CCTV doesn’t work: so why do we use it?

The implementation of 77 Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) cameras in Toronto’s downtown core in advance of the G20 summit attests to a growing trend in Canadian law enforcement towards the use of CCTV systems. Such systems have a substantial history of use in Europe, specifically in the U.K., but are only in their nascent stages in Canada. This is important in that it affords us the chance to learn from previous histories of use, including studies of CCTV’s effectiveness.

In its most basic form, a CCTV system consists of a fixed camera hard-mounted to a wall, pole or similar surface, connected by wire to a television monitor in a separate location. The CC in CCTV comes from this ‘closed-circuit’ between camera and monitor. In reality, contemporary CCTV systems are much more intricate. Multiple pan-tilt-zoom cameras communicate wirelessly with control rooms equipped with computers, servers, monitors and video recording software. The complexity and expansion of CCTV systems has resulted in some recurring problems: multiple cameras and monitors create streams of images that can’t possibly be monitored effectively by human eyes; control rooms are often very far from the location of cameras (in some cases across the country); control room operators are often poorly trained; communication between control room operators and police, and police response time are often poor; and wireless transmissions can be picked up by non-authorized people through a process known as video-sniffing. Indeed ‘closed-circuit’ is a bit of a misnomer in that contemporary CCTV systems operate wirelessly and are therefore partially ‘open.’

As with its precursors, fingerprinting and DNA analysis, the official discourse surrounding CCTV positions it as a magic bullet in contemporary policing. Success stories abound in which offenders are caught and brought to justice through the use of CCTV footage. This professional discourse has made its way into public opinion as well. When polled, a majority of people will agree that CCTV is an effective criminal justice tool. But here’s the problem: the empirical evidence simply does not support such a claim. In their landmark empirical study on the rise of CCTV in the U.K., published in 1999, Clive Norris and Gary Armstrong found that the impact of CCTV on crime reduction and prevention is negligible at best. Subsequent studies by the British Home Office reach the same conclusion. In 2009 the Surveillance Camera Awareness Network (SCAN), a group of researchers from universities across Canada, produced a detailed study of camera surveillance in this country and found a distinct lack of evidence that supports CCTV as an effective tool in reducing, deterring or even responding to crime. The SCAN study found that CCTV in this country was prone to the problems noted earlier in this article and that it was often used in a discriminatory manner, such as targeting specific people based on physical appearance.

A central question arises: given the evidence of CCTV’s ineffectiveness, why do we continue to implement such systems and why do we continue to believe they work? In addition to the successful promotional campaigns of both the security industry and the law enforcement community, I offer four primary reasons:

1. Fear of crime. The cover of the current Macleans magazine features a striking image of a G20 protestor (presumably one of the ‘black bloc’) standing in front of a burning police car. Images like this fuel public fears about the dangers of the contemporary world and the subsequent need for CCTV.
2. There is no governing legislation. Federal and provincial privacy offices offer ‘guidelines’ for the use of CCTV, but, as guidelines, these are largely toothless.
3. We simply don’t care. Our daily actions are recorded and tracked by an increasing number of devices. Given the amount of information we willingly give off through our daily lives, what’s the problem with one more device recording us?
4. I have nothing to hide. CCTV systems are used to target criminals; therefore, as long as I’m not committing a crime, I have no reason to object to the technology.

Given the growing amount of evidence that underscores CCTV’s ineffectiveness and the numerous dangers associated with its misuse including the potential violation of civil liberties and privacy, it is imperative that we take a critical look at CCTV in this country. Large-scale, informed public consultation must take place before the implementation of new cameras. Such consultation could give rise to legislation that balances the needs of law enforcement with the rights and freedoms we enjoy in Canada. Perhaps paradoxically, the biggest obstacle to this consultation is not the police but, I would argue, the fact that the majority of citizens simply don’t care.