Suchergebnisse

State surveillance programs often operate in direct tension with ideals of democratic governance and accountability. The fraught history of surveillance programs in the United States, for instance, illustrates that government agencies mobilize discourses of exceptional circumstances to engage in domestic and foreign spying operations without public awareness or oversight. While many scholars, civil society groups, and media pundits have drawn attention to the propensity of state surveillance programs to violate civil liberties, less attention has been given to the complex trust dynamics of state surveillance. On one hand, in justifying state surveillance, government representatives claim that the public should trust police and intelligence communities not to violate their rights; on the other hand, the very act of engaging in secretive surveillance operations erodes public trust in government, especially when revelations about such programs come to light without any advance notice or consent. In order to better understand such trust dynamics, this paper will analyze some of the competing trust relationships of Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 'fusion centers,' with a focus on the role of these organizations in policing the Occupy Wall Street movement of 2011 and 2012.

Suspicious activity reports (SARs) are an increasingly important tool in the law-enforcement repertoire, especially for counterterrorism. In spite of significant problems with such reports, they are experiencing a resurgence that can be attributed partly to the institutionalization of Department of Homeland Security (DHS) "fusion centers," which are taking the lead in vetting and interpreting these reports as they enter into law-enforcement and counterterrorism databases. Based on a 3-year study of DHS fusion centers, this article reviews a range of problems with SARs and argues that robust community relationships are necessary to achieve contextually situated reports that eschew overt forms of bias.

Other than the financial motivations for enrolling in Phase I trials, research on how healthy volunteers perceive the benefits of their trial participation is scant. Using qualitative interviews conducted with 178 U.S. healthy volunteers enrolled in Phase I trials, we investigated how participants described the benefits of their study involvement, including, but not limited to, the financial compensation, and we analyzed how these perceptions varied based on participants' sociodemographic characteristics and clinical trial history. We found that participants detailed economic, societal, and noneconomic personal benefits. We also found differences in participants' perceived benefits based on gender, age, ethnicity, educational attainment, employment status, and number of clinical trials completed. Our study indicates that many healthy volunteers believe they gain more than just the financial compensation when they accept the risks of Phase I participation.