 Legal regimes and oversight ......................................................................................................... 17 3. Legal modalities of action at EU level and compatibility with EU law ................................................. 19 3.1 National security and democratic rule of law ................................................................................ 20 3.1.1 National Security and the ECHR ........................................................................................ 21 3.1.2 National security and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights .............................................. 24 3.2 Whose security? Sincere cooperation and citizens’ liberties compromised .................................... 25 3.3 Home affairs agencies .................................................................................................................. 27 4. Conclusions and recommendations: Implications of large-scale surveillance for freedom, fundamental rights, democracy and sovereignty in the EU ................................................................... 29 4.1 General conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 29 4.2 Policy recommendations .............................................................................................................. 32 Academic references ................................................................................................................................... 37 ANNEX The EU Member States’ Practices in the context of the Revelations of Large-Scale Surveillance Operations by the NSA .................................................................................................... 39 1. The United Kingdom ....................................................................................................................... 39 2. Sweden............................................................................................................................................ 45 3. France ............................................................................................................................................. 48 4. Germany ......................................................................................................................................... 52 5. The Netherlands .............................................................................................................................. 57 Mass Surveillance of Personal Data by EU Member States and its Compatibility with EU Law Didier Bigo, Sergio Carrera, Nicholas Hernanz, Julien Jeandesboz, Joanna Parkin, Francesco Ragazzi and Amandine Scherrer CEPS Paper
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Suspect Until Proven Guilty, a Problematization of State Dossier Systems Via Two Case Studies: the United States and China
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations Fall 2009 Suspect Until Proven Guilty, a Problematization of State Dossier Systems via Two Case Studies: The United States and China Kenneth N. Farrall University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Asian Studies Commons, Communication Technology and New Media Commons, International and Intercultural Communication Commons, and the Social Influence and oliticalP Communication Commons Recommended Citation Farrall, Kenneth N., "Suspect Until Proven Guilty, a Problematization of State Dossier Systems via Two Case Studies: The United States and China" (2009). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 51. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/51 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/51 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Suspect Until Proven Guilty, a Problematization of State Dossier Systems via Two Case Studies: The United States and China Abstract This dissertation problematizes the "state dossier system" (SDS): the production and accumulation of personal information on citizen subjects exceeding the reasonable bounds of risk management. SDS - comprising interconnecting subsystems of records and identification - damage individual autonomy and self-determination, impacting not only human rights, but also the viability of the social system. The research, a hybrid of case-study and cross-national comparison, was guided in part by a theoretical model of four primary SDS driving forces: technology, political economy, law and public sentiment. Data sources included government documents, academic texts, investigative journalism, NGO reports and industry white papers. The primary analytical instrument was the juxtaposition of two individual cases: the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • National Programmes for Mass Surveillance of Personal Data in Eu Member States and Their Compatibility with Eu Law
    DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT C: CITIZENS' RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS NATIONAL PROGRAMMES FOR MASS SURVEILLANCE OF PERSONAL DATA IN EU MEMBER STATES AND THEIR COMPATIBILITY WITH EU LAW STUDY Abstract In the wake of the disclosures surrounding PRISM and other US surveillance programmes, this study makes an assessment of the large-scale surveillance practices by a selection of EU member states: the UK, Sweden, France, Germany and the Netherlands. Given the large-scale nature of surveillance practices at stake, which represent a reconfiguration of traditional intelligence gathering, the study contends that an analysis of European surveillance programmes cannot be reduced to a question of balance between data protection versus national security, but has to be framed in terms of collective freedoms and democracy. It finds that four of the five EU member states selected for in-depth examination are engaging in some form of large-scale interception and surveillance of communication data, and identifies parallels and discrepancies between these programmes and the NSA-run operations. The study argues that these surveillance programmes do not stand outside the realm of EU intervention but can be engaged from an EU law perspective via (i) an understanding of national security in a democratic rule of law framework where fundamental human rights standards and judicial oversight constitute key standards; (ii) the risks presented to the internal security of the Union as a whole as well as the privacy of EU citizens as data owners, and (iii) the potential spillover into the activities and responsibilities of EU agencies.
    [Show full text]
  • İSTİHBARATIN TEŞKİLATLANMA Ve YÖNETİM SORUNSALI: A.B.D. ÖRNEĞİ
    T.C. İSTANBUL ÜNİVERSİTESİ SOSYAL BİLİMLER ENSTİTÜSÜ SİYASET BİLİMİ VE KAMU YÖNETİMİ ANABİLİM DALI YÜKSEK LİSANS TEZİ İSTİHBARATIN TEŞKİLATLANMA ve YÖNETİM SORUNSALI: A.B.D. ÖRNEĞİ Fatih TÜRK 2501110836 TEZ DANIŞMANI DOÇ. DR Pelin Pınar GİRİTLİOĞLU İSTANBUL - 2019 ÖZ İSTİHBARATIN TEŞKİLATLANMA ve YÖNETİM SORUNSALI: A.B.D. ÖRNEĞİ Fatih TÜRK Günümüzde teknolojinin gelişimi ve küreselleşme dünyayı uçtan uca değiştirdi. Toplumlar ve ülkeler birbiri ile etkileşime geçtikçe bireysel özgürlükler ve demokrasi konusunda hassas alanlar giderek artmaktadır. Bu etkileşim ülkelerin güvenliğini ve bireysel özgürlük alanlarınıda etkilemektedir. Bu hızlı değişime karşın ülkeler geçmişin soğuk savaş anlayışı ve güvenlik hassasiyetlerini de aynı zamanda taşımaya devam etmektedirler. Gelişmiş demokrasilere sahip ülkelerin başında gelen Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nde (ABD) mevcut güvenlik ve istihbarat anlayışı, faaliyetleri ve denetimi işte bu çatışmanın uzun sürede meydana geldiği denge üzerine kuruludur. ABD açısından istihbarat teşkilatlanma süreci yeni problemler, hak arayışları, çatışma ve çözümler doğurmaktadır. Tüm bunların ışığında bu tezin temel amacı istihbarat problemlerini ABD istihbarat teşkilatlanma süreci üzerinden analiz edip karşılaşılan problemleri neden sonuç ilişkisi içerisinde tespit etmektir. Bu çalışmada Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nde istihbaratın yönetim modeli, teşkilatlanması ve hukuki alt yapısı incelenmiştir. Birinci bölümde kavramsal anlamda istihbarat incelemesi literatüre önemli bir katkı olarak görülebilir. İkinci bölümde
    [Show full text]
  • Mass Surveillance of Personal Data by EU Member States and Its
    Mass Surveillance of Personal Data by EU Member States and its Compatibility with EU Law Didier Bigo, Sergio Carrera, Nicholas Hernanz, Julien Jeandesboz, Joanna Parkin, Francesco Ragazzi and Amandine Scherrer No. 62 / November 2013 Abstract In the wake of the disclosures surrounding PRISM and other US surveillance programmes, this paper assesses the large-scale surveillance practices by a selection of EU member states: the UK, Sweden, France, Germany and the Netherlands. Given the large-scale nature of these practices, which represent a reconfiguration of traditional intelligence gathering, the paper contends that an analysis of European surveillance programmes cannot be reduced to a question of the balance between data protection versus national security, but has to be framed in terms of collective freedoms and democracy. It finds that four of the five EU member states selected for in-depth examination are engaging in some form of large-scale interception and surveillance of communication data, and identifies parallels and discrepancies between these programmes and the NSA-run operations. The paper argues that these programmes do not stand outside the realm of EU intervention but can be analysed from an EU law perspective via i) an understanding of national security in a democratic rule of law framework where fundamental human rights and judicial oversight constitute key norms; ii) the risks posed to the internal security of the Union as a whole as well as the privacy of EU citizens as data owners and iii) the potential spillover into the activities and responsibilities of EU agencies. The paper then presents a set of policy recommendations to the European Parliament.
    [Show full text]
  • Five Eyes Intelligence Alliance Director of International Intelligence Scarlett Robinson Secretary of International Defense Alec Prodger
    EYES ONLY ACCESS Five Eyes Intelligence Alliance Director of International Intelligence Scarlett Robinson Secretary of International Defense Alec Prodger Office of the Queen’s Model United Nations Washington D.C. THIS IS A SECURITY COVER SHEET CLASSIFIED TOP SECRET NO DISSEMINATION OR DECLASSIFICATION The contents of this document are fictional based loosely on the X-Files and will be used for the purposes of an extracurricular event. This document contains information affecting the international defense and security of the English-speaking world. Within the meaning of the Espionage Act ss U.S.C. 35 and 38. Its transmission or revelation of its contents in any manner to any unauthorized persons is prohibited by law. Reproduction in any form or the taking of written or electronically transcribed notes is strictly forbidden. READ AND DESTROY EYES ONLY ACCESS About This Committee On behalf of the Queen’s National Model United Nations conference team, we welcome you to the Five Eyes Intelligence Alliance Committee! In this committee you will be discussing the security and intelligence needs of a secret alliance formed between the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. You, the delegates, will represent the Directors, Chiefs, and Commanders of the security and defense agencies that make up the Five Eyes Alliance in the year 1996, and you will be tasked with guiding your respective countries through difficult security and intelligence issues. The most recent incident involving extraterrestrial activity was the Phoenix Lights incident: the spotting of a group of strange lights in a V formation above Phoenix, Arizona.
    [Show full text]
  • System Security: a Missing Filter for the Propaganda Model? Daniel Broudy and Miyume Tanji
    CHAPTER 7 System Security: A Missing Filter for the Propaganda Model? Daniel Broudy and Miyume Tanji 7.1 Introduction In the present post-9/11 dispensation, the world’s so-called indispensable nation1 has managed, to a great extent, to dispense with liberty in the interest of secu- rity.2 As with the spread of neoliberal ideology, the spreading assault on civil lib- erties appears to be a global phenomenon. But, what can be said of societies and their systems of public awareness and mass surveillance that seek to reinforce and normalise the destruction of these cherished liberties? We hypothesise from our close studies of the public discourse that powerful forms of state and corpo- rate propaganda play integral parts in the political theatre conditioning citizens to tolerate the revolting decomposing corpse of liberty. For insights on how this decay appears today we turn to a postulated model of propaganda to help us apprehend what it can tell us about resistance to this contemporary stagecraft. While gaining currency as a research tool, the ‘Propaganda Model’ (PM hereafter) set out by Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky in Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media has, over the past three decades, helped throw a critical light on elite control and management of How to cite this book chapter: Broudy, D. and Tanji, M. 2018. System Security: A Missing Filter for the Propa- ganda Model? In: Pedro-Carañana, J., Broudy, D. and Klaehn, J. (eds.). The Propaganda Model Today: Filtering Perception and Awareness. Pp. 93–106. London: University of Westminster Press.
    [Show full text]
  • National Programmes for Mass Surveillance of Personal Data in Eu Member States and Their Compatibility with Eu Law
    DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT C: CITIZENS' RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS NATIONAL PROGRAMMES FOR MASS SURVEILLANCE OF PERSONAL DATA IN EU MEMBER STATES AND THEIR COMPATIBILITY WITH EU LAW STUDY Abstract In the wake of the disclosures surrounding PRISM and other US surveillance programmes, this study makes an assessment of the large-scale surveillance practices by a selection of EU member states: the UK, Sweden, France, Germany and the Netherlands. Given the large-scale nature of surveillance practices at stake, which represent a reconfiguration of traditional intelligence gathering, the study contends that an analysis of European surveillance programmes cannot be reduced to a question of balance between data protection versus national security, but has to be framed in terms of collective freedoms and democracy. It finds that four of the five EU member states selected for in-depth examination are engaging in some form of large-scale interception and surveillance of communication data, and identifies parallels and discrepancies between these programmes and the NSA-run operations. The study argues that these surveillance programmes do not stand outside the realm of EU intervention but can be engaged from an EU law perspective via (i) an understanding of national security in a democratic rule of law framework where fundamental human rights standards and judicial oversight constitute key standards; (ii) the risks presented to the internal security of the Union as a whole as well as the privacy of EU citizens as data owners, and (iii) the potential spillover into the activities and responsibilities of EU agencies.
    [Show full text]
  • 150+ Methods Listed -- US Gov Surveillance / Big Brother
    150+ methods listed -- US Gov Surveillance / Big Brother NewsFollowUp.com search Obama pictorial index sitemap home Privacy, Domestic Surveillance UPDATED News for the 99% ...................................Refresh F5...archive home 50th Anniversary of JFK assassination "Event of a Lifetime" at the Fess Parker Double Tree Inn. JFKSantaBarbara. NFU MOST ACTIVE PA Warrantless Surveillance of American Journalists, Go to Alphabetic list authorized by Bush ... FIRSTFRUITS Academic Freedom "As part of its case, the EFF said Conference Electronic Frontier Foundation Trapwire it obtained documents from a former AT&T technician showing that the Obama Death List NSA is capable of monitoring all communications on AT&T's network FBI Facial Recognition and Identification Rothschild Timeline ..." more Initiative Bush / Clinton Body Count What is Amdocs / Narus connection to Hayden / Bush / NSA phone records database? = go to NFU page py Types of Surveillance Advanced Research and Development Activity Facial Recognition Facebook, Israel, Jewish co. Operations Security (AR 580-1) Office TIA replacement. FDIC Bank Transaction Surveillance Police Departments tracking protesters, NSA Administrative subpoena p.2 Federal ID Patriot Act, database compilation on 'terrorists' and Amdocs, Israel Telecom Immunity FEMA secret databases, Main Core civilians Apple, Iphone, Android Google and Anti-Big Firstfruits media wiretap surveillance Perfect Citizen domestic surveillance, NSA Brother Surveillance Patent FISC Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court wmr Pinwale
    [Show full text]
  • The Edward Snowden NSA Data Breach of 2013: How It Happened, and Its Consequences and Implications for the U.S
    The Edward Snowden NSA Data Breach of 2013: How it happened, and its consequences and implications for the U.S. and the IT Industry William Favre Slater, III, M.S. MBA, PMP, CISSP, CISA Adjunct Professor, IIT School of Applied Technology A Presentation for Forensecure 2014 April 2014 Edward Snowden’s Christmas Message to America, December 2013 April 10, 2014 The Edward Snowden NSA Data Breach of 2013 by William Favre Slater III - Forensecure 2014 2 Agenda • Introduction • What Happened? What Did Edward Snowden Do? • How did he accomplish this? • What has he disclosed? • Consequences: How does this affect the NSA and U.S. National Security? • Consequences: How will the Edward Snowden Compromise affect the U.S. Government? • Consequences: Has anyone lost their job as a result of what Edward Snowden has done? • Implications: How will the Edward Snowden Compromise affect the Cybersecurity Career Field • Implications: How will the Edward Snowden Compromise affect your career? • Implications: How would you prevent ant Edward Snowden-style Data Breach in your organization if your were the Cybersecurity Director? • The Latest Developments on Edward Snowden • Opinion: Do you think Edward Snowden was correct in doing what he did? • Conclusion • References • Questions April 10, 2014 The Edward Snowden NSA Data Breach of 2013 by William Favre Slater III - Forensecure 2014 3 Introduction • The Edward Snowden 2013 NSA Data Breach was arguably the most damaging (known) data breach to ever impact the U.S. Intelligence Community. This presentation will cover what happened, how it happened, why it happened, the data breach’s consequences, its implications for the future, and how such breaches can be prevented in the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Beware of a Limited Hangout, Part Three
    9/11 Terror Trading: Beware of a Limited Hangout, Part Three In this third and final part we connect Al Qaeda with a device to move its funds undetected through the international banking system; visit Richard Cheney at the Presidential Emergency Operations Center implementing Continuity of Government plans; take an interest in computer hard drives from the World Trade Center; and ask some questions, inter alia, at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. by Lars Schall “The Indian knew that deer moved in circles...that if the hunter calculated his moves with skill, he could run the swift deer into submission. Its hooves would bleed, and the animal stumbled. The Indian was to kneel above his dying prey, putting his mouth to that of the deer, stealing its last breath. While he had earned the swiftness of the beast in its death, he was struck by its peace and stillness, and by his own.” – Opening Sequence of “The Indian Runner”, 1991 – Spy vs Spy via PROMIS Let’s continue to talk about the Prosecutor’s Management Information System, abbreviated as PROMIS, for there are a few dots that can be connected to 9/11. Quite a central figure in the PROMIS saga is Rafael “Rafi“ Eitan, a legendary Israeli spy, who served at the beginning of the 1980’s as head of LAKAM, the scientific intelligence collecting unit to support Israel’s ultra-secret nuclear program. The British investigative journalist Gordon Thomas published in 1999 a book entitled, “Gideon's Spies – The Secret History of the Mossad”, for which he interviewed many senior officials of Israeli intelligence, among them covert operations specialist Rafi Eitan.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxonomy of the Snowden Disclosures Margaret Hu Washington and Lee University School of Law, [email protected]
    Washington and Lee Law Review Volume 72 | Issue 4 Article 4 Fall 9-1-2015 Taxonomy of the Snowden Disclosures Margaret Hu Washington and Lee University School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr Part of the Fourth Amendment Commons, and the Privacy Law Commons Recommended Citation Margaret Hu, Taxonomy of the Snowden Disclosures, 72 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 1679 (2015), https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr/vol72/iss4/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington and Lee Law Review at Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington and Lee Law Review by an authorized editor of Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Taxonomy of the Snowden Disclosures Margaret Hu∗ Abstract This brief Essay offers a proposed taxonomy of the Snowden Disclosures. An informed discussion on the legality and constitutionality of the emerging cybersurveillance and mass dataveillance programs revealed by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden necessitates the furtherance of cybersurveillance aptitude. This Essay contends, therefore, that a detailed examination of the Snowden disclosures requires not just a careful inquiry into the legal and constitutional framework that guides the oversight of these programs. A close interrogation also requires a careful inquiry into ∗ Assistant Professor of Law, Washington and Lee School of Law. I would like to extend my deep gratitude to those who graciously offered comments on this draft, or who offered perspectives and expertise on this research on big data cybersurveillance through our thoughtful discussions: Jack Balkin, Kate Bartlett, danah boyd, Guy Charles, Bobby Chesney, Andrew Christensen, Danielle Citron, Geoff Corn, Jennifer Daskal, Nora Demleitner, Charlie Dunlap, Josh Fairfield, Mark Graber, David Gray, Woody Hartzog, Trina Jones, Brett Max Kaufman, Orin Kerr, J.J.
    [Show full text]
  • On Their Own Terms: a Lexicon with an Emphasis on Information-Related Terms Produced by the U.S. Federal Government
    Notes on the 6th edition.........................1 On Their Own Terms: A Lexicon with an Introduction..........................................2 – 15 Emphasis on Information-Related Terms Produced by the U.S. Federal Government Creative Commons License...................16 How to Cite this Work...........................16 Susan Maret, Ph.D. (6th ed., revised 2016) Contact Information.............................16 Terms ..................................................17- 432 Notes on the 6th edition Since the first edition in 2005, On Their on Terms has reported language that reflects the scope of U.S. information policy. Now in its sixth edition, the Lexicon features new terms that further chronicle the federal narrative of information and its relationship to national security, intelligence operations, freedom of information, privacy, technology, and surveillance, as well as types of war, institutionalized secrecy, and censorship. This edition also lists information terms of note that arise from popular culture, the scholarly literature, and I find interesting to federal information policy and the study of information. This edition of the Lexicon emphasizes the historical aspects of U.S. information policy and associated programs in that it is a testament to the information politics of specific presidential administrations, of particular the Bush-Cheney and Obama years; there is also a look back to historical agency record keeping practices such as the U.S. Army’s computerized personalities database, discovered in a 1972 congressional
    [Show full text]