http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/pfe/lowres/pfen132l.jpg
The above link directs you to cartoonstock.com, pay attention to what the cartoon is trying to express.
How much of our privacy should we give up in exchange for security? Does this security scan cross the line on privacy? As an initial reaction to 9/11, would these scanners seem like a good idea? How does this artist express his views on airport security scans?
How much of our privacy should we give up in exchange for security? Does this security scan cross the line on privacy? As an initial reaction to 9/11, would these scanners seem like a good idea? How does this artist express his views on airport security scans?
I believe that we should give up as much privacy as the government feels necessary to ensure that no weapon or potentially harmful product is ever carried on to an aircraft again. This security does cross the line of privacy, but because of previous terrors and catastrophes extreme measures have to be taken to ensure safety for all passengers and the general public. This artist expresses his views on airport security a number of different ways. First off, what caught my attention was the bold red line running through the cartoon seeming to separate the worker and the passengers. I feel that the artist is trying to say that this is a line of privacy that as soon as we choose either option (body scan or pat-down) our privacy is being invaded. Another way the artist showed his view point is the use of the word "groping". This is coined after the pat-down method that TSA's use. The artist is implying that he believes this pat-down is more of a grope, or in slang terms meaning to handle or fondle for sexual pleasure. He really shows his belief that our privacy is intruded on in airports. Although I agree with this, it is what we have to do now in order to be safe and secure.
ReplyDeletei think that as long as you have nothing to hide, you should be willing to give up as much privacy as needed. The cartoon seems as though the security crosses boundaries that shouldn't be crossed. However, due to our nation's past, I think that it is necessary. Who knows? The next terrorist attack could easily come from someone with explosives attached to their inner thigh by the groin area or up their anal cavity. The scanners are a good idea, if they are used for their intended purpose. Like I said before, if you have nothing to hide, does it really matter? Better safe then sorry.I think the artist is trying to protray that the "pat down" is a grope for pleasure.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sung. If you have nothing to hide then whats the big deal about going through the scanner? This picture is obviously trying to convince us that both security options are very bad and cross the privacy line. While the pat down may be uncomfortable and may seem invasive, it is usually only done when the scanner shows something of interest, or a person refuses to go through a scanner. I think Sung is right in people should be willing to give up as much privacy as it takes to be safe.
DeleteIn theory, one of the main purposes the government exists is to protect us from harm. Like Luke said, we need to give up just a bit of our freedom to the government in order to keep us safe. However, I do agree with the artist's prespective on the TSA. It's not effective. In America, the TSA is looked down upon for being unprofessional. Chances are that if you're working for the TSA then you don't have a PhD. If you go to countries in the middle east, then you see how professional their security is. They hire professional firms that scan each and every passenger with patdowns and full-body scans. The Israeli government hires their airport security only if they have a college degree, and even then the chances are slim if you don't have some sort of military training. While the Israeli government may be infringing their rights, there hasn't been an airport bombing ever since this system was implimented. I'd give up some of my private life to the government so that I'd actually HAVE a life.
ReplyDeleteI feel that in situations like this there is supposed to be the illusion of security. In the Franzen reading he said that we don't mind sacrificing privacy when we feel it is bettering our life. When the american public looks at something like airport security we automatically jump to negative images like the one portrayed yet we all still use air travel. I think what this cartoon is doing is using a noticeably large figure to express the whole "big brother" government TSA employee. I think the old ladies are used because the are supposed to be representing Americans who will give up everything to have this sense of security. I also think the red line is showing the line of privacy thats about to be crossed by these ladies. Even though there is a general consensus that a line of privacy is crossed i don't think it will ever prohibit air travel because it gives Americans the security blanket it wants.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Luke and Sung on the issues about exchanging privacy for security. Like Sung say if there is nothing to hide, privacy shouldn’t be an issue. I’m sure anyone would give up their privacy for their life. In my personal opinion, I do not think the security scan cross the line on privacy. The scan is basically a x-ray, except it is used to make sure no one is carrying any weapons. The scan is not used to examine someone’s body. Therefore I do not think it is an invasive on privacy because the scan does not show any medical problems. As an initial reaction to 9/11 it seemed like a perfect idea! People still needed to travel to different places but needs some sort of guarantee that they were safe. The scanners provided a sense of safety and security to everyone. The uses a sexual sense of humor to express his view on airport security scans. The security guy was fat and looks perverted trying to mock what a security might say. I believe that the artist does not agree with the use of scanners in airports. He made it seem like the scan was a naked scan where people will see your naked body, but in reality they see your skeletons.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Chen because privacy shouldn't be an issue if you value a safe flight. I also don't think that the security scans cross a line because they are implemented for our safety. The images from the scanners are blurred so as not to violate your privacy. The scanners are supposed to provide safety and they work very well. If you want to have a safe flight then you have to give up some privacy.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Nathan and Chen, that there are other things that trump our privacy, which includes feeling safe when flying. The government is take what they think are need precautions to ensure our safe and the safety of the other passengers and the crew. Without these precautions of the scanner or the pat down, we could have another 9-11 or something worse than that. These precautions just happen to invade our privacy.
ReplyDeleteLike everyone above me, I think our privacy has to take a back seat to security. But, I really like Sung's point when he said, "Like I said before, if you have nothing to hide, does it really matter? Better safe then sorry." Personally, I don't think it's an invasion of my privacy to be searched at the airport because of the fact that everyone else is searched in the same manner that I am. Going into an airport, a public venue for transportation, I think it should be public knowledge to know/make sure that everyone is safe from danger. But, when I look at this cartoon I think it's pointing out our lack of professionalism within airport security rather than the invasion of privacy. Like Thomas said, "Chances are that if you're working for the TSA then you don't have a PhD," to put it nicely. I don't think it's necessary for security to have a military background like in some other countries, but from my experiences at the airport I would like the TSA people to at least act like they care. If the security officers communicated with travelers nicely and followed protocol for pat-down searches and scanning I think it would reduce the feeling of an invasion of privacy, even if the only reason is because it seems like the security officers are on the same "team" you are.
ReplyDeleteJustinJones has a really interesting take on the purpose of the cartoon, saying that it is attacking the professionalism of the workers. Do you agree? If security were to act more professional will criticisms like this cartoon die down? Is this the purpose of the cartoon? Or is it just criticizing the new security for being too invasive?
ReplyDeleteI've never had to go through these new security scanners or a pat down at the airport, but from what I've heard in the news, I feel like this concern about loss of privacy is over exaggerated. The scanners and pat downs, while possibly slightly invasive, are necessary for maintaining the safety of planes and their passengers. In my opinion, safety is more important than slight privacy invasions, and if people are bothered by these safety precautions, there are always other possible ways to travel.
ReplyDeleteI believe that we should give up as much privacy as we feel comfortable in exchange for security. People disagree with some of the methods that airports use to ensure security and feel that they are being "violated." The people who feel this way should choose a different method of transportation if they don't feel this invasion of privacy is worth their personal safety. This scan may or may not cross the line on privacy, but we must remember that if we feel it does, it is for our protection. These scanners definitely seemed like a good idea after 9/11. The whole nation was on its toes and we wanted to make sure such a catastrophe could never happen using whatever methods possible. This artist is very clear on his view of security scans. Either method passengers choose, the "stark naked scanner" or the "groping," their privacy is violated in some capacity.
ReplyDeleteObviously the artist is exaggerating the airport security process. The artist believes that the airport security system invades people's privacy too much. The artist makes the security person look evil and perverted. The artist makes the passengers look like sweet and innocent old ladies who are about to be violated. The security scan depicted in this cartoon obviously crosses the line, but as I said earlier I do not believe that this is an accurate depiction of the airport security process.
ReplyDeleteI've heard stories about airport security workers taking advantage of people getting patted down instead of scanned, and it does seem pretty frightening. But I also thing that not all security workers are like that, and most want safety for airports and passengers. I think the artist is going pretty far by assuming that all travelers are as innocent as the older ladies, and all security workers are perverted. I agree with Emily about being comfortable with how much of our privacy is given to ensure safety, because being at the airport shouldn't have to be uncomfortable, and passengers shouldn't have to fear being violated in the name airport safety. I still stand by what I believe, that the scans and pat downs are for our safety.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteCam has an interesting view on the machines. It is true that not every person has to go through these scanners at every airport. Does the amount of security garnered worth the privacy invaded for the few that get scanned? Should every person have to go through the machines?
ReplyDelete