Security or surveillance?

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12427
• Author: Meghan E. Hollis
• Date: 01 February 2019
• Published date: 01 February 2019

DOI: 10.1111/1745-9133.12427

EDITORIAL INTRODUCTION

CCTV SURVEILLANCE FOR CRIME PREVENTION

Security or surveillance?

Examination of CCTV camera usage in the 21st century

Meghan E. Hollis

Ronin Institute for Independent Scholars

Correspondence

MeghanE. Hollis, Ronin Institute for Independent Scholars, 6705 Covered Bridge Drive, E13, Austin, TX 78736.

Email:dr mehollis@gmail.com

How many times a day do we encounter closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras? Drive down a

street, and you have likelybeen captured on at least one. They are prevalent on university campuses, in

malls, in convenience stores and at gas stations, at K–12 schools, in sports and concert arenas, and at

so many other venues. Surveillance cameras are also increasingly used in private homes. The increased

ease of use and decreasing cost of “nanny cams,” home security cameras, and other forms of private

surveillance further expose us to the regular presence of cameras.

In addition to these “stationary” cameras, there is increased exposure to portable surveillance mecha-

nisms. Police officers are increasingly likely towear body cameras and have dashboard cameras. These

record people at their most vulnerable moments and increase surveillance on both the police and the

public. (Imagine being a woman who has called 9-1-1 because you are in labor—the police officer

arrives and must deliver your baby with a body camera activated. Not a pleasant thought.) Many indi-

viduals in society have cell phone cameras on them at all times. These cameras can be activated with

one “swipe” of the finger and are used to record all kinds of interactions. These devices are no longer

limited to recording perceived inappropriate actions of police officers and often include recordings

of other citizens that they believe are not behaving civilly. All citizens are subject to surveillance—

whether or not they realize it (see, for example, the manyinstances when people have been videotaped

and that information has been sent out via social media without their knowledge or consent).

There are two sides to the CCTV story. Supporters of CCTV usage often highlight the crime preven-

tion and deterrence capacities of CCTV cameras, which raises questions about how efficacious CCTV

cameras are in preventing or reducing criminal activity. Eric Piza, Brandon Welsh, David Farrington,

and Amanda Thomas (2019, this issue) explore the utility of CCTV cameras in reducing crime in detail.

They indicate that CCTV cameras have a significant but moderate impact on crime. Additionally,they

find that “place matters”—a finding that is not uncommon in criminology. The monitoring approach

used is also important. This finding translates well into routine activity theory (Cohen & Felson, 1979)

research raising the question of whether CCTV cameras can be used as a tool to enhance capable

guardianship. The findings from this body of research also highlight the utility of security cameras in

identifying and apprehending criminal offenders.

In their comprehensive, 40-year systematic review, Piza et al. (2019) provide a much-needed update

to the knowledge base on CCTV camera usage. They expand on previous systematic reviews on the

Criminology & Public Policy. 2019;18:131–134. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/capp © 2019 American Society of Criminology 131