Photo Credit: Prince George's County Police Department Facebook, via Government Fleet
The Prince George's County Police Department has recently announced that it will be live-tweeting an undercover prostitution sting operation from @PGPDNews using the hashtag #PGPDVice. While this sounds at first like an ill-conceived reality tv show plot, the real-word ramifications are all too real.
Why did the PGPD chose to live tweet, specifically, a prostitution sting? This is the first live-tweeting of a prostitution sting by a police department in Twitter history, according to USA Today. However, the sexual nature of the crime is a prime target for sensationalism, and consequently, public attention. Was prostitution sting chosen because it was thought to be a less dangerous operation than perhaps a drug bust? Or because it was somehow perceived as more flashy and likely to gain attention?
Photo Credit: Prince George's Country Police Department, via CBS local
This article published earlier today in USA Today described the motivations of the PGPD as striving for greater transparency and as a warning to those currently engaged in prostitution in PG County.
However, is this truly an attmpt to prevent prostitution in PG County, and does it have the potential to be effective?
If anyone is deterred by prostitution due to this tactic, it would be out of fear of public shaming over social media: it seems as though, however, those driven to prostitution by desperation are unlikely to stop because of public disapproval. Those who it may likely impact are those seeking the services of prostitutes who may be afraid of being caught by the PGPD. However, those interested in soliciting a prostitute are almost certainly aware that their actions are illegal and that their actions are illegal has done nothing to deter them. People participate in illegal activity all the time, despite the law and law enforcement.
My main ethical concern about live tweeting a police operation that included arrestees' name and photos is the impact it may have upon an individual's fundamental presumption of innocence. If the public is exposed to the police tweets detailing the arrest of an individual including photos and the person's name, what are the chances that the public will presume that the person is innocent? It subjects the arrestee to trial by media before they have their day in court. As the public has already been presented with a negative impression of the arrestee, the arrestee in the position of being forced to prove their innocence; this goes contrary the core fundamentals of our justice system.
Photo Credit: Kevystew via Flickriver
During jury selection, a potential juror is often asked if they have any prior knowledge of the case: if a sting operation is being live-tweeted, how will this impact jury selection and potential juror bias? I'm also curious how these tweets will be treated in court: will the tweets be admissible? Will any photos and/or videos live-tweeted be admissible?
PGPD spokesperson Julie Parker has emphasized that the sting operation will not target the sex workers themselves, but target the "johns" who solicit them.
The operation as a while has received divided support over social media platforms such as Twitter.
While some applaud the PGPD for their attempt at transparency, others find live-tweeting a police operation to be a "terrible idea." Citing the recent #myNYPD debacle as a evidence, it seems much of the public has reservations about the police use of social media for public relations purposes.
Yet others seem to share the sentiment that the #PGPDVice hashtag was a gross and blatant attempt at sensationalism, while simultaneously exploiting a vulnerable population.
(tweet refers to the photo above of PGPD officer arresting a prostitute, courtesy of CBS local)
The @PGPDNews twitter account is very active, with a large number of followers and tweets.
The account has live tweeted K-9 operations and other photos from investigations in the past. However, this instance is different in that the names, photos and other personal information of those involved will be published online by the PGPD Twitter account. There is an argument that releasing such information over Twitter, essentially for the entertainment of the public, is a gross invasion of privacy. However, the counter argument is that all arrest records are public record and are accessible to the public already.
Regardless that this information may be public record, the tweeting of the personal information of arrestees for what amounts to public entertainment seems wrong, and if not an abuse of power by the PGPD, than very close.
The question of whether this is a publicity stunt or legitimate attempt at transparency remains to be seen. While this appears a doomed PR tactic, a crucial question remains: How does PGPD know that the sting will go according to
plan, and will they inform the public through live-tweets of any complications that arise? Or will we receive the version of events the PGPD sees fit to tell us?
-
For more, check out these articles:
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/05/01/pr-georges-county-police-to-live-tweet-prostitution-sting/
No comments:
Post a Comment