Editorial: Sacrificing safety for surveillance

On Oct. 19, two thieves entered the Louvre and walked out with royal jewels worth $102 million in broad daylight.

In a world of constant surveillance, it’s astonishing they were able to pull it off.

In fact, the only place the Louvre’s cameras weren’t focused in on was the balcony the thieves used to enter the museum.

From across neighborhood streets to security surveillance on every aisle of retail stores, one would think a $1 million robbery could be prevented or at least stopped in action when it seems like there’s cameras everywhere we turn.

In reality, these cameras may be compromising our privacy and safety more than they’re protecting it.

Ring cameras and other smart systems have been hacked nationwide, exposing private footage and personal data. They give users a false sense of security that watching who’s at the door will prevent a break-in. While these devices may deter petty crimes, there’s little evidence that proves a significant deterrence in crime. 

With more than 537,000 surveillance cameras across U.S. cities, it feels like we’ve opened a digital window into our daily lives — for hackers, corporations and even friends to peer through. 

On campus, front-door conversations are watched live through the Ring app. A quick chat on the doorstep can turn into entertainment for whoever gets a motion alert on their phone. That’s not home security — it’s an invasion of privacy. 

Ring cameras were created with good intentions: to protect homes and discourage neighborhood crime, but they’ve come up short. Vulnerable to hacking and technical glitches, they often raise more questions about privacy than safety. 

The home security industry is growing, with millions of homeowners and renters installing cameras, and large firms like ADT Inc. and Ring reap the profits.

With the prevalence of hacking on their systems, they must engineer additional security measures for their cameras. 

If a hacker accesses a doorbell feed, they can see exactly when a person comes and goes.  

For anyone with a predictable routine — like a student or employee — that leaves them in a particularly vulnerable position with an open invitation for break ins.

Even worse, many families install cameras inside playrooms or children’s bedrooms to “keep an eye” on loved ones. These devices have also been compromised. 

Gone are the days of neighborhood watch groups, when people on the block would look out for one another face-to-face and report suspicious activity. 

Now we’re in the days of relying on dash, body and phone cameras that film from every angle — but too often, people aren’t watching for the right reasons.  

It’s not just home security systems that are unreliable. Even in stores, many “security” cameras aren’t plugged in or feed into looping footage, offering only the illusion of protection. 

Online, the problem deepens: hacks, scams and data breaches have become routine. Websites track our shopping habits so precisely that we’re shown advertisements for something we searched once. Scammers make false promises of large prizes for pieces of people’s identities. If algorithms can follow us that closely, what else — and who else — can? 

Despite countless passwords and two-step verification protocols, true online security remains out of reach. Technology keeps advancing, but so does the ability to exploit it. 

We’ve become too dependent on surveillance, believing every crime will be caught on camera. That illusion, that we’re constantly being watched both in and outside of our homes, breeds carelessness. 

People glued to their phones miss what’s happening around them — just as guards missed the two men climbing the Louvre balcony with millions in jewels.

Cameras can help solve crimes, but they can’t prevent them. They’re not an all-encompassing solution to modern-day security issues. They don’t think, anticipate or intervene — they simply record. 

Rather than investing millions more in cameras, efforts and funding could be spent on mitigating the factors that drive people to commit crimes to decrease initial motivations. While these resources will not eradicate crime from our city streets, they may make a more positive impact on safety than cameras.

For now, security relies on technology, and while it’s a valuable tool, it doesn’t have the same critical thinking as humans to assess a situation.

Real security still depends on human awareness. Paying attention to our surroundings, knowing our neighbors and trusting our instincts will do more to keep us safe than any screen or sensor could.