【導(dǎo)讀】March16,2020. ONTHISREPORT:. LeeRainie,DirectorInter,Science,and. TechnologyResearch. MaryMadden,SeniorResearcher. 1. PEWRESEARCHCENTER. AboutthisReport. MartinShelton,ResearchConsultant. MaryMadden,SeniorResearcher. MonicaAnderson,ResearchAnalyst. MaeveDuggan,ResearchAnalyst. AndrewPerrin,ResearchAssistant. foundat:. 2. PEWRESEARCHCENTER. 3. PEWRESEARCHCENTER. SummaryofFindings

　　

【正文】 homes and who they talk with. I feel this gives the government too much control.” “The fourth [amendment] originally enforced the idea that each man’s home is his castle, secure from unreasonable search and seizure by the government.” 13 PEW RESEARCH CENTER “What happened to privacy?” At the same time, others suggested that the programs could be helpful for prevention of criminal activity and terrorism, and they are not personally concerned because they have “nothing to hide”: “Lawabiding citizens have nothing to hide and should not be concerned.” “I am not doing anything wrong so they can monitor me all they want.” Small price to pay for maintaining our safe environment from terrorist activities.” References to “terror” or “terrorism” also appeared in many of the openended responses, and others pointed to conflicts between personal privacy, individual rights, and national security: “If in the event I do something unacceptable to the government or country, they have the right to investigate me. Otherwise they are taking away my privacy as an American citizen.” “Monitoring is okay for potential suspects but not every American.” A majority say they are losing confidence that the public interest is being served by the surveillance programs Those who are aware of the government surveillance programs say they are being increasingly skeptical of . surveillance programs. The 87% of the respondents who say they have heard of the programs were asked, “As you have watched the developments in news stories about government monitoring programs over recent months, would you say that you have bee more confident or less confident that the programs are serving the public interest?” Some 61% of these respondents said they were less confident and 37% said they were more confident. Those more likely than others to say they are less confident include those very/somewhat concerned about government surveillance (80%) and those who have heard a lot about the surveillance programs (71%). In addition, those who say they are less confident include those who say they are very/somewhat concerned about government monitoring of their activities on social media, search engines, mobile apps, cell phones, and . Republicans and those leaning Republican are more likely than Democrats and Democratic leaners to say they are losing confidence (70% vs. 55%). 14 PEW RESEARCH CENTER The public is evenly split about the capacity of the judicial system to balance privacy rights with intelligence agency and law enforcement needs Many Americans are split on the effectiveness of the judicial system in balancing privacy and national security. Some 48% agree and 49% disagree when asked if they think “the courts and judges do a good job balancing the public’s right to privacy with the needs of law enforcement and intelligence agencies to collect information for investigations.” Those who are more likely to say they agree the courts are striking an appropriate balance include: those who have heard only a little about the surveillance programs (56%), those who are not very/not at all concerned about the programs (63%), and those whose confidence in the surveillance programs has grown over time (83%). However, there are no notable partisan differences on this question. Americans are fortable targeting others for surveillance, but not themselves Even as they express some concern about the reach of government surveillance programs, majorities of Americans think such monitoring is acceptable in certain instances, as long as the targets are not average Americans. Those in positions of power are not seen as exempt。 for instance, 60% of all adults say it is acceptable for the American government to monitor munications from America’s leaders. Here Those Who Have Heard a Lot about Surveillance Programs Are Less Likely to Support Monitoring Others Among those who have heard “a lot” or “a little” about gov’t surveillance programs, the % who say it is acceptable to monitor the munications of … A lot A little 90 is the breakdown: Suspected terrorists Leaders of other countries American leaders Citizens of other countries American citizens ? 82% say it is acceptable to monitor munications Source: Survey of 475 . adults on GfK panel November 262020January 3, 2020. PEW RESEARCH CENTER of suspected terrorists ? 60% believe it is acceptable to monitor the munications of American leaders. ? 60% think it is okay to monitor the munications of foreign leaders 76 66 71 61 53 49 47 49 32 15 PEW RESEARCH CENTER ? 54% say it is acceptable to monitor munications from foreign citizens At the same time, only a minority of Americans — 40% — feel it is acceptable to monitor ordinary American citizens. Some 57% say it is unacceptable for the government to monitor their munications. There are several consistent patterns in people’s answers to these questions: Those who have heard a lot about the government surveillance programs are less likely than others to feel that monitoring others, including terrorists, is Those Who Think the Judicial System is Doing a Good Job Balancing People’s Privacy Rights with Law Enforcement Needs Are More Likely to Support Monitoring Others Among those who think the courts and judges are doing a good job/not a good job, the % who say it is acceptable for the American gov’t to monitor the munications of … Courts and judges doing a good job acceptable. Similarly, those who are concerned about the Suspected terrorists Leaders of other countries American leaders Citizens of other countries American citizens surveillance programs are less likely to feel that monitoring Source: Survey of