Wiretaps often aren't cheap or effective

It turns out they're at least one step ahead of him. State and federal agents installed 1,154 wiretaps and bugs last year, an 18 percent increase over 1993. That may be the biggest jump ever in one year, according to the Electronic Privacy Information Center, in Washington, D.C. Poor police reporting means the numbers are probably even higher. Clinton's counterterrorism proposal would let agents use electronic surveillance for all federal felonies, not just the extreme cases presently specified (such as kidnapping and drug trafficking). Illegal taps also could be used as courtroom evidence, if police act in "good faith." But while wiretaps occasionally earn high-profile praise, as in the World Trade Center bombing, more typical is a case like the 1992 Fat Cats BBQ case in Tampa, Fla. Detectives wasted a month and $106,000 bugging a restaurateur's home and work phones, hoping to gather information about a small-time marijuana ring. The man was eventually arrested (but not because of the wiretaps). That same year, the state agency covering Tampa mistakenly reported only 18 wiretaps to federal regulators, when they really recorded 38. Even that figure is dubious, since local police agencies fail to keep proper records. Meanwhile, last year's Communication Assistance for Law Enforcement Act gives the FBI $500 million in taxes to divvy up between telephone companies to make their systems more tap-able. So while phone companies gain free upgraded equipment, and police get to bug more, the taxpayers get stuck with the bill, roughly $50,000 a tap. And the criminals? Most will know to use the pay phone around the corner.

ACLU By ACLUSponsored

Imagine you've forgotten once again the difference between a gorilla and a chimpanzee, so you do a quick Google image search of “gorilla." But instead of finding images of adorable animals, photos of a Black couple pop up.

Is this just a glitch in the algorithm? Or, is Google an ad company, not an information company, that's replicating the discrimination of the world it operates in? How can this discrimination be addressed and who is accountable for it?

“These platforms are encoded with racism," says UCLA professor and best-selling author of Algorithms of Oppression, Dr. Safiya Noble. “The logic is racist and sexist because it would allow for these kinds of false, misleading, kinds of results to come to the fore…There are unfortunately thousands of examples now of harm that comes from algorithmic discrimination."

On At Liberty this week, Dr. Noble joined us to discuss what she calls “algorithmic oppression," and what needs to be done to end this kind of bias and dismantle systemic racism in software, predictive analytics, search platforms, surveillance systems, and other technologies.

What you can do:
Take the pledge: Systemic Equality Agenda
Sign up