You are here: Home / News & Media / Rethinking Privacy: The Link between Florida v. Jardines and the Surveillance of Nature Films

Rethinking Privacy: The Link between Florida v. Jardines and the Surveillance of Nature Films

by Prasad Krishna last modified Jul 28, 2014 05:51 AM
Bhairav Acharya gave a talk on "Rethinking Privacy" at an event organized by the Indian Institute of Technology, Madras (IIT-M) on July 11, 2014.

In a 2010 article in Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, Brett Mills proposed that animals have a right to privacy and that wildlife documentaries, specifically BBC's Nature's Great Events (2009), invaded this right without an examination of animal conservation ethics. In the 2013 Florida v. Jardines decision, the Supreme Court of the United States re-examined the constitutional validity of 'dog sniff laws' that permitted police animals to enter the threshold of private property to conduct 'minimally invasive warant-less searches' and 'Terry stops'; this was the latest in a long line of Fourth Amendment cases that examine the ethics of conserving and protecting public order. I attempt to draw links between the two scenarios that highlight the dissonance between sociological and jurisprudential constructions of privacy.

Document Actions

banner
Donate to support our works.
 
Call for essays on #List, please submit abstracts by August 23, 2019
 
Call for Contributions and Reflections: Your experiences in Decolonizing the Internet’s Languages!